• Tuesday, May 29, 2007

    Xena Liz, Cindy and Miss USA - symbols of the evil Empire??

    We have to take our victories where we can get them in the face of bizarre hostility for a 100 years of saving the world. Our Miss USA takes a tumble and gets booed and yet shows some class before the skeptical world. Same class in the face of disdain by the new warrior princess, Elizabeth Hasselbeck, who did achieve unconditional victory over Rosie. Watch out, Joy Behar! Meanwhile our favorite Gold Star mom, Cindy, gets in a snit with the waffling Democrats and declares her cause over. And speaking of waffling, it is a pretty picture when we neocons can now come to the defense of none other than Jolting Joe Biden for a yes vote on Iraq funding.

    Wednesday, May 23, 2007

    Why Democrats are More Imperialistic than Neo-cons. REALLY!

    In the Middle East, the BIG short term story is the Democrats folding on the withdrawal timelines. The medium term story is how Lebanon, Pakistan and other Muslim nations' crises will take prominence. But one perhaps small long term impact is the ironic shift that peace-loving Democrats are at heart more imperialistic than Republican Neo-Cons. HUH?!!

    One recent story is that the Democratically controlled Congress (but in a huge bipartisan consensus!) advocates the U.S. suing OPEC for the high price of oil. Now this huge cartel does control the international pricing of crude through its "managing" of supply and demand, but this has never been the subject of international trade sanctions. Even though impractical in the highest and probably not actionable under international law and certainly not enforceable economically, this does not stop Congressional initiative on this issue. Now classically, a tax or claim on a foreign power imposed unilaterally is defined as "tribute" owed. A greater power able to enforce such judgment of tribute on lesser powers is a primary definition of empire. And no doubt we could enforce this judgment somehow but only militarily to intimidate governments and / or their leaders to do our bidding. How many McDonalds we have around the world or even how many arms we deploy, sell or give away does not make empire, it is the imposition of our sovereignty on others and a tax or tribute is such an imperial measure.


    But a second definition of empire would be the creation of offices such as satraps and viceroys for the subject nations or regions that would report and be accountable to the imperial power. Now in the setting of benchmarks and deadlines and schedules for the Iraqi parliament, again, there is the inherