I wonder. . .
Yes, I know it's been a long time since I last blogged en masse. I apologize. At the very least you'd think I'd try to have some triumphant return to the blogosphere, with thoughts so well-researched and connected that it made the wait worthwhile. Alas, such is not the case. . .
Without going into great summary about the several sources for the following thought process, I will start by saying that there have been a lot of "moves" in the campaign in the last week. Most centered around Prime Minister Allawi of Iraq coming stateside to speak not just to the U.N., but also directly to the United States. Sen. Kerry couldn't be bothered to show up in D.C. to even LISTEN to Allawi's address to a joint session of Congress, much less actually talk with the guy who's shouldering a remarkable burden for the entirety of peaceful civilization right now. Now I'm sure I might have missed the nuance that led to Kerry's absence from the festivities last week, but there's no "nuancing" this: Kerry claimed that Allawi was doing nothing more than "putting on a face" when talking about the situation in Iraq. Later, a leading spokesman of the Kerry camp actually had the gaul to accuse Allawi of being nothing more than a puppet of the Bush administration. Now making these types of statements takes some kind of guts--I'll let you decide if it's a kind that you like or dislike.
But to me, these actions by Kamp Kerry are all part of a "bigger picture" about Kerry and the people that he surrounds himself with: they think they're smarter than everyone else. Their thinking goes like this: Bush and his cronies are simpletons; the "neocons" are nothing other than warmongers; even other heads of state (pardon me, "selected" heads of state) are clearly delusional--or liars--because they see things, say things, and act in ways that are different than the way the Kerry Dems see, talk and act. These "big-thinkers" that the Dems have on their ticket and team. . .well, the world has never seen the brilliance of this lot before. Clearly, they can solve all the problems that currently ill the world, simply because they are just that smart. . .
How smart do they think they are? Well, consider this: they've actually proposed GIVING to Iran the one thing that is keeping the mullahs from being a nuclear power. Now while the rest of the world may shudder at the idea of Iran having these materials and the capabilities that come with it, the Kerry team thinks that by giving the fuel to the Iranians, the U.S. will actually put Iran right where we want 'em! Why, it's such a smart idea that I, being a simpleton, just can't understand the brilliance of it on any level. "You want to make peace with your enemies? Just give 'em what they want--give them the ability to blast a free, democratic and worthwhile ally of the United States off the face of the planet. You know they'll never do it--because if they did, then we'd KNOW that they actually had sinister plans for their nuclear power!" Reverse psychology on a strategic level--I never would have thought of the benefits of that! I must be stuck in the Cold War.
To these neo-grande-thinkers, the problem with America is that those stodgy careerists in all levels of government--you know, the ones who help to shape policy--have always "stuck" the U.S. in a rut as far as wiggle-room with our enemies: we can't let communism spread; we can't allow a country hostile to the interests of the United States control the oil flowing out of the Middle East; we have to play to the Mutually Assured Destruction policy with regards to the arms race against the Soviets; we should support Democratic movements the world over; Israel is our friend and is worth defending to the bone, we have to limit and place controls on the countries that possess a nuclear capability--gosh, the list goes on. But these are all ideas that have become policy BK--as in Before Kerry. As in Before the really big thinkers got on the scene.
These "new" brains take a different look at the world. Nuclear capability in the hands of a government that has been no friend of the United States and has been downright hostile to one of the U.S.'s biggest allies isn't such a bad thing, is it? Not to these thinkers, apparently--and if you think otherwise, clearly you are a simpleton on the same level as myself. Never mind that another grand strategy that has driven U.S. policy for the last 50 years--the support of the Israeli state--would be put in serious danger by the Iranians were they to gain the nuclear materials. Never mind that Iran has known ties to terrorist organizations--and that a nuclear weapon in the hands of a terrorist organization is by Kerry's own admittance the worst-case scenario for American security. We know we can trust the Iranian government to keep a lock on whatever nuclear ability they gain because. . .because. . .well. . .because the Kerryists are so smart and they say so!
