Diplomats Are the Danger

I won’t go into too much detail as to exactly where I read The Economist, but a few minutes after my first coffee this morning, I was staring incredulously at a quote in a column about Afghanistan. I re-read it four times to make sure I hadn’t missed something.

No, there it is in black and white. Discussing rapprochement with the Taliban, “Banyan” notes that while the US is in talks, it is also trying to assassinate as many of the Pashtun movement’s leaders as possible. And then:

In what one Western diplomat calls the Taliban’s “madrassa, linear-thinking sort of way” this does not infuse talks with mutual trust.

Get OUT. Those infant-minded, one-track Islams, with their strange dislike of being drone-bombed. What barbarians!

It’s like a mob boss, wiping his hands on his vest, says “eyy, it ain’t personal, it’s just business.”

This is the kind of solipsist delivering “diplomacy” for America, literally unable to imagine why anyone would not trust the United States of America, light unto the world, even as it sent bombs to dismember their families.

WikiLeaks’ revelations of US diplomatic cables are said to have done harm to diplomacy. Is this not proof the diplomats themselves are the harm? Taking narrow-minded dingbats and the machine they serve like this down a peg can only be a good thing. After all, “diplomacy” is always the cover used to get otherwise civilized, peaceful people on board a war.

Can we stop pretending our envoys are thoughful peacemakers, necessary to defuse war? Time and again in the recent past they have been the (willing?) tools of the War Party, some wool to hide the real goal of invasion, as was done by the Bush regime for Iraq. And, come on, they work for the firebreathing Hillary Clinton, who periodically threatens Iran with nuclear annihilation and recently commanded her minions to steal their foreign colleagues’ credit card numbers, for God’s sake.

If that’s still not enough, I leave you with another diplomat, Madeleine Albright, who in 1996 told Lesley Stahl the price of pretending to squeeze Saddam Hussein — five hundred thousand dead children — was “worth it.”

And after all that, America still attacked and destroyed Iraq. Diplomacy is a lie. Any earnest true believers in the ranks of the State Dept. are pawns, dupes, patsies. Stop respecting them. We need more Bradley Mannings to expose this.

3 thoughts on “Diplomats Are the Danger”

  1. Disingenuous hypocrisy as US diplomacy. Well and then there are all those icky war crimes…

  2. Diplomats are useful only in fair weather. As soon as it rains they drown in every drop.

    Charles de Gaulle

  3. After all, “diplomacy” is always the cover used to get otherwise civilized, peaceful people on board a war.

    "Diplomacy, n. The patriotic art of lying for one's country."

    — Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary

Comments are closed.