RANGER AGAINST WAR: Proliferators of WMD are Us <

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

Proliferators of WMD are Us

George Bush is Edward Arlington Robinson's Miniver Cheevy, child of scorn, if we were to read his psychology charitably. A few stanzas from the poem about our knight manque:

Miniver loved the days of old

When swords were bright and steeds were prancing;

The vision of a warrior bold

Would set him dancing.

* * *

Miniver mourned the ripe renown

That made so many a name so fragrant;

He mourned Romance, now on the town,

And Art, a vagrant.

Miniver loved the Medici,

Albeit he had never seen one;

He would have sinned incessantly

Could he have been one.

* * *

The boychick has brought on two wars that are run like PR campaigns. Pakistan is spinning on the brink of collapse. Turkey has their battle blood up, and a possible ally -- Iran -- wants a nuclear weapon, which we won't let them have (Cheney: "We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.”) Right.

When Turkey's parliament recently authorized a resolution to send troops into Northern Iraq last month, one lawmaker, Nihat Ergun, explained
, "Iraq has become a stomping ground for terrorists." Iraq has become a stomping ground. . .and what event presaged that sad state of affairs?

We don't seem to care that Pakistan has at least 20 nukes in a country that is anything but democratic.

We might bomb Iran, but that would only prove their argument that they need a nuclear defensive capability. Then again, GWB doesn't do nuance.

"The administration will designate the entire Revolutionary Guard [the most elite wing of Iran's military] under Executive Order 13382, signed by GWB in June 2005, which allows the United States to freeze the assets of any proliferator of weapons of mass destruction and its supporters." Hello -- that would be us, with India being our newest nuclear client, if they continue their contract with us, that is. I suppose we could always claim the Fifth should push come to shove.

Whether Iran ever has a nuclear weapon is not as relevant as the question of whether the U.S. will ever return to a strong dollar. Not bloody likely with these geopolitical alignments.

Labels: , ,


Blogger The Minstrel Boy said...

this reminds me of something i said to a young eltee in the boonies of angola. we were there in support of an obviously insane jonas savimbi "training." the young eltee was trying to toe the company line about UNITAS being a legimate democratic movement that would have existed without massive u.s. and south african support. eltee said in a way, this reminds me our revolution

i replied yeah eltee, except this time we're the fucking hessians

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 at 11:43:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...


The U.S. seems to have shifted in support for COIN following WWI.

After Vietnam, we shifted our support to insurgencies, such as the action you participated in in Angola. Somewhere after WWI, U.S. policy seemed to shift into COIN.

Your experience in Angola is against the grain of our present COIN struggles. The support you provided is similar to the support given to the Contras, both supported insurgent groups. Generally done on the Q.T.

We have shifted from insurgency, to COIN and back again, as many times as it befits national economic interests. It all comes down to the dollar. Neither COIN nor insurgency is intrinsically bad. I hope you drew max per diem in Angola. You earned it.

Thursday, November 8, 2007 at 9:28:00 PM GMT-5  

Post a Comment

<< Home