Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Articles
Democratic Underground  
SEARCH DU
Powered by FreeFind

THE DU T-SHIRT OF THE WEEK:

Click here to purchase DU Merchandise

Sweatshirts, mugs, and mousepads also available!

DONATE TO DU!
We rely on donations from our readers to run this website. If you think we're worth it, give us your money!

SUBMIT ARTICLES
Authors - we publish a wide variety of new material six days a week. If you would like us to consider your article for publication, click here.

BOOK REVIEWS
Find out what other Evil DUers are reading. And buy through our Amazon Affiliate Program.

LINKS DIRECTORY
We have over 1,000 progressive websites listed in our Links Directory.
· Democratic Party
· Forums/Communities
· Government
· Humor and Parody
· Issues and Activism
· Merchandise
· News/Commentary
· Personal Homepages
· Research and Dirt
· State and Local
· Add a link!

GET DU GEAR
Check out our fabulous range of T-shirts, mugs, baseball caps... etc.

No Foreign Policy Foreplay?
June 28, 2002
By punpirate

Either Dubya's latest speech on the Middle East is confused, or I am.

In this latest missive from the unelected one, Palestinians are told they are at fault, that they are not democratic, and if they were, it would all be so much easier. I thought the Palestinians had already decided that they like Arafat and want to keep him as their leader and representative, for good or bad.

Maybe this points to a larger and more particular problem, that of the United States of America wanting to decide who gets to run things around the world....

Israel and their particular Dubya of the moment, Ariel Sharon, don't want to abide by any of the UN resolutions to which they've agreed in the past. When the UN created Israel, it also created a Palestinian state. The 1967 war took care of that. When Israel wanted into the UN, it agreed to the right of return of Palestinians uprooted from their homes. Israel got into the UN, but there's been no right of return for any Palestinian. When the UN reiterated that Israel was not entitled to keep territories occupied during war, Israel just looked the other way and said to the multitudes of settlers, "go fer it."

Now, after so many UN resolutions have been blasted apart, the apparent Bush strategy is to blame the Palestinians for upsetting the American applecart, for making it temporarily more difficult for the Bush II administration to wage war on Iraq.

It's absurd, in a way. The UN says to Israel, do this and all is forgiven, and Israel says, "yeah, okay, but leave us alone."

Pardon? Membership in the UN strongly implies agreement with its principles of the primacy of international law, the dictates of fair play and reason among nations. Israel says, "nope, not for us," and America, Israel's greatest benefactor since its inception, says, "uh, ok, whatever."

America says, "we're going to fight every country with weapons of mass destruction." Yep, except for Israel.

With regard to weapons of mass destruction and the Middle East, everyone's nervous about Saddam Hussein and Iraq's capabilities in that regard. That country is in the crosshairs. Certainly, that's because Saddam Hussein is a power-mad idiot, but, that's not the end-all of it.

One component of this great problem of the Middle East is Israel's desire, as with the United States, to be a nuclear superpower in its region, without having to say one's sorry.

Unfortunately, there's a rub in this - in the past (pre-Bush II), the United States' nuclear policy sought to appear as if it were a benign Santa with the power to withhold gifts, rather than something which could wreak havoc on the planet at large. Because Israel was a government which we hosted, consistently, with economic and military tax dollars, we saw them, and them alone, as friends in a hostile region. Our leaders continue to protect this view, even though it is in direct conflict with our relations with other countries in the region (okay, read here, Saudi Arabia).

All this is indicative of problems in the larger policy of the US, not just now but in the past as well. US politicians today are loathe to speak accurately and simply about Israel's failures in living up to its international agreements. Too many votes to be lost by speaking the simple truth.

To a much greater degree, though, US policy is increasingly tending toward one of, "we decide who runs your country, and why." Bush II essentially, in his last speech, dictated that to Palestinians, as he has done with Iraq, Columbia, and recently, Venezuela.

