Bill Sykes' Newsletter from America.
(September 2002)
An ex-Brit gives his views-(without fear
or favor)---of the American Scene
Policy. What policy???
Although I have a complete distrust in the accuracy of
the many polls conducted in the United States, or other
places for that matter, there are times that if you read
between the lines you can get a general consensus of opinion.
 The
latest United States polls suggest that fewer than half
of the population believe that the Bush Administration has
a clear policy on the Iraq situation and the public are
divided upon who should have the final say, President Bush
or Congress, even though, if my American history is correct,
the Constitution declares that the only body of American
Government to have the authority to authorize a “Declaration
of war” is by a Congressional vote.
Correct me if I’m wrong.
Of course Vietnam and all the other minor skirmishes that
the United States have been involved in since World War
Two, have been named policing actions in order to, shall
we say, bypass Congress.
Recent polls suggest that approximately 70% of the American
public support military power to force Saddam Hussein from
power, that figure is reduced to approximately 50% if US
Allies oppose such action, and falls further still to around
40% if such a war would generate heavy American casualties.
Just to jog our memories --- Gulf War One, cost us 390
American lives --- a much larger number than I remember,
but never the less true. It has been reported that even
some members of the Republican Party have defected from
the pro-war camp due to the outspoken opposition from key
allies and other nations around the world.
 One
thing that always appears to be missing from the equation
is the big question as to whether any thought has been given
by President Bush and his Administration as to who would
replace President Saddam Hussein if he were to be deposed???
A recent visit to the White House of the Iraqi dissident
group did not inspire the public in general as to their
capabilities to be a credible opposition force to govern
any country, let alone Iraq. Their botched attack on the
Iraqi embassy in Berlin did not endear them to the world
at large and received condemnation from many nations.
A spokesman for the White House said “The American
position at all times is to support the rule of International
Law”.
Mr. Fliescher appears to have forgotten that we have interfered
in the sovereign rights of many nations since World War
Two and have infringed the rule of International Law in
a number of cases.
 Take
for instance Chile, Central America, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon,
Somalia, even the removal of General Noriega from Panama,
Haiti, our support of the Taliban in the war against the
Russian invasion of Afghanistan, (and then bombing the hell
out of them when they didn’t fit our picture of basic
human rights), our lost cause in Vietnam that cost us the
lives of so many young Americans, our threats to North Korea,
India and Pakistan with respect to their development of
nuclear capabilities, and finally what may turn out to be
the biggest political foreign policy blunder of all, George
Bush’s threat to mainland China, that if they invade
Taiwan, we will support Taiwan with all the military power
necessary to prevent a take over!!!
If we issue threats against sovereign nations we must
expect, somewhere along the line, some form of retaliation!!!
We seem to forget that we are the only nation to have used
the Atomic Bomb. It was deemed necessary at that time to
stop a terribly brutal war and save lives, but we must also
remember in saving lives we killed a great many innocent
civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
|
