Jim Austin

His previous columns are archived HERE.

JIM AUSTIN

Bush rattles the US sabre

Six months has passed since 9/11. It is time to furl the flag that has covered our eyes and get back to the business of overseeing the government we have elected.

Bush's ever-expanding warlike posturing and export of troops to other countries needs to be examined in the cold light of day. We cannot hold in our criticism of government forever in order to portray a united front to our enemies. If we did that we would be more North Korean than American.

On February 17 a Congressional Rep from Ohio delivered a speech to the Southern California Americans for Democratic Action. He said this:

"We did not authorize an eye for an eye. Nor did we ask that the blood of innocent people who perished on September 11 be avenged with the blood of innocent villagers in Afghanistan.

We did not authorize the government to wage war anywhere, anytime, anyhow it pleases. We did not authorize war without end. We did not authorize a permanent war economy. Yet we are on the threshold of a permanent war economy."

As this speech circulated the internet, Dennis Kucinich (D. Ohio) received over 10,000 emails of support.

It's time to start asking questions.

The Bush administration is espousing and enacting the most idiotic foreign policy in recent memory. The ill considered, bordering on moronic, "axis of evil" comments were only the beginning.

Now we see that government documents have been purposefully leaked to the press that indicate we have plans in place for nuclear retaliation should China or another nation attack our allies or us.

First of all, if this information was purposefully given to the press why must it be leaked? Is there some kind of plausible deniability at work here? We all know that our government has plans in case we are attacked. They would certainly be remiss if they didn't.

Why is the Bush White House insisting on gratuitously bruiting information that is best left quiet?

It is a May Day parade of missiles and tanks rolling down the street in front of the Kremlin just like the bad old cold war days. Instead of Khrushchev waving his fedora and banging his shoe, we have Chairman Bush pounding his chest and waving his Colt .45 around.

When asked why the hostile words, Bush says he has to make sure that the world understands that we will not abide a nuclear or biological attack. George, I'll go out on a limb and say that they knew that already.

Bush is behaving like a participant in some WWF smack down instead of the leader of the free world. Bullying and threatening tactics are not only infantile, they just don't work.

Israeli/Palestinian relations are a fine example. The further right the government of Israel becomes, the more heated the rhetoric and the more aggressive the military, the more innocent Israeli and Palestinian bodies litter the landscape. Have these tactics bought them a single good night's sleep? I think not.

This adolescent cowboy saber rattling by our room temperature IQ President is a disgrace to this country. We have just been grievously assaulted by fanatics with box-cutters. Why on earth are we now threatening China, Iran, and North Korea? And why do we have troops in the Philippines?

The world, both enemies, allies and neutrals think we are behaving aggressively and stupidly. And they are right.

Bush's social agenda is more insidious but equally ill considered. He has consistently failed to acknowledge the fact that the majority of people in this country did not vote for him. Does the leader of a democratic nation not have a moral obligation to represent the majority of its citizens? They are trying to make all of us like them.

If they impose their right-wing agenda on us with their ludicrously right-wing appeals court nominations, a religious zealot Attorney General, faith-based charities, welfare benefits that hinge on man/woman marriage, and prayer in public schools, then the enfranchised among us will be a homogenous, white bread, bible-bashing clone of Billy Graham.

Everyone else will be legally excluded or disadvantaged. Is it just me or does that sound a lot like a page from the Taliban Political Primer