Monday, May 02, 2005

Pressure Is Not An Option

PBU18 topic this week is the idea that pressure on Blair (with UK election May 5) also puts pressure on Bush with the result of hopefully convincing more netizens of the need to bring the troops home. I don't feel pressure on either of the men will bring the troops home. Neither listened to the huge protests before the war, neither listening now. I think the majority of Americans would agree we need to bring the troops home, but most will go along with the voices of "authority" who changed a couple of words in their rhetoric, i.e. the "threat" is not a communist takeover but Muslim extremists. It's a different world. We've been "attacked." Another Pearl Harbor, with more demons now, more evil with "terror cells" in at least 60 countries. Bush is a war president. Trust us (even though from day 1 around the world many called 9/11 an inside job).

In September 2002, in the run-up to a new session of parliament, Blair produced the first dossier. He insisted that Saddam had WMDs which could be activated in 45 minutes and would threaten other countries. (Condi's mushroom cloud.) Barely 2 years ago, when Blair was confronted with the lies of WMD, American progressives were certain that Blair's trouble would ooze across the ocean and create problems for Bush. Blair was in hot water over the "sexed up dossier" hence Bush would be too. Didn't happen.

The second dossier in 2003 showed Blair/UK cooking up a mess of intelligence material with analysis from a research student's paper found on the internet. It was ridiculed around the world. Blair, as did buddy BushCo, linked Saddam to Al-Qaida and claimed that intelligence data (forged) proved that Iraq was trying to obtain uranium from Africa to develop nuclear weapons. And the yellow cake stink on Bush/Blair lasted no longer than a fart in a whirlwind.

July 8, 2003 when questioned, Blair stated "For me, the jury is not out at all... I have absolutely no doubt at all that we will find evidence of weapons of mass destruction programmes." It was deemed Blair had not misled parliament to war in Iraq. Bush too has been cleared of any wrong doing. Not guilty of lying us to war. Intel failure. Everyone innocent, everyone misled by someone else, no one to blame. Clinton's fault for "gutting the CIA." Saddam had "weapons of mass destruction program actvities". Program activities? The imminent threat that launched a war thuds to read like the junior/senior prom program handout.

There is no such option as "putting pressure" on Blair or Bush, however much we the people like to think we have the power to pressure. Nor do we have leaders today who might pressure for us. It's not the voter, here or the UK, that any politician is worried about. Would Kerry, had he been selected, be bringing troops home or just talking about it? Would replacing Blair generate much change in British policy toward Iraq? How many fingers can you count Democrats on who are demanding loud and clear we leave Iraq? Not asking for a guesstimate of a draw down, but demanding an exit. Not barking about a lack of withdrawal strategy but demanding we leave in the very near future? How many voted against war to begin with? How many now claim they were "misled." We can change the face of the PM or the Prez, swap back and forth one party to the other, and battle whatever evil they name for us. The reality is we are going to be in Iraq for a very long time on those 14 "enduring" military bases we're building. This "venture" is for the long haul. We were told as much in the beginning by Blair and Bush; it's the only thing they haven't lied about.

Maybe followers prefer figureheads like Bush and Blair, who don't have enough sense to be ashamed at pissing away the opportunity to change the world for the better, all because talking heads assure people that men like Bush and Blair make the world safe from those evil-doers out to get us because of our freedom, our way of life. In Latin American republics, the peasants live in reality, they know their big banana is a despot working for a foreign power, and political pressure is called a revolution. We should be as astute.


Deb said...

Thank you for this wonderful article. You are absolutely correct that putting pressure on the so-called leadership is futile.

Did you know that the skin of a tiger has stripes, too? (I digress)

Perhaps your eloquent essay will open another pair of eyes to the reality that is upon us.

Kate-A said...

Your welcome, and thanks.

Content © 2005-2020 by Kate/A.