nope no war -- or the dumbest war ever

[Honor Johnson]

I think that Bush will go to war regardless of who is with him because =
any failure to do so would mean his bellicose rhetoric, which is, after =
all, one of the reasons we are in this growing mess, would be shown to =
one and all...even his Republican friends...to be as hollow and as =
meaningless as his own warty little "soul".  That he appears to be "on =
drugs" to a lot of people suggests that he is sinking way below his =
natural depth (which would be, what?, 1/4 of an inch at best?).  =
Wolfowitz, Cheney and Rumsfeld give not a tinkers dam about either world =
opinion or, apparently, the long-term effects on the US economy if this =
situation gets out of hand.

There was a most informed retired Army Colonel on NPR this morning =
(naturally, I can't recall his name now. It might be Walker.).  This =
person was a strategic policy advisor to Gen. Schwartzkopf (sp?).  His =
scenario goes something as follows:

First, he said, the Army fights the "last" war.  Question: Is the model =
here Desert Storm...or, much more ominously, Mogadishu.
Second, Saddam unleashes scuds against Israel and the "right-wing =
Israeli Government" (his words) fires back igniting another Arabic War =
in the Middle East.  Meanwhile, Saddam fires off his oil wells.  Then =
releases chemical and biological weapons.
Third, we win the war but there is a power vacuum, including widespread =
disease, famine and a gathering storm of world criticism fueled by =
photos of US soldiers wandering amidst fields of dead and dying Iraqi =
citizens, (caused by Saddam's weapons, who can tell in a photograph?)
Fourth, NATO and most European governments condemn the US.
Fifth, the US economy tanks.
Sixth, North Korea begins to sell weapons grade plutonium to anyone =
interested.  Iran begins to do the same.
Seventh, Al Queda executes another strike against the US. =20
Eighth, the Blair Government falls.

And then what would follow?  Martial Law and "internment" of Iraqi, =
Iranian, Saudi, Yemeni people, regardless of their citizenship?  =
Perhaps, quickly followoed by "dissident Americans" whose "behavior =
supports Godless International Terrorism and threatens the American Way =
of Life" (read: us)=20

Oh happy day.

wj
-----Original Message-----
From:	Michael Eisenstadt [SMTP:michaele@ando.pair.com]
Sent:	Monday, March 10, 2003 3:39 PM
To:	austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
Subject:	nope no war -- or the dumbest war ever

i think i finally got a handle on this

after WW II, England pursued as close a
relationship with the US as possible

Churchill pursued this "stick close to the US"=20
policy in the 50s with Eisenhower, and so did
subsequent PMs through the years

think Thatcher and Reagan, evil twins joined
at the hip

Blair & Clinton were very huggy-huggy (through
2000)

Blair naturally wanted to continue this policy with
Bush as he had with Clinton

when Bush and his staff told Blair what they
planned to do, he could NOT agree to it UNLESS
he believed it was really the right thing to do.
Why? because he's a Christian who are the biggest
hypocrits in the hole world. of their own free
will Tony and Cheri go to church every Sunday hand=20
in hand, just like Ron and Nancy, and Jimmy and
Rosalyn, and Laura and W (W stands for M oron
standing on his head)

so somehow he believed (still believes?) in Bush's=20
insane take on reality

but now as push comes to shove i hear on the=20
radio that other powerful Brits are making him=20
back away a bit. if he doesnt, he is on the point=20
of losing the confidence of Parliament and the
ruin of his career (i suspect he has already=20
ruined his career)

which means that the governments of the other=20
important countries out there are firmly in favor
of disarming Saddam without war (China, Germany,=20
Russia and France) and Britain may now be=20
wavering in that direction

Bush will NOT go to war if Britain doesnt go in=20
at the same time

Michel Nostradamus

"Oh my God, we forgot the fucking blessing!" - Dwight Eisenhower