Year: 2003

Suddenly, September 10 again. Friends calling from New York City, asking if I have a spare room. Nervous glances up at the TV screens in the gym. Greta van Susteren declaring a specific cyanide alert in New York City, where none existed. Duct tape jokes. Tanks at Heathrow. It is a war, isn’t it? It reminds me that the anti-war protestors are not in fact trying to prevent a war. They cannot – because one has already broken out. They merely want to give up on one critical front. The trouble is: our enemies won’t.

THE SMOKING MISSILE: The issue is not whether we have discovered an illegal piece of weaponry in Iraq. The question is whether Saddam will allow these missiles to be destroyed. Blix should demand it. Then see what the French say.

PARIS TO THE RESCUE: Could the French swing Middle Britain behind the war? Boris Johnson thinks so:

Just as everyone was laying into the Number 10 spin machine, the French did something so disgusting, so selfish, and so French, that the British media have had no choice. The press has dropped Alastair Campbell’s dodgy dossier, in favour of that time-honoured staple of the British journalist – the orgy of frog-bashing. Confronted by French treachery, previously fence-sitting newspapers such as the Daily Mail have suddenly seen the merit of the war, and the downmarket tabloids have gone gallistic. You know the kind of articles: they involve references to Vichy, tanks with reverse gears, garlic-guzzling peasants, women of loose morals cosying up to the Boche, and they traditionally end with the cry: “And they eat our children’s ponies!”

And just in time!

My bet is that he’ll back the U.S. in the end, maybe the very end. Great analysis in the New York times today:

Mr. Putin must consider the extent to which a snub of either European doves or American hawks will set back his own agenda to bind Russia more tightly to the West. On that question, there is little doubt, said Alexander G. Rahr, a longtime Russia scholar at the Körber-Foundation and German Council on Foreign Relations, who talked with Kremlin officials during Mr. Putin’s Berlin stopover last weekend. “They said, `If we play the European card, we play on a very small field – in Europe,’ ” Mr. Rahr said. By contrast, both Russia and the United States need each other in the Far East, where the Korean nuclear crisis is heating up on Russia’s border; in South Asia, where India and Pakistan flirt with war; in the Middle East, where the Americans and Russians both have important stakes; and in the Caucasus, where both are fighting terrorism. Not only has Europe no significant stakes or influence in those areas, Mr. Rahr said, but also the debate over Iraq has left in shambles Europe’s own supposedly growing unity on the most basic matters of foreign policy and defense.

Exactly. We’ll soon find out if President Bush’s very careful cultivation of Putin has paid off.

SUGGESTED SLOGANS: A friend just got an email from some of the anti-war protestors about to descend this weekend. It’s a list of suggested slogans on posters or t-shirts for the protests. Here they are:

A Village In Texas Has Lost Its Idiot
All Humanity Is Downwind
Beat The Bushes For Peace
Bombing For Peace Is Like Fcking For Chastity
Books Not Bombs
Born To Kill, Born To Drill
Brains Not Bombs
Bush Is A Moron Don’t Let Him Get His War On
Bush Is A Servant Of Sauron. We Hates Him!
Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld: Axis Of Weasel
Draft The Bush Twins
Drop Bush, Not Bombs
Drop Names, Not Bombs
Evolve! Work For A Non-violent Future
George Bush Couldn’t Run A Laundromat
George Dubya: Weapon Of Mass Distraction
Go Solar, Not Ballistic
God Does Not Bless Only America
Has Anyone Seen Our Constitution Lately?
Honk Your SUV If You’re A Terrorist
How Did Our Oil Get Under Their Soil?
How Many Lives Per Gallon?
If War Is The Answer We’re Asking The Wrong Question
If You Are Not Outraged You Are Not Paying Attention
Justice Or Just Us?
Killing Innocent People Is The Problem, Not The Solution
Let’s Try Preemptive Peace
Make Alternative Energy Not War
Make Love, Not W
More MPGs, Less MIAs (MPG =miles per gallon, MIA= missing in action)
My President Is A Psychopath
Nonviolence, Not Nonexistence
Our Grief Is Not A Cry For War
Peaceful Solution Not Daddy’s Retribution
Pretzel – It Does A Country Good
Real Patriots Drive Hybrids
Relax, George
Rich Man’s War Poor Man’s Blood
Save America, Spare Iraq, Make Texas Take Him Back
Smart Bombs Don’t Justify Dumb Leaders
Sorry Dubya – Have A Pretzel Instead
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease
Tame The Tyrant In The Mirror, Then The One In Iraq
There Is No Path To Peace – Peace IS The Path
War Is A Dick Thing, Peace Is A Heart Thing
War Is SO 20th century
We Have Guided Missiles And Misguided Men
Weapons Of Mass Destruction: Look Under The Bushes
What If God Blesses Iraq?
When Bush Comes To Shove
Who Would Jesus Bomb?
Who’s The Unelected Tyrant With The Bomb?

Notice that only one addresses anything to do with the threat from Saddam. Notice also the constant harping on the tired old notion that Bush is an idiot – “Brains Not Bombs,” “Bush Is a Moron,” “Smart Bombs Don’t Justify Dumb Leaders.” Notice the personal attacks – “Draft the Bush Twins,” “Sorry, Dubya, Have a Pretzel Instead.” Notice the idiotic moral equivalence: “Who’s The Unelected Tyrant With The Bomb?” It’s hard not to feel demoralized by a culture that can throw up such things as genuine pieces of protest. It’s as if an entire generation or more has forgotten what an argument is.

From Dennis MIller on Donahue: the New York Times will decide to support a war as soon as they find out Saddam has opened an all-male golfing club in Tikrit.

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY: “The Sermon on the Mounts is the last word in Christian ethics. Everyone respects the Quakers. Still, it is not on these terms that Ministers assume their responsibilities of guiding states. Their duty is first so to deal with other nations as to avoid strife and war and to eschew aggression in all its forms, whether for nationalistic or ideological objects. But the safety of the State, the lives and freedom of their own fellow countrymen, to whom they owe their position, make it right and imperative in the last resort, or when a final and definite conviction has been reached, that the use of force should not be excluded. If the circumstances are such as to warrant it, force may be used. And if this be so, it should be used under the conditions which are most favourable. There is no merit in putting off a war for a year if, when it comes, it is a far worse war or one much harder to win. These are the tormenting dilemmas upon which mankind has throughout its history been so frequently impaled. Final judgment upon them can only be recorded by history in relation to the facts of the case as known to the parties at the time, and also as subsequently proved.” – Winston Churchill, “The Gathering Storm.”

More shameless anti-U.S. and anti-Blair propaganda from the BBC.

IN DEFENSE OF ORWELL: Leon Wieseltier dismembers pomo anti-Orwell critic (and former Wieseltier colleague) Louis Menand.

IN DEFENSE OF THE FRENCH: Not as bad as the Germans.

THE LEFT VERSUS TERRORISM: They’re getting serious at last.

A NEW BLOG: From two feisty writers and editors, Ross Douthat and Steven Menashi. It’s called “The American Scene.” Welcome, guys.

SONTAG AWARD NOMINEE: This from the Ottawa Citizen, from our old friend, Lewis Lapham, railing once again at the evils of capitalism, the imperialism of Bush, and the “gang of utopian anarchists” in the White House:

“I think the Bush administration equates the American spirit with power, not liberty,” said Lewis Lapham. “And I think the U.S. is in danger of losing its spirit of liberty.” “American politics, at this point in time, is trembling in the balance of losing its soul,” he said. He described a country run by a “gang of utopian anarchists” whose main objective in waging war is to boost military spending, and build an empire – considered the pinnacle of Republican doctrine first outlined a decade ago. “War is the health of the state,” said Mr. Lapham. The same agenda, he argued, is responsible for a steady erosion of personal freedoms, which denies the average citizen the right to dissent.

Denies the average citizen the right to dissent? Where? How? Or are these questions beneath the concern of Lapham?

My boyfriend spent the night last night in Normal, Illinois. That’s it. I’ve just always wanted to write that sentence.

WHY BLOGS MATTER IN THE U.S.: “I don’t think it’s any coincidence that blogs have been strongest in the US, where the dozy monodailies are so excruciatingly boring and where incredibly dull columnists seem able to hold down prime op-ed real estate for decade after decade. America’s torpid j-school culture is killing American newspapers, both in style and content. Why, for example, does no print columnist have the curiosity to do what Charles Johnson does and make a specialty of finding out what the Muslim world is saying about the west?” – the irrepressible Mark Steyn in a great little interview.

NOT JUST CHOMSKY: The BBC is actually running some pieces that aren’t saturated in anti-Americanism. Here’s one.

I learn three things from the latest morsel of half-crazed religious rhetoric from Osama bin Laden. The first is that he is perfectly willing to ally himself with Saddam. The critical section is as follow:

And it doesn’t harm in these conditions the interest of Muslims to agree with those of the socialists in fighting against the crusaders, even though we believe the socialists are infidels. For the socialists and the rulers have lost their legitimacy a long time ago, and the socialists are infidels regardless of where they are, whether in Baghdad or in Aden. And this fighting about to take place resembles the fight with the Romans earlier and the collusion of interest doesn’t harm, for the Muslims’ fight against the Romans was due to the collusion of the interests with the Persians.

This isn’t exactly a Hitler-Stalin pact. It’s more like the German-Japan axis of the last world war. OBL is the ideological purist; but Saddam is a critical ally of the Islamofascists against the West, against any notion of Western freedom in that part of the world. More important, Iraq provides a base – and far more lethal weapons – for the continuing war. The enemy of Osama’s enemy is his friend. Only experts in the Middle East could have missed that one.

OBL’S MISCALCULATION: The second thing I learn is that Osama still under-estimates American military power. He writes that America’s fundamental weakness are

fear and cowardice and absence of the fighting spirit among American soldiers. Those soldiers are completely convinced about the injustice of their government and its lies, and they lack a fair cause to fight for. And they are rather fighting for the capitalist and interest hoarders, and weapons and oil merchants, including the criminal gang at the White House, which harbors crusader hatreds and personal hatreds from Bush the father.

If I were Tommy Franks, I would post that statement in every barracks I could find, alongside a picture of the World Trade Center. If that doesn’t mobilize the troops, nothing will. But lastly, Osama is getting desperate. He senses, I think, a huge blow to his cause in the Middle East if Baghdad is liberated and Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction are taken off the table. Hence the somewhat pathetic military tips, the pep-talk, the prayers for victory, and so on. For all these reasons, this message is a timely one for the world. Some Europeans will argue that this means we should avoid war even more carefully, ignore Saddam’s arms, keep the inspection charade for a few more months, and so on. Others will recognize the voice of a lethal and determined enemy, in league with the regime they are so desperately trying to keep in power. Sooner or later, they will realize that they are at war too. And that we’re risking lives to defend their freedom as well as ours’.

I know he’s desperate to spark publicity – any publicity – for his book on why the earth is flat, I mean, why the media is hopelessly slanted to the right. But wishing Rush Limbaugh had actually gone deaf? Here’s a quote from Eric Alterman in the current Esquire: “The lack of civility he [Limbaugh] demonstrates toward liberal politicians is really dangerous to our political public. I hate to say it, but I wish the guy would have gone deaf. I shouldn’t say that, but on behalf of the country, it would be better without Limbaugh and his 20 million listeners.” And Alterman is bashing Limbaugh for incivility? Not that I’m exactly surprised. Alterman rarely avoids an ad hominem directed at yours truly. Here’s Limbaugh’s take.

In France, grilled relentlessly by French television interviewers, Vladimir Putin refuses to say he’d veto a second U.N. resolution. It’s “not necessary right now.” The French will have taken the message. There’s still a chance for a U.N.-backed war. Powell’s presentation persuaded the American public, and the Europeans have noticed. It’s still up for grabs.

SCHRODER BUNGLES: “Germany as the odd man out? This must be the nightmare now wafting through the chancellor’s office. Can it be banished? Yes, if coldly calculated interest prevails. It whispers ever so loudly: ‘Don’t mess with Mr Big unless the stronger battalions are on your side.’ Belgium is not enough.” – Josef Joffe on why Bismarck must be spinning in his grave.

“What we have made up our minds about is unilateralism vs. multilateralism. We are fully for multilateralism.” – Arthur Sulzberger Jr, February 8 2003.

“Turkey, which borders Iraq and reasonably fears Iraqi reprisals, has a legitimate need for Patriot missiles, Awacs surveillance aircraft and units specialized in combating biological and chemical attacks. NATO is capable of providing these, but so are its individual members, including the United States. Washington was wrong to strong-arm the issue to a decision in a divided NATO. The result was that France, Germany and Belgium blocked an initial American-backed proposal. They said it was premature and overly broad and would appear to commit NATO to supporting a war the Security Council had not yet approved.” – the New York Times, February 11, 2003, blaming the Bush administration for excessive multilateralism.

From the Washington Post, January 22, 1991:

Despite NATO’s commitment to defend Turkey, there is no consensus in the Western alliance to send forces to help Ankara if it is attacked by Iraq in retaliation for U.S.-led bombing raids launched from bases in Turkey, according to diplomats from four NATO nations.
If Baghdad fires Scud missiles at Turkey, the only NATO country to share a border with Iraq, the organization “will protect Turkey,” NATO Secretary General Manfred Woerner has said. “Whoever attacks Turkey must realize that he will be attacking all member nations.”
But at least four NATO members – including Spain and Belgium – agree with the reluctance voiced today by German leaders against joining the Persian Gulf War, even if Turkey asks for help, according to diplomats from the United States, Britain, Germany and the Netherlands. Chancellor Helmut Kohl’s spokesman, Dieter Vogel, called Woerner’s comment “an interesting statement,” adding only that the German government’s position was not “describable.” Kohl avoided the topic today, saying he would “not publicly meditate on what would” spark Germany’s and NATO’s obligation to defend Turkey.

Maybe it’s time to ask France and Germany to leave NATO. Maybe, in reality, they already have.

MOORE WILL GET THE OSCAR: Of course he will. These people are in the movie business. They made “A Beautiful Mind” and “Good Will Hunting” the best movies of the year. You think a made-up documentary will stop them? For a little light relief, here’s a short extract from a truly hilarious Michael Moore parody in London’s satirical magazine, “Private Eye” (my brother sends over a copy every couple of weeks). It’s Michael Moore’s diary, as written by Craig Brown, Tina’s spectacularly talented brother:

The tobacco companies (all run by men) have been extremely successful in convincing the firearms lobby to pacify the car manufacturers by distributing crack cocaine to 132 nuclear plants so that now up to 69 percent of women between the ages of 28 and 39 are unable to drive their kids to school without inhaling harmful emissions from the ozone layer caused by toxic fumes radiated by President Bush under direct instructions from – yes, you guessed it – the tobacco companies. So where does that leave the rest of us? Ho-hum. From where I’m standing, guys, it looks like we’re drowning in deep doggy-do. And I don’t know ’bout you, but deep doggy-do’s not something I like to drown in – at least not when there’s a Pammy Anderson movie just started on the TV!!!

Moore in reality is a little less coherent than this, but it’s a pretty accurate otherwise, innit?