|
|||||||||
Posted September 22, 2001
Pedantry
Gee, if the Iranians are such evil enemies of Christianity and Orthodoxy, how come they're not supporting the Chechens? And why do they have such good relations with Russia, Greece, and even Serbia? And why do they side with Christian Armenians against the Azeris, who are closer in their religious beliefs (Shi'ite Muslims) than the largely secular and religiously diverse Albanians? Go read your Procopius, Mr. Deliso. You're better suited to pedantry than politics.
Chris Deliso replies:
Well,
sir, the utter lack of examples you provide to validate
these "good relations" rather invites the charge
of "pedantry" upon yourself, does it not? Iran's
relations with Azerbaijan, as you well know, are dictated
by the tensions over Caspian oil which have almost brought
the two countries to war even recently. Therefore, support
of Armenia, traditional enemy of Azerbaijan, is a no-brainer,
considering the game of regional politics. Russian relations
involve a similar dynamic, and as for Greece, just try
to wrap your head around the fact that its traditional
enemy – Turkey – shares a long border with Iran.
The Balkans, however, are far away, and here Iran can
and does try to control Albania by pushing Islamic terrorism.
This is convenient, both as a way to gain a foothold,
and as a way of masking the differences internal to various
Muslim
groups. Without the US intervention that has provided
a common banner for diverse Muslim groups to unite under,
these factions would of course be ripping themselves apart
– as the Albanians will, once the initial elation
accompanying the creation of a "Greater Albania"
wears off.
Remember the Maine
It is fashionable amongst the pundits to equate Tuesday's attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon with Pearl Harbor. This may be more than just rhetorical flourish. Those of us who believe Roosevelt more or less manuevered the Japanese into making an "unprovoked" attack on the United States in order to win public support for a war, should take the analogy seriously (as well as remember the Maine and the Lusitania).
One commentator remarked that all it would take for such an attack to occur is for someone to give a million dollars to some fanatical group and tell them to spend it wisely . Well, the CIA has a million dollars and links to any number of fanatical groups. It is unthinkable to most that any American leader would contemplate the loss of 5000 American civilians acceptable under any circumstances, and I agree. But maybe they didn't expect the attack to be so devastating, just as Roosevelt may have been surprised by the scope of the Japanese attack. Just because things don't work out quite the way the plotters expect doesn't mean they aren't plotting. I believe there are any number of megalomaniacs in Washington who would consider the loss of several hundred innocent American lives to serve a higher cause quite acceptable.
Chinese Nukes
I noticed you have a leader titled "US to aim more nukes at China." In today's Washington Times, there is a piece detailing the early deployment of mobile Chinese missiles that can now reach the Western US! Hello? Are you guys there? Why aren't you discussing this? What are we supposed to do? Negotiate with a Communist dictatorship? Beg them to dismantle them?
~ 2nd Lt. M.A., 1st div, 3rd Amrd Batl'n
The "Backtalk" editor replies:
The
fact that the U.S. military – the only organization in
the world that has attacked civilians with nuclear weapons
– is aiming more nukes at China is news that opponents
of war and interventionism should know. The Chinese military,
an organization that has never attacked the United States,
has a handful of nukes that can hit the US West Coast
– compared to the U.S. military's thousands. China doesn't
fly military planes along the U.S. coast or intervene
in North American affairs. Their handful of nukes are,
at most, a secondary issue for most opponents of interventionism.
Jingoistic Blockheads
Some context first. One of my best freinds was bumped from that Newark flight to SFO that ended up as a burned-out hulk in Pennsylvania. I have a close relative who is an attendant for one of the airlines whose planes were hijacked. She was on vacation at the time. So far as I'm concerned, these constitute two very near misses.
I also have an ex-wife who is a third generation American citizen of mid-east extraction, and she has had to endure the slings and arrows of jingoistic blockheads. This woman has no politics, and the vaguest notion of what the crisis is about - yet she has been singled out.
When I see anti-Arab sentiment in the Antiwar.com letter page – or elsewhere, my blood begins to boil.
The "Backtalk" editor replies:
Some people think that we intentionally publish letters by only the most inarticulate jingoists, but the sad fact is that we haven't published any of the worst letters.