8pov

The world can certainly do better than this. Here's why.

Thursday, November 17

Lot More

"KERRY:

"'I mean, we can remember when President Kennedy in the Cuban missile crisis sent his secretary of state to Paris to meet with DeGaulle. And in the middle of the discussion, to tell them about the missiles in Cuba, he said, "Here, let me show you the photos." And DeGaulle waved them off and said, "No, no, no, no. The word of the president of the United States is good enough for me."

"'How many leaders in the world today would respond to us, as a result of what we've done, in that way? So what is at test here is the credibility of the United States of America and how we lead the world. And Iran and Iraq are now more dangerous -- Iran and North Korea are now more dangerous.'

"'... You don't help yourself with other nations when you turn away from the global warming treaty, for instance, or when you refuse to deal at length with the United Nations.

You have to earn that respect. And I think we have a lot of earning back to do.'"


"LEHRER:

"'Ninety seconds.'

"BUSH:

"'Let me -- I'm not exactly sure what you mean, "passes the global test," you take preemptive action if you pass a global test.'" (italics added)

Obviously the President, in the conduct of his affairs doesn't understand the concept of responsibility. Ignorance, ever his best friend, is his first response. This was the weakness that Bush exhibited throughout the first debate. Reacting violently to the notion of testing, of being held accountable for his actions, Bush proceeds...

"'My attitude is you take preemptive action in order to protect the American people, that you act in order to make this country secure.'"
This attitude is why no-one wants him to invite himself over to their house. The security of the country, as it turns out, was never threatened by Iraq, because there were no chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons materials in the enitre country. Instead Bush has found himself in a trap. Iraq baited him, making him believe that there was a threat, US troops invaded, and now more than 2000 troops have died and more than 30 000 civilians have died.

By the by, Saddam Hussein is on trial for the massacre of 143 Shia men in 1982. Bush, whose government is crumbling about him, is responsible for each of the 33 000 deaths in Iraq since 19 March 2003. Iraq may yet set precedent for halting US intervention as foreign policy. If so, at this rate, Hussein could be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Contrast is a very funny thing, and, no, he can't get the prize. But, neither can Bush.

"'My opponent talks about me not signing certain treaties. Let me tell you one thing I didn't sign, and I think it shows the difference of our opinion -- the difference of opinions. And that is, I wouldn't join the International Criminal Court. It's a body based in The Hague where unaccountable judges and prosecutors can pull our troops or diplomats up for trial.

"'And I wouldn't join it. And I understand that in certain capitals around the world that that wasn't a popular move. But it's the right move not to join a foreign court that could -- where our people could be prosecuted.'"

Obviously, the Prez is more than a little concerned about the possibility of being called, himself, to answer for his actions. Or, he simply doesn't believe that war crimes exist. What he does believe is that America, unlike other nations, must be permitted to act with complete autonomy.

He maintains an obvious double standard. On 30 September 2004, he denies the validity of the ICC, just in time for Christmas his troops uncover Saddam Hussein, and on 19 October 2005, Hussein is put on trial by a court in New Iraq under US occupation. Dubious authority of the court has already been called into question by the Hussein defense team, refusing to recognize the validity of the court and refusing to accept the manner in which he was removed [read:escaped] from office.

US and Iraqi interests are aligned in refusing ratification of the Rome Statute, denying the authority of the ICC. Others short listed nations: China, Israel, Libya, Qatar, and Yemen. Of note, one of the final acts of the President Clinton was the signing of the Rome statute on 31 December 2000. However,

"Israel, the United States and Yemen signed the statute at the end of 2000, but the United States has continued to insist on immunity for American forces.

On May 6, 2002, the Bush Administration informed the United Nations Secretary-General that 'the United States does not intend to become a party to the treaty. Accordingly, the United States has no legal obligations arising from its signature on December 31, 2000.' The United Nations has not removed the name of the United States from the official list of signatories." (from wikipedia)

"'My opponent is for joining the International Criminal Court. I just think trying to be popular, kind of, in the global sense, if it's not in our best interest makes no sense. I'm interested in working with our nations and do a lot of it. But I'm not going to make decisions that I think are wrong for America.'"

Interestingly enough, the interests of the President and his investors, er... constituents have neatly aligned with those of America, regardless of the cost in terms of human lives. As long as more foreigners die than Americans, American interest in winning will be satisfied.

Stop war. All human lives are valuable.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home