You see, the world doesn't have to fight communism too much anymore. And we don't have to get bogged down in a pesky arms race. The thinking of the old guard served its purpose--but now it's time for a new look at the world. International security today is threatened not by bad people with bad intentions, but by good people who are unwilling to let others share in the fruits of internationalism--or so the Kerryists think. So join with me while we look at the world of tomorrow through the sunglasses of a big-brain Kerry Kamper:
This whole fight in Iraq? Well, it wasn't worth it--or at least not how it's gone down so far. Never mind the huge strategic implications of ousting Saddam from a region rife with anti-Americanism and that was a proven breeding ground for terrorists--we should have gone about the war differently in just about every way! But never mind the trap that Bush has led us into--we're smart enough to get out of it. Heck, we're smart enough to get out of it quickly AND with the proper results AND without putting any more troops into Iraq. We won't tell you how, though--you'll just have to trust us that we know the answer. We'll let our candidate tell the present administration to do exactly what they're already doing while we know full well that plan won't work because we didn't think of it. After all, we're the only guys who can think in the mode necessary in this current world.
And since we'll take care of that muck in Iraq, you're probably asking: What's next? Well, let's get back to that Global War on Terror thing. GWOT is actually a misnomer created by the simpleton Bush. You see, this war on terror is actually a war against the terrorists who would like to make war on us, right? If taking the fight to them isn't the right way to wage the war, and a full pull-out and the ensuing isolation/threat to U.S. activities abroad isn't the right way to end the war, what's left? Well, you simpletons out there are probably scratching your heads about now, so I'll give you a little clue:
Here's another way to look at it: what's the only "tool" that the United States has never used in dealing with terrorists and/or terrorist threats?
If you said "diplomacy", or something akin to it, pat yourself on the back.
As a rule, the United States has never given in to terrorist demands, and our only "negotiation" has been for the terrorists to withdraw their demands and surrender or pay the price.
But now you're part of this Kerry team, this team of 10-lb brains with the world at their bidding--and we don't get bogged down in the rhetoric of yesterday. To us, this administrations-old and battle-tested policy of ignoring the terrorists is "unenlightened".
Why? For starters, everything else has been tried: detente, deterrence, economic attacks, tactical strikes, not-so-tactical strikes, chasing, impeding, intelligence collecting, regime removal, yadda yadda yadda--and yet there's still terrorism. The only thing missing from that list? Good old-fashioned talk. That's something that we here at team Kerry do exceptionally well, too.
Secondly, what's the worst that can happen? We meet with these guys, we try to hammer out some deal, and we see if they hold up to their end of the bargain. If not, we will know that we can't deal with that particular spokesperson from that particular faction again--we'll just try our luck with someone else. But people who are talking to each other probably aren't bombing each other, right? Never mind that the terrorist movements would immediately gain a strength never before known to them; never mind that the standing of this country in the eyes of the international community would immediately become slightly lower than pond scum; and never mind that we'd be almost certainly sentencing Israel to a barrage of terrorist attacks unlike any they've seen before--at least we're trying something new! Just because it's never been done before doesn't mean it won't work--and the big thinkers here in Kamp Kerry know it, too!
And look no further than the top of the ticket to see a man who has made an entire political career out of going upstream in waters clearly devoid of salmon. In VietNam, some of his band of brothers were still fighting in theater while he was protesting the war to the Senate. The Sandinistas that held the contempt of old-fashioned President Reagan were not just respected but defended by John Kerry. When the votes were tallied for the first Gulf War, the one that was precipitated when Saddam decided to steamroll Kuwait to grab at their dollars, Kerry was one of the few voices that said "nay". The list of "resourcefulness" shown by our candidate is so long, so noteworthy that you just KNOW he will bring an understanding of the world community to the White House that hasn't been seen before. And he's a talker. Boy, is he a talker.
Isn't it fun to see the world in an entirely different light?
All right, back to Johnspeak now: Can you imagine Madelaine Albright sitting down with some leading figure of Al Qaeda, the organization chiefly responsible for the murder of 3,000 innocents on American soil in a "conference" with leading figures of the Kerry adminstration? It's really not a wacky exercise, unfortunately. Painful, yes (and not just because I chose Albright as one of the subjects)--but I doubt you can put it out of the realm of possibility.
Not with this team.