Covert policy to overthrow Hussein with prejudice speaks to the same expectations on the part of the US. US manipulations in the war in Afghanistan and its desires to influence the outcome of the recently-convened loya jirga in Kabul have made America seem to so many in the world a petty democracy, run by moneyed interests, bent upon establishing not true democracy, but rather, influence, around the world. No wonder no one trusts us to do the right thing.

This latest administration of ours has chosen, quite deliberately, to make the Monroe Doctrine into something wholly unfamiliar to contemporary American citizens. It is now the desire of the current administration to rule the world, absolutely and without contradiction. Even Monroe would be shocked by the breadth and scope of George Bush's intentions.

We are, covertly or overtly, seeking to manipulate the hopes and desires and dreams of every country around the world which does not meet our expectations, and are as equally willing to ignore the every transgression of a country upon its own people as long as that country's dictator is an ostensible friend of ours. Even the military junta in Myanmar gets a pass from the Bush administration, the courts and Congress.

Maybe all this is a sign of bigger trouble. The dissolution of the former Soviet Union is seen, now, by many conservatives in this country as an opportunity not only to fill a world leadership void, but, in one sense, as an opportunity not to be missed - the opportunity to run the world, politically and economically.

Money counts mightily in the equations currently being summed by the Bush administration. Ephemeral as those profits might be, they still count - mightily, especially to those politicians in our midst who depend upon feeding the profit machine which is now the United States.

The coincidence of oil and evil cannot be dismissed. But, oil is but a part of this horror about to be unleashed on the poor of the world. The larger variable is the raw, naked grasp of power, absolute, unmitigated power. Controlling people, dominating people, domestic and abroad, is perhaps the strongest aphrodisiac of all. Determining the fates of whole countries, the United States included, is political, economic and sexual in its implications.

Many years from now, someone may come to the conclusion that the United States and its leaders in our time were just economic weight-lifters with itty-bitty social pricks and were seeking to compensate for their perceived personal lack in sexual throw-weight....

Well, it's no crazier an explanation for what's going on today with our leaders than any other theory, is it?

Maybe we just need to breed politicians with bigger dicks. Then they would have no need to seek compensation through world domination. What a concept!

Sexist? Perhaps. But, by and large, in this country, women aren't the problem. Men are. As Michael Moore says, stupid white men are. Maybe Mike should have said, "stupid white men with tiny dicks are the problem."

And, no, I'm not volunteering to measure Trent Lott, or George Bush or Tom DeLay.... I'll leave that to others with stronger stomachs than have I.

More seriously, though, there's something wrong here. American politicians think the world is their oyster, when, ultimately, they should be thinking hard about what their constituents really want, and not what they, in their puny minds believe, is good for the world at large - a world, to the greatest extent, they've never visited and know nothing about. If all of the Senate and the House of Representatives were put on the same diet as the poorest of the world's people for three or four months, we might see a slightly different set of opinions from these plump, corn-fed bowsers whom we elect year after year because we don't know any better.

They might even be able to see the viewpoint of the average Palestinian. Or East Timorean. Or Malaysian. Or Brazilian, or Argentinian. Or Somalian. Or Nigerian. Or Angolan.

In American business parlance, to fuck someone is to gain power over them. When your representative talks that way to you, even in politically correct terms, maybe he or she means to gain power over you, too.... Vote for an asshole and plan on getting fucked, too.... Only in America.

Tell the parties to drop their pants for you before you vote. It's the right thing to do, for America and the world. Don't forget your ruler. Tell 'em they can't have your vote unless they can seduce you, and that you're really hard to get. Tell 'em they can't have you unless they prove themselves to you. Tell 'em they have to be sensitive, too. Tell 'em it's not enough that they say they love you. Love is fleeting. Honesty is forever.


Punpirate is a New Mexico writer very fond of foreplay, at home and abroad.

Printer-friendly version
Tell a friend about this article Tell a friend about this article
Discuss this article
Democratic Underground Homepage

 
© 2001 - 2004 Democratic Underground, LLC
 

Important Notice: Articles published on the Democratic Underground website are the opinions of the individuals who write them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC