Maybe I'm delusional but could Bush and Cheney be on the verge of committing acts of aggression that will put their previous crimes against peace in the shade? They did declare that there were scores of enemy nations early on in their so-called "war on terror". Threats and deeds against Iran continue to intensify. Syria has been threatened but Israel just said something about giving back the Golan heights. Is that because Israel is part of this plan to strike out at other Arab and Muslim nations. Is the United States about to attack Iran, Pakistan or other nations in the region? Could Bush try to first strike North Korea? Of course, none of these options are off the table, are they?
Nor should we forget that this administration is full of folks who think they are personally channeling god, a very warlike god. They are fundamentalists who believe that end times are near and that maybe a little nuclear war might help usher in the rule of Christ for a thousand years or forever or whatnot.
Chavez was wrong about the sulfurous smell at the UN. The fact is that the devil hold's the Vice President's office. This makes another desperate act of aggression more likely. This man is an indomitable malignancy.
I can imagine Condeleeza Rice saying something like, "What's the point of having all these cool nuclear weapons if we can't use them to irradiate Waziristan?" They could name an H-bomb after Conde and drop it on remote tribesmen in Pakistan or perhaps on Pyongyang. Nuclear weapons are special and so is Conde. What's the point of having an axis of evil if you can't nuke it?
Someone in this administration has probably already written a paper on how shocked, awed and well behaved the world will be after the United States nukes a few trouble makers. America's almost exclusive obsession with military solutions to political and economic problems is beyond excessive and well into madness. Nuclear strikes would consolidate an already overwhelmingly anti-US world opinion.
Of course the 2008 elections will have to be cancelled, for national securitiy reasons. After all, elections are just about impossible to conduct anyway, at least since G. W. came along. Serious domestic rebellion would be likely as well. Or perhaps the deep malaise of the American population would continue.
Nuclear attacks on multiple nations or even one nation would lead to the world economy being disrupted for an unknowable period of time. The disruption of production, trade and transport could cause an extremely destructive collapse of the world and local economies. Asymmetric warfare against the United States would proliferate. More nations would seek more nuclear weapons more quickly in order to defend themselves.
Of course such an act of imperial brutality could lower the standard of human conduct considerably. Imperial acts of war can only undermine a system of international law based on justice and equality rather than upon the right of the biggest bully to push everyone else around.
Republican, bully, Christians... I just don't get these people!
Thursday, April 24, 2008
IS AN UNPRECEDENTED ACT OF NUCLEAR TERRORISM AT HAND?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

No comments:
Post a Comment