Credit: http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20031219/index.php

 

 

Misguided Mission

 

Friday, December 19, 2003

 

 

It's clear that the president's brain is occupied by the neoconservatives who surround him. It's clear from their writings and policy statements that the neoconservatives believe the United States can become the dominant power on Earth.

 

This is a bad judgment that is dangerous and could become lethal. This is why thoughtful people believe it is imperative to defeat George Bush in the 2004 elections. This wrongheaded policy, cooked up by academics and journalists, is not one that will merely embarrass the United States. It is a wrongheaded policy that could have dire consequences for the American people.

 

This wrongheaded idea that the United States can now dominate the planet rests on a number of fallacies. Let's look at them.

 

Fallacy No. 1 is the belief that the rest of the world will acquiesce to American dominance. Russia, China and India, not to mention the Islamic World, are not about to go quietly into the sunset. All three have large populations, large amounts of natural resources, and nuclear teeth. Their nuclear teeth mean that the U.S. attempts to bully them will always fall short of being effective.

 

Fallacy No. 2 is the false belief that the United States is as strong as it was in 1945. The truth is we are much weaker. The great manufacturing capacity that became the "arsenal of democracy" has been eroded almost beyond recognition. Our agricultural base has been eroded. Iron ore and oil supplies have been seriously depleted. We are in fact dependent on imports not only for energy supplies but for manufactured goods, strategic minerals, parts for our own strategic weapons systems, and increasingly for food. We are running high federal deficits, high trade deficits and high current account deficits. The value of the dollar is eroding rapidly.

 

Fallacy No. 3 is the false belief that our military is undefeatable. This falsehood has been fed by the fact that since Vietnam, we have used our high-tech forces to attack small, poor, defenseless countries such as Grenada, Panama, Serbia, Afghanistan and Iraq. But even Afghanistan and Iraq, both dilapidated and lacking all modern military technology, have put a great strain on America's military forces. We do not yet have full control of either country.

 

Our strength is not in our ground forces but in our high-tech air power and the ability to coordinate the two. One breakthrough in air-defense technology could seriously weaken us, and you can be sure both Russia and China are working assiduously to make that breakthrough. Before you dismiss Russia, you should remember that we are now dependent on Russian spacecraft to reach the space station and that Russia, not us, has the world's largest mobile intercontinental ballistic missile force.

 

If we are so strong, why has the president tread so carefully in his dealings with North Korea? Why not bully them as he did Iraq? Why not issue ultimatums? For the simple reason that we would pay a very high price in American casualties if we got into a war with North Korea. Don't forget, it is their civilian sector that is poor. They have put most of their resources into their military.

 

In 1945, the United States was the strongest and richest country on Earth. In 2003, we are one of, if not the, most indebted countries on Earth. Foreign holders of that debt could wreck our economy simply by deciding to dump their holdings on the market. Domestically we are a divided people with a decadent culture, if you can even call it a culture.

 

Far from entering a period of dominance, we are entering a period of great danger. Most empires have lasted about 250 years, and we are approaching that number. What we need are not empty heads controlled by pseudo-intellectual ideologues but the smartest, wisest leaders we can find. Our future depends on it.

 

? 2003?by King Features Syndicate, Inc.

Wow... That was an interesting article DT. However, I would like to know where he got all his ideas from...

Its a terrible article. He uses wrongheaded 3 or 4 times in the first paragraph. Its boring. I've seen much better Bush bashing articles. Seems like it comes from the far left. America is nt and still the strongest country in the world. In North Korea Bush is being cautious because they have nukes and are dangerous but there is no doubt in my mind that we could defeat them easily in a war especially if we had good intel on where there nukes were. Also Russia is our ally. Although they may not have supported us in Iraq the relationship is still in fairly good standing. I agree that we must be careful in foreign policy but many of his points are easily disproven. Its an awful, disjointed article written in about 10 minutes tops.

Its a terrible article. He uses wrongheaded 3 or 4 times in the first paragraph. Its boring. I've seen much better Bush bashing articles. Seems like it comes from the far left. America is nt and still the strongest country in the world. In North Korea Bush is being cautious because they have nukes and are dangerous but there is no doubt in my mind that we could defeat them easily in a war especially if we had good intel on where there nukes were. Also Russia is our ally. Although they may not have supported us in Iraq the relationship is still in fairly good standing. I agree that we must be careful in foreign policy but many of his points are easily disproven. Its an awful, disjointed article written in about 10 minutes tops.

Listening too much to the brainwashing press?

Its a terrible article. He uses wrongheaded 3 or 4 times in the first paragraph. Its boring. I've seen much better Bush bashing articles. Seems like it comes from the far left. America is nt and still the strongest country in the world. In North Korea Bush is being cautious because they have nukes and are dangerous but there is no doubt in my mind that we could defeat them easily in a war especially if we had good intel on where there nukes were. Also Russia is our ally. Although they may not have supported us in Iraq the relationship is still in fairly good standing. I agree that we must be careful in foreign policy but many of his points are easily disproven. Its an awful, disjointed article written in about 10 minutes tops.

Listening too much to the brainwashing press? No but its obvious to me this comes from the far left. I associate more with the middle. How could I be listening to the brainwashing press when most of it is very liberal. Just about every newspaper in the country is liberal. I just want an independent view of things. I'm not saying Bush is perfect. I'm certainly not brainwashed.

Its a terrible article.? He uses wrongheaded 3 or 4 times in the first paragraph.? Its boring.? I've seen much better Bush bashing articles.? Seems like it comes from the far left.? America is? ? ? nt and still the strongest country in the world.? In North Korea Bush is being cautious because they have nukes and are dangerous but there is no doubt in my mind that we could defeat them easily in a war especially if we had good intel on where there nukes were.? Also Russia is our ally.? Although they may not have supported us in Iraq the relationship is still in fairly good standing.? I agree that we must be careful in foreign policy but many of his points are easily disproven.? Its an awful, disjointed article written in about 10 minutes tops.

Listening too much to the brainwashing press? No but its obvious to me this comes from the far left. I associate more with the middle. How could I be listening to the brainwashing press when most of it is very liberal. Just about every newspaper in the country is liberal. I just want an independent view of things. I'm not saying Bush is perfect. I'm certainly not brainwashed. You should point out what things you think are wrong in the article and provide proof that they are wrong... because I agree that the United States is declining while we're worried about oil somewhere else...

My main point is that the article is like a doomsday article. It says we are dependent upon imports for many things which is true. However, the whole world would just have to turn against us for us to become ineffective. Thats where foreign policy comes in. I don't understand why it assumes that we are trying to te the planet when we are not. To me it seems like the article is calling for neutrality and an absence from the World politics scene. Of course that was the policy prior to WW2 and then happened. The U.S. cannot just let things happen and then react. We must react at the earliest signs of trouble. The author of the article assumes many beliefs that I don't think most Americans have as well. If you asked the people in D.C. if they believed the American army was undefeatable I believe that 99% would say no. Also I think most people in government including the Bush administration know that will not acquiesce to U.S. nce. In my opinion these "fallacies" just come out of the author's head and from nowhere else. They are not based and actual beliefs that people have in my opinion.

My main point is that the article is like a doomsday article. It says we are dependent upon imports for many things which is true. However, the whole world would just have to turn against us for us to become ineffective. Thats where foreign policy comes in.

 

The whole world won't turn against us because they are benefiting in NAFTA and Free Trade. Our dependence on imports strengthens those other countries' economies and weakens ours (one of the reason why the American dollar is weakening).

 

 

I don't understand why it assumes that we are trying to te the planet when we are not. To me it seems like the article is calling for neutrality and an absence from the World politics scene. Of course that was the policy prior to WW2 and then happened.

 

One simple answer: War in Iraq. Iraq is the country with the most oil and cheapest place to produce in the entire world. We went to war with little or no support, against what most of the entire world and most of our allies said. We're also now controlling 90% of Europe's and Russia's oil dependances.

 

 

In my opinion these "fallacies" just come out of the author's head and from nowhere else. They are not based and actual beliefs that people have in my opinion.

 

IMHO, America is weakening (shown in the declining of the American dollar). We're worried about other things when our land is becoming fragile and any hard hit will break it apart.