Monday, December 24, 2001
...or else
Anne Applebaum's Foreigners takes a look at what it will take to keep Afghanistan's new government afloat: "We cannot put an end to the factional and inter-ethnic squabbling that have condemned Afghans to war and poverty for two decades. We cannot wave a magic wand and grant [Afghan interim government leader Hamid] Karzai political experience and legitimacy either. We can, however, control the flow of aid money, as the Afghans know. From now on, the equation should be a simple one: You don't cooperate with Karzai's interim government--you don't get food or new roads for your region." 24/12/2001
prmn
prmn
Thursday, December 20, 2001
making up the rules as it goes along
The NYT says that some European politicians are peeved that Walker seems to be getting better treatment than the al-Qaida prisoners at Gitmo. The United States seems to be "making up the rules as it goes along," one European ambassador told the NYT. ... the European's concern is that America doesn't believe in international law. [December 2001]
prmn
prmn
Sunday, December 16, 2001
falling back on the usual
It's interesting to hear war supporters hearken back to World War Two so as to justify the current operations in Afghanistan. On the one hand, the President has said this is a "new war," that is being fought with "new weapons," and that is unlike any previous conflict in which the U.S. has found itself.
And yet on the other hand, those prosecuting this "new war," are falling back not only on the usual weapons (cluster bombs and daisy cutters--very original), but the usual rhetoric as well: Pearl Harbor, massive retaliation, reconstruction.
So desperate are we as a nation for a "good" war--one that will make us feel happy to wave the flag again--that we are willing to overlook the obvious differences between this conflict and the last one that most folks consider truly just.
So desirous are we of a new "Greatest Generation," that we seem willing to rush into military action no matter the consequences; no matter the likely anger such actions will engender, thereby increasing, not reducing terrorism; no matter the innocent civilians we will snuff out in the process.
We say we want safety. But really, what we seem to want is a rejuvenated patriotism that can paper over our fears, even as it does nothing to make us safe. [Playing the World War Two Card: Nostalgia in the Crusade Against Terrorism / by Tim Wise]
prmn
And yet on the other hand, those prosecuting this "new war," are falling back not only on the usual weapons (cluster bombs and daisy cutters--very original), but the usual rhetoric as well: Pearl Harbor, massive retaliation, reconstruction.
So desperate are we as a nation for a "good" war--one that will make us feel happy to wave the flag again--that we are willing to overlook the obvious differences between this conflict and the last one that most folks consider truly just.
So desirous are we of a new "Greatest Generation," that we seem willing to rush into military action no matter the consequences; no matter the likely anger such actions will engender, thereby increasing, not reducing terrorism; no matter the innocent civilians we will snuff out in the process.
We say we want safety. But really, what we seem to want is a rejuvenated patriotism that can paper over our fears, even as it does nothing to make us safe. [Playing the World War Two Card: Nostalgia in the Crusade Against Terrorism / by Tim Wise]
prmn
