← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Peter Phillips
Thread ID: 13482 | Posts: 2 | Started: 2004-05-01
2004-05-01 18:19 | User Profile
Paul Craig Roberts remains an outstanding writer for the Paleo point of view:
[QUOTE]
[font=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3][/size][/font][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=6]National Reviewââ¬â¢s Plan for Victory in Iraq[/size][/font]
[center][font=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3][/size][/font][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]by [email="PCRoberts@postmark.net"][color=#0000ff]Paul Craig Roberts[/color][/email] [/font][size=1][color=#ffffff]by Paul Craig Roberts[/color][/size] [/center] [center] [/center] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]Why do Americans who talk about freedom and democracy rely on coercion? [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]The political left is all for coercion against the rich. Freedom and democracy mean taking the richââ¬â¢s money and giving it to those who have a "right" to it. [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]For conservatives, freedom and democracy issue forth from the barrels of our guns. National Reviewââ¬â¢s cover (May 3) proclaims: "To the Death, Crushing the insurgency, saving Iraq." The magazineââ¬â¢s conservative editors are too serious to see the irony, but polls show that Americans are appalled at the growing carnage. [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]An April 28 CBS/New York Times poll found "just 32%, the lowest number ever, say Iraq was a threat that required immediate military action a year ago." A majority of Americans now say the invasion was a mistake. [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]I remember when conservatives complained about people like Hitler and Stalin, who were good at crushing people. Now conservatives have the spirit themselves. [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]In a series of articles in the May 3 issue, National Reviewââ¬â¢s writers show off their new face. Leading off with his plan for gaining legitimacy in Iraq, John Oââ¬â¢Sullivan writes: [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]"Our first tasks now must be to crush the rebellions, punish the al-Sadr types, and disband the militias. Ceasefires must be conducted in ways that dispel any impression of weakness. If threats are made ââ¬â like the threat to kill or capture al-Sadr ââ¬â they must be carried out. In general the U.S. must not only win but also be seen to win." [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]All this bloodshed, however, is insufficient to solve "the underlying problem," which is, Oââ¬â¢Sullivan writes, "that Iraq is too divided to be a fully sovereign democracy." Solving that problem will require "several decades" as a US colony, and "during this long period the most important politician in Iraq will be the US ambassador." [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]How many Iraqis would be left after decades of being killed and crushed? Not to worry. In the next article, David Pryce-Jones writes: "For as long as anyone can remember, Iraq has been in the hands of some thug whose will is the only law." Having rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein, the secret of success is to retain his methods. In the hands of our thugs, Iraqis are better off, Pryce-Jones writes, because we have good intentions for crushing them. [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]To achieve our good intentions, however, we have "no choice except to work through the custom inherent in absolute rule. " What is this custom? Pryce-Jonesââ¬â¢ answer: "Superior and exemplary force alone can prove that the political and military leadership of the coalition has confidence in its goals, and the strength to carry them through." [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]"Liberals in the West," complains Pryce-Jones, object to the proper way of handling our new colonial subjects, because liberals are "ignorant about the harsh imperatives of absolutism." To help liberals understand that the harsh imperatives of absolutism lead to freedom and democracy, Pryce-Jones quotes the great admirer of American democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville, who advised French officers in the front line in Algeria in 1841: "Only force and terror, my dear sirs, work with those [Muslim] fellows." [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]As for al-Sadr, writes Pryce-Jones, the US should take its cue from Stalin: "No man, no problem." We must do no less than Saddam Hussein, who "would have arrested Moqtada al-Sadr and shot him, as he shot the ayatollahââ¬â¢s father and other members of the family." For goodness sake, Pryce-Jones exclaims, we mustnââ¬â¢t sit around and let "those seeking power" [not us of course] "believe that victory is theirs for the taking" just because we donââ¬â¢t exercise the harsh imperatives of absolutism. Donââ¬â¢t Americans understand that the ends justify the means? [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]Next, Michael Rubin assures the faint-hearted that Iraqis want the US to be forceful like Saddam Hussein and stop acting like wimps. The Iraqi people donââ¬â¢t want American troops to leave, he claims. Iraqis are upset with us "because American calls for more UN involvement or for outright withdrawal do little but project weakness." Iraqis, Rubin tells us, "watch with disbelief" as we project weakness instead of acting like men and exercising the harsh imperatives of absolutism. [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]Richard Lowry writes that the US need not worry, because we have "the Marines who will fight in Fallujah and elsewhere in Iraq." Unlike weak-kneed politicians, Marines arenââ¬â¢t afflicted with doubts, because Marines accept "an absolute and unquestioning submission to authority" and can be relied on to do as they are told. [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]Lowry sees the Borg as the conservative future. He romanticizes the training process, which teaches an 18-year old kid to speak of himself in the third person and turns him into an automaton whose identity becomes the unit. [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]UN Secretary General Kofi Annan disagrees with National Reviewââ¬â¢s plan. He says, "Violent military action by an occupying power against inhabitants of an occupied country will only make matters worse." Obviously, Annan doesnââ¬â¢t understand the harsh imperatives of absolutism, which is why the UN must be kept out of the picture. [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3][url="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/076152553X/lewrockwell/"][/url]The Bush administration maintains that the only Iraqis who oppose our occupation are "thugs and criminals." According to a new USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll, that is most of Iraq: 71% of Iraqis see the US as an occupier (81% if Kurds are excluded), not as a liberator, and the majority want us to leave. [/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=3]Who do you believe, gentle reader, National Reviewââ¬â¢s writers or the polls? [/QUOTE][/size][/font] [/left]
2004-05-01 20:56 | User Profile
Paul Craig Roberts has always been a good paleo-con writer, but he's really found his voice in recent months. I think he's being inspired via his anger and disgust. Who can blame him?
Oh, and I LOVED IT when he compared neo-cons to the Borg!