Without going into great summary about the several sources for the following thought process, I will start by saying that there have been a lot of "moves" in the campaign in the last week. Most centered around Prime Minister Allawi of Iraq coming stateside to speak not just to the U.N., but also directly to the United States. Sen. Kerry couldn't be bothered to show up in D.C. to even LISTEN to Allawi's address to a joint session of Congress, much less actually talk with the guy who's shouldering a remarkable burden for the entirety of peaceful civilization right now. Now I'm sure I might have missed the nuance that led to Kerry's absence from the festivities last week, but there's no "nuancing" this: Kerry claimed that Allawi was doing nothing more than "putting on a face" when talking about the situation in Iraq. Later, a leading spokesman of the Kerry camp actually had the gaul to accuse Allawi of being nothing more than a puppet of the Bush administration. Now making these types of statements takes some kind of guts--I'll let you decide if it's a kind that you like or dislike.
But to me, these actions by Kamp Kerry are all part of a "bigger picture" about Kerry and the people that he surrounds himself with: they think they're smarter than everyone else. Their thinking goes like this: Bush and his cronies are simpletons; the "neocons" are nothing other than warmongers; even other heads of state (pardon me, "selected" heads of state) are clearly delusional--or liars--because they see things, say things, and act in ways that are different than the way the Kerry Dems see, talk and act. These "big-thinkers" that the Dems have on their ticket and team. . .well, the world has never seen the brilliance of this lot before. Clearly, they can solve all the problems that currently ill the world, simply because they are just that smart. . .
How smart do they think they are? Well, consider this: they've actually proposed GIVING to Iran the one thing that is keeping the mullahs from being a nuclear power. Now while the rest of the world may shudder at the idea of Iran having these materials and the capabilities that come with it, the Kerry team thinks that by giving the fuel to the Iranians, the U.S. will actually put Iran right where we want 'em! Why, it's such a smart idea that I, being a simpleton, just can't understand the brilliance of it on any level. "You want to make peace with your enemies? Just give 'em what they want--give them the ability to blast a free, democratic and worthwhile ally of the United States off the face of the planet. You know they'll never do it--because if they did, then we'd KNOW that they actually had sinister plans for their nuclear power!" Reverse psychology on a strategic level--I never would have thought of the benefits of that! I must be stuck in the Cold War.
To these neo-grande-thinkers, the problem with America is that those stodgy careerists in all levels of government--you know, the ones who help to shape policy--have always "stuck" the U.S. in a rut as far as wiggle-room with our enemies: we can't let communism spread; we can't allow a country hostile to the interests of the United States control the oil flowing out of the Middle East; we have to play to the Mutually Assured Destruction policy with regards to the arms race against the Soviets; we should support Democratic movements the world over; Israel is our friend and is worth defending to the bone, we have to limit and place controls on the countries that possess a nuclear capability--gosh, the list goes on. But these are all ideas that have become policy BK--as in Before Kerry. As in Before the really big thinkers got on the scene.
These "new" brains take a different look at the world. Nuclear capability in the hands of a government that has been no friend of the United States and has been downright hostile to one of the U.S.'s biggest allies isn't such a bad thing, is it? Not to these thinkers, apparently--and if you think otherwise, clearly you are a simpleton on the same level as myself. Never mind that another grand strategy that has driven U.S. policy for the last 50 years--the support of the Israeli state--would be put in serious danger by the Iranians were they to gain the nuclear materials. Never mind that Iran has known ties to terrorist organizations--and that a nuclear weapon in the hands of a terrorist organization is by Kerry's own admittance the worst-case scenario for American security. We know we can trust the Iranian government to keep a lock on whatever nuclear ability they gain because. . .because. . .well. . .because the Kerryists are so smart and they say so!
You see, the world doesn't have to fight communism too much anymore. And we don't have to get bogged down in a pesky arms race. The thinking of the old guard served its purpose--but now it's time for a new look at the world. International security today is threatened not by bad people with bad intentions, but by good people who are unwilling to let others share in the fruits of internationalism--or so the Kerryists think. So join with me while we look at the world of tomorrow through the sunglasses of a big-brain Kerry Kamper:
This whole fight in Iraq? Well, it wasn't worth it--or at least not how it's gone down so far. Never mind the huge strategic implications of ousting Saddam from a region rife with anti-Americanism and that was a proven breeding ground for terrorists--we should have gone about the war differently in just about every way! But never mind the trap that Bush has led us into--we're smart enough to get out of it. Heck, we're smart enough to get out of it quickly AND with the proper results AND without putting any more troops into Iraq. We won't tell you how, though--you'll just have to trust us that we know the answer. We'll let our candidate tell the present administration to do exactly what they're already doing while we know full well that plan won't work because we didn't think of it. After all, we're the only guys who can think in the mode necessary in this current world.
And since we'll take care of that muck in Iraq, you're probably asking: What's next? Well, let's get back to that Global War on Terror thing. GWOT is actually a misnomer created by the simpleton Bush. You see, this war on terror is actually a war against the terrorists who would like to make war on us, right? If taking the fight to them isn't the right way to wage the war, and a full pull-out and the ensuing isolation/threat to U.S. activities abroad isn't the right way to end the war, what's left? Well, you simpletons out there are probably scratching your heads about now, so I'll give you a little clue:
Here's another way to look at it: what's the only "tool" that the United States has never used in dealing with terrorists and/or terrorist threats?
If you said "diplomacy", or something akin to it, pat yourself on the back.
As a rule, the United States has never given in to terrorist demands, and our only "negotiation" has been for the terrorists to withdraw their demands and surrender or pay the price.
But now you're part of this Kerry team, this team of 10-lb brains with the world at their bidding--and we don't get bogged down in the rhetoric of yesterday. To us, this administrations-old and battle-tested policy of ignoring the terrorists is "unenlightened".
Why? For starters, everything else has been tried: detente, deterrence, economic attacks, tactical strikes, not-so-tactical strikes, chasing, impeding, intelligence collecting, regime removal, yadda yadda yadda--and yet there's still terrorism. The only thing missing from that list? Good old-fashioned talk. That's something that we here at team Kerry do exceptionally well, too.
Secondly, what's the worst that can happen? We meet with these guys, we try to hammer out some deal, and we see if they hold up to their end of the bargain. If not, we will know that we can't deal with that particular spokesperson from that particular faction again--we'll just try our luck with someone else. But people who are talking to each other probably aren't bombing each other, right? Never mind that the terrorist movements would immediately gain a strength never before known to them; never mind that the standing of this country in the eyes of the international community would immediately become slightly lower than pond scum; and never mind that we'd be almost certainly sentencing Israel to a barrage of terrorist attacks unlike any they've seen before--at least we're trying something new! Just because it's never been done before doesn't mean it won't work--and the big thinkers here in Kamp Kerry know it, too!
And look no further than the top of the ticket to see a man who has made an entire political career out of going upstream in waters clearly devoid of salmon. In VietNam, some of his band of brothers were still fighting in theater while he was protesting the war to the Senate. The Sandinistas that held the contempt of old-fashioned President Reagan were not just respected but defended by John Kerry. When the votes were tallied for the first Gulf War, the one that was precipitated when Saddam decided to steamroll Kuwait to grab at their dollars, Kerry was one of the few voices that said "nay". The list of "resourcefulness" shown by our candidate is so long, so noteworthy that you just KNOW he will bring an understanding of the world community to the White House that hasn't been seen before. And he's a talker. Boy, is he a talker.
Isn't it fun to see the world in an entirely different light?
All right, back to Johnspeak now: Can you imagine Madelaine Albright sitting down with some leading figure of Al Qaeda, the organization chiefly responsible for the murder of 3,000 innocents on American soil in a "conference" with leading figures of the Kerry adminstration? It's really not a wacky exercise, unfortunately. Painful, yes (and not just because I chose Albright as one of the subjects)--but I doubt you can put it out of the realm of possibility.
Not with this team.
1 Comments:
Welcome back, bro. Totally worth the wait! I found points both insightful and humorous--nicely done!
Hey, um, how's the weather? Are you getting the remnants of Ivan/Jeanne/partridge in a pear tree?
And, by the way--congrats!! Looks like D.C. is getting a baseball team. . .such as it is.
Post a Comment
<< Home