President George W. Bush, who ironically would probably have been a Democrat were he not the son of former President George H. W. Bush, seems to think he has the right to tell General Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan to “turn in your uniform”. Our duly elected leader has seemingly morphed from a wannabe messiah figure and symbolic Second-Coming-Of-Christ, and has decided to play Caesar Augustus to Musharraf’s Herod the Great.
Funny, I don’t recall the US ever getting a say in how Pakistan’s government runs it’s affairs, nor have I been able to glean much in the way of enlightenment from the Constitution in that regard.
As for Benazir Bhutto, the former Prime Minister of the country, previously run out of the nation in 1998 amidst ever-growing and credible charges of corruption-well, she seems to be the new darling and cause celebre` of American politicians, particularly among the left. The trail regarding past evidence of her former misrule, scandal, and corruption, seems to have grown as cold as a stack of thousand dollar bills in Congressman William Jefferson’s freezer.
It seems we find ourselves constantly faced with three choices:
One-side with dictatorial regimes that do not represent American values and ideals out of a vain hope for stability in the face of economic and/or strategic concerns.
Two-side with allegedly pro-democracy movements and politicians, and make excuses when they turn out to be corrupt, or when the society they rule crashes and burns because most factions want democracy for their own selves but no one else.
Then, finally, there is choice number three-leave these people the fuck alone and let them be. In other words, follow the fucking constitution for the first time in going on seventy years. Trade with them if possible, and if not, do without. If we have to do without, call on that old-fashioned American inventiveness and ingenuity I keep hearing so much about. If any of them start any shit with us, bomb them off the face of the earth. Otherwise, again, leave them the fuck alone. Sure, give aid to those nations that really need it through no discernible fault of their own or their rulers, without any regard to the type of government they have. Help feed their hungry, clothe and shelter them, educate them, give them medical aid, even aid in development and infrastructure when appropriate. Then, in those cases where we discover that the money ends up stolen, misused, or misappropriated, never ever help them again.
How fucking hard can it be? Yeah, I am one of those evil “isolationists” you have probably heard about. I think it is going to be a growing trend myself. Actually, it is probably already a majority attitude among most Americans, and possibly even explains why pundits and politicians consider a 60 percent turnout among voters during a presidential election a huge turnout.
By the way, am I the only person that finds it a little odd that Benazir Bhutto, during her recent assassination attempt, just happened to get safely out of harms way at exactly the right instant? Kind of convenient, huh? Why, some of your more backwards, superstitious Muslims might well view that as a divine omen.
Just sayin’.
3 comments:
I support Benazir Bhutto's party. It has a history of being a socialist party, explaining the large turnout, when she returned. My comrades are in the parliment, representing the Marxist wing of her party. They brought busloads of people, for the rally.
I think fear of millions in the street, not brought out by Islamists, scared Musharaff more than anything.
Bush is doing nothing to the general. It's just rhetoric.
For once, you might be right, Pagan.
India is big enough to deal with Pakistan if it misbehaves.
Bhutto, Musharraf - it's all the same incompetence.
If Gandhi had his way, Pakistan wouldn't even exist. It would just be a small, backward province of India.
Ren-
I understand Bush's words were more rhetoric than substance, but it still doesn't look good when an American president speaks either publicly or privately to the head of a sovereign nation as though he were a client ruler.
Support Bhutto all you want, but she is corrupt, and if she is corrupt, what else can her followers be?
Sonia-I am always right. One time I thought I was wrong, but I was simply mistaken.
Gandhi's Pakistan policy, by the way, was one of the things on which he was correct. He did not want to see the nation split along religious lines. That was the only or at least the major reason for the split, unless I am mistaken, and I think we have established how that is unlikely.
Post a Comment