If all we get out of this Presidency is our restored standing as a leader

and good in the eyes of the rest of the world. That will be a miracle in of itself.

I'll be happy. Everything after that is gravy.

Myself....I want what they promised. Employee Free Choice Act for starters. National Health Care or something serious leading in that direction second. For me, after those two, everything else is gravy.

Maybe some decades after the last country you bomb, if ever.

But not this time.

The US "moral standing" and our position as a global leader was very high during the Clinton administration. That was within just a few years of the invasion of Panama (most recently), not to mention Granada and the Reagan Lebanon debacle. And, it was at the same time as the non-action on the Rwandan genocide, the bombing of Serbia, and while we upheld sanctions against Iraq that lots of people thought were completely counterproductive and hell on civilians. Even with all that, our image was still pretty good and opinion polls around the world reflected that.

Try to keep some perspective.

We killed way more people over a longer period of time. Yet, less than 20 years after we got out of that conflict, we were riding high.

When did you say we were going to stop, again?

How about trying to follow the civilized countries of the world for a change -- the western European social democracies come to mind, along with the former Brit colonies Canada and Australia.

New Zealand's doing well, at least until some snooping petro-geologist discovers OUR OIL in a sub-oceanic puddle 20 miles off the North Island's western coast. Then they're fucked, along with the "rag heads" and "sand Ni**ers" of the middle east.

Africa's next, and Nigeria looks like it's being measured for that giant Standard-Mobil-Shell-BP-Conoco-Exxon-Unocal bullseye the rest of the world has come to know and loathe. Leadership...

Who the hell needs this country's leadership? Who ever has besides those land speculating assholes and massive property thieves who invented the "white man's burden" and "Manifest Destiny?"

Why not discuss the white man's idea of leadership with the ghosts of the 15 million original Americans who were wiped out by "guns, germs and steel," in the words of the great, great geographer and anthropologist Jared Diamond.

Read Howard Zinn's "Peoples' History..." and learn what attempted leadership gets you. It ought to be a capital crime; here, it's woven into the fabric of our wretchedly phony creation myth. We have to be the world's leader because everybody else is just too... a) lazy; b) incompetent; c) anti-capitalist; or d) all of the above.

A little fucking humility would go a long way these days, it seems to me.

But, as always, your mileage may differ. In fact, it may require wiping out all New Zealand fisheries just to keep that ol' tank topped off.


sf

Being honestly cynical, I'd rather live in the sadder-but-wiser remnant of a former empire than a current one.

The UK, France, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain all seem like saner places to live nowadays. Italy too. For that matter, living in a yurt in Mongolia seems to have things to recommend it over here. There's not much paperwork and the air is cleaner.

...as you say: "Being honestly cynical, I'd rather live in the sadder-but-wiser remnant of a former empire than a current one."

I'm afraid we have no choice. We already live in a dying empire whose only possible claim to leadership lies in its ability to blow up civilians in numbers unseen since the gawd of Abraham decided to take his frustration out on the first born of Egypt.

Just for the hell of it, here's a transcript of an email conversation I had with Harlan Ullman, the very guy who "invented" the concept of "shock and awe." Looks a hell of a lot like the German blitzkrieg or the various allied fire bombings -- or maybe the big ones themselves: Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But Harlan would argue differently...


ME:

Mr. Ullman -- Shock and awe -- along with loathing, disgust and
a barely suppressed gag reflex -- pretty well characterize my response to
your "little Hiroshima" plan for Baghdad.

They don't hate us for our freedoms, Mr. Ullman. Nor do they hate us
because we can buy houses.

They hate us because all sane people detest murderous imperialists
engaged in cynical resource grabs. They hate us because we have
demons in our midst who advocate unleashing the fires of hell on
civilian populations, then dismissing the charred results as "collateral damage."

Not in my name, Mr. Ullman, and not with my tax dollars.


XX
Portland, Oregon



Harlan Ullman:

Sadly, you miss understand (sic) the point. Shock and awe is meant to get the
enemy to quit as quickly and cheaply as possible not target civilians.
there is a moral imperative on our part to use our force to minimize
casualties and damage all around.

Assuming you oppose the war and it still comes, what is your
alternative to possible tens of thousands of civilian casualties if we
go to battle the old way?


Me:

Mr. Ullman -- I fail to see how lobbing between 600 and 800 cruise
missiles into a city of about 5 million people over a two-day period
creates a credible "alternative to possible tens of thousands of
civilian casualties."

And in case these Iraqi civilians are just statistics to you, here's what some of them look like.


XX
Portland, Oregon



Ullman:

No one is talking about lobbing hundreds of bombs profligately into a city. If we do, then that will be a huge and costly error. However what I don't understand is how things have been so turned around. why is GW Bush cast as the villain and the real thug, Saddam, seen as the victim?


Me:

On the contrary, every news reference to shock and awe I've seen has included some sort of dire threat to Baghdad itself. Note this line from a CBS News story from Friday, January 24th:

"There will not be a safe place in Baghdad," said one Pentagon official who has been briefed on the plan.

The full story is here:

And I've heard similar threats from administration officials on NPR, PBS and ABC.


As to the Bush/Saddam/thuggery issue . . That's a false dichotomy. Just because I see Bush as a murderous thug with designs on Iraqi oil doesn't mean I support Hussein, yet another murderous thug.

As far as I'm concerned, an imperial presidency and an autocratic dictatorship have far too much in common. A pox on both houses.

I could enumerate my personal list of Bush administration offenses against the Constitution -- and against sanity in general -- but they've been done to death by others already.


XX
Portland, Oregon

Ullman:

No reply...


Note that this is the same Harlan Ullman who was among the first to be named as a client of the late "D.C. Madam."

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The alleged "D.C. madam" dropped a name in court documents filed Thursday, but the man named laughed at being accused of hiring the high-end escort service run by Deborah Jeane Palfrey.

Of course he did... At least he wasn't wearing diapers at the time, unlike a certain Louisiana senator.

Note, too, that Ms. Palfrey allegedly found it necessary to hang herself once the Bushie "wet work" types tracked her down to her mother's place in Tarpon Springs, Florida.


Now, just for the hell of it, google "green parrot" "landmine" ... Or don't if you want to preserve your sanity every April 15th.


sf

of those of us who died waiting for affordable health care? Or would that put lumps in your gravy?

To be honest, I'm more PO'd at DNC Chair Kaine, COS Emmanuel, and Majority (and I use this next word loosely) "Leader" Harry Reid.