sorry, no peace; we lose

[wrog]

I'll have to admit I feel a little bit hypocritical wishing for peace, since I've never been anti-war in general (i.e., if one has a clear, worthwhile goal and war is the only way to achieve it, then war it is --- admittedly, these sorts of goals tend not to come up very often). E.g., I'm still happy we were able to take down the Taliban (if only they could stay taken down...), I'm happy that Milosovic is now sitting in a prison cell in The Hague rather than a presidential palace in Belgrade, and I'm still wondering if bombing the shit out of that North Korean reactor might not be such a bad idea after all.

What pisses me off about the present situation is not that we're going to war, but that

1. This particular war is beyond stupid.
   We're doing Osama bin Laden an incredible favor by simultaneously removing one of his worst enemies and providing him a whole mess of new recruits (i.e., when the folks struggling out from under the ruins of Basra and whatever else we decide to blow up decide they need an outlet for their anger/frustration).

   I'm sure he'll remember to thank us.

   And, in case you're wondering, this is why I predict there won't be any terrorist reprisals for this attack, in case anyone was worried about that. The time to worry will be 3-4 years from now when the new recruits go into action...

2. GWB has gone about this in pretty much the worst way possible.
   As things stand, under the UN charter Iraq now has every right to lauch a preemptive attack to defend itself (as Israel did in 1967). They may not be quite so silly, but it's a measure of just how much of the moral high ground we've ceded.

   Never mind that now having been officially blown off, the UN is probably not going to be terribly quick about providing peacekeeping troops.

   Never mind the next time we face a real threat (which I'm guessing won't be long now), we're going to be so hosed internationally because GWB has already done the Boy Crying Wolf thing far too many times.

3. You can be sure Saddam Hussein has one last ace up his sleeve.
   He's a bright guy and he's had ten years to plan for this. And unless he somehow goes completely into denial, we're pretty much guaranteeing that he's going to use it.

   One last little "fuck you" to the Western governments that stabbed him in the back after he served them so faithfully all those years. Figure on something small that he can fire off himself without needing to rely on too many subordinates.

   A SCUD aimed at Dome of the Rock would be about right. Wouldn't even need a nuclear warhead (though maybe his fellow dictator-in-distress Kim Jong-Il will have fedexed him one by now).

I'm even wondering how NATO is ever going to survive this. Arguably its demise is 10 years overdue, but it was useful to have around.

Oh well, at least with the Turks out of the picture, maybe the Kurds won't get utterly screwed this time. But don't hold your breath waiting for free elections in southern Iraq.

Comments

[tombking.livejournal.com]

While I think if it had been pressed years ago after the Gulf War I would not have minded so much, nor would the rest of the world minded as much.

But now, years and years after the fact, and with a president who was marginally
elected that lets too much of his fundamental christian god is on my side beliefs come across in his public address. Plus I feel like the administration is mostly doing this to take attention away from the fact we are going to have way too much trouble finding Osama Bin Laden and others that will spring up after he is caught and the fact they have not the slightest clue or power of the economic downturn as well as possible distraction from connections to ENRON and other busted companies.

[greyaenigma.livejournal.com]

Oh well, at least with the Turks out of the picture, maybe the Kurds won't get utterly screwed this time. But don't hold your breath waiting for free elections in southern Iraq.

So, you're assuming that because they didn't let us put our troops on Turkish soil, they're not going to go in there sometime soon and crush the Kurds?

I'm even wondering how NATO is ever going to survive this. Arguably its demise is 10 years overdue, but it was useful to have around.

Overdue? Granted, this is a terrible blow to it, but I continue to hope (or at least wish) that it'll survive this and become the world government it deserves to be.

[wrog]

So, you're assuming that because they didn't let us put our troops on Turkish soil, they're not going to go in there sometime soon and crush the Kurds?

See next entry. Also I'm thinking Bush has shown a spiteful and petty streak in the past; that the Turks aren't on board now makes it somewhat less likely he'll let them in later. Granted, that assumes we actually can keep them out, but unless they feel profoundly threatened, they're going to think twice about crossing the border uninvited. But also, see next entry.

Overdue?

Given that NATO's express purpose was to contain the Soviet threat, the fact that it's still alive and kicking 10 years after the fall of the USSR is more than a little suspicious. At least it certainly appears that way to the Russians and I'm not entirely sure I blame them.

but I continue to hope (or at least wish) that it'll survive this and become the world government it deserves to be.

hence "useful to have around." Well, okay, I don't know about world government; the non-Europe/NorthAmerica folks might have something to say about that. Anyway, I thought this was what the UN was for, stupidly organized though it might be for that task...

[greyaenigma.livejournal.com]

OK, I read the NATO thing as "UN" for some reason.