Politics: Disappointed
The Washington Post's gruesome editorial today really affirmed the Washingtonian item about the Post's position as the nation's official newspaper of Hawkdom. What's terrible is that this newspaper has taken a disturbing tactic of the Bush administration and rolled it right into their editorial. More and more, the Bush administration has shown that it believes conversation, debate, dissent and discussion are somehow un-American. By their actions and their statements, they have demonstrated that they don't believe people should talk about things.
They don't think the Senate should debate sweeping changes to the law enforcement infrastructure in America. They don't think our lawmakers should even have a chance to know and discuss the beliefs of a potential federal court judge. They don't believe that accused criminals should have their day in court, and they apparently don't even think that some people should have a chance to discuss a day in court with their lawyers.
Sadly, the Bush administration has also proven that they don't believe any of the international institutions that America helped create are worth their spit. They practically had to be dragged to the UN to justify Karl Rove's election-winning gambit/war. So they went, rigged the resolution and pretty much walked away thinking they wouldn't have to deal with the UN ever again.
But now they want NATO to join in their reindeer games, sign on for the bombing and the killing and whatnot, and make plans in case things go badly, because even President Bush would like someone else to revel in the gore, and let's face it, it's going to be tough to shake that 'cowboy' image if you just go out there alone. But they don't want NATO to be an international organization with several countries and several different opinions. They want NATO to function as they want everything to function: echo our voice, our call for war, our condemnation of differentness, our thinly veiled racism and warmongering. Echo it all, because we're right and we don't need you.
And the Washington Post has joined in. The Washington Post writes today that the members of NATO who are blocking war-preparations and instead are seeking more arms inspectors and possibly peacekeeping troops are causing "the enfeebling of both NATO and the United Nations."
The Post's assertion is based on the belief that this valuable work by Germany, France and Belgium is in fact just a smoke-screen to block the onrushing war. Apparently, the entire Post editorial board failed to notice that France can veto the next UN resolution to go to war if it doesn't want it passed. That would seem to be a silver bullet obviating the need for obstructionist tactics like the Post believes these ones are. They aren't leaving room for the possibility that France and the others actually believe more inspectors could resolve unanswered questions about Iraq's weapons program. Nor are they admitting the possibility that these three countries and NATO "Partner for Peace" Russia actually in the UN's mission to inspect and require Iraqi compliance is a mission worth seeing through. The Post doesn't appear to understand that not everyone shares Karl Rove's belief that if you started a war to win an election, you have to have the war or people might figure out that you were bluffing all along.
The American people -- and the Post's readers -- may be interested in reading a newspaper's editorial board assertion that Iraq hasn't complied with UN Security Council Resolution 1441. But no one is ever served by a newspaper attacking the principle of debate. The Post does a grave disservice to its readers when it portrays the painful deliberations before an attack that will cost hundreds of allied lives and thousands of Iraqi lives as unimportant. Indeed, nothing is more important than thinking before action. I wouldn't expect President Bush to understand that. But I once believed that the Washington Post did.
The Washington Post's gruesome editorial today really affirmed the Washingtonian item about the Post's position as the nation's official newspaper of Hawkdom. What's terrible is that this newspaper has taken a disturbing tactic of the Bush administration and rolled it right into their editorial. More and more, the Bush administration has shown that it believes conversation, debate, dissent and discussion are somehow un-American. By their actions and their statements, they have demonstrated that they don't believe people should talk about things.
They don't think the Senate should debate sweeping changes to the law enforcement infrastructure in America. They don't think our lawmakers should even have a chance to know and discuss the beliefs of a potential federal court judge. They don't believe that accused criminals should have their day in court, and they apparently don't even think that some people should have a chance to discuss a day in court with their lawyers.
Sadly, the Bush administration has also proven that they don't believe any of the international institutions that America helped create are worth their spit. They practically had to be dragged to the UN to justify Karl Rove's election-winning gambit/war. So they went, rigged the resolution and pretty much walked away thinking they wouldn't have to deal with the UN ever again.
But now they want NATO to join in their reindeer games, sign on for the bombing and the killing and whatnot, and make plans in case things go badly, because even President Bush would like someone else to revel in the gore, and let's face it, it's going to be tough to shake that 'cowboy' image if you just go out there alone. But they don't want NATO to be an international organization with several countries and several different opinions. They want NATO to function as they want everything to function: echo our voice, our call for war, our condemnation of differentness, our thinly veiled racism and warmongering. Echo it all, because we're right and we don't need you.
And the Washington Post has joined in. The Washington Post writes today that the members of NATO who are blocking war-preparations and instead are seeking more arms inspectors and possibly peacekeeping troops are causing "the enfeebling of both NATO and the United Nations."
The Post's assertion is based on the belief that this valuable work by Germany, France and Belgium is in fact just a smoke-screen to block the onrushing war. Apparently, the entire Post editorial board failed to notice that France can veto the next UN resolution to go to war if it doesn't want it passed. That would seem to be a silver bullet obviating the need for obstructionist tactics like the Post believes these ones are. They aren't leaving room for the possibility that France and the others actually believe more inspectors could resolve unanswered questions about Iraq's weapons program. Nor are they admitting the possibility that these three countries and NATO "Partner for Peace" Russia actually in the UN's mission to inspect and require Iraqi compliance is a mission worth seeing through. The Post doesn't appear to understand that not everyone shares Karl Rove's belief that if you started a war to win an election, you have to have the war or people might figure out that you were bluffing all along.
The American people -- and the Post's readers -- may be interested in reading a newspaper's editorial board assertion that Iraq hasn't complied with UN Security Council Resolution 1441. But no one is ever served by a newspaper attacking the principle of debate. The Post does a grave disservice to its readers when it portrays the painful deliberations before an attack that will cost hundreds of allied lives and thousands of Iraqi lives as unimportant. Indeed, nothing is more important than thinking before action. I wouldn't expect President Bush to understand that. But I once believed that the Washington Post did.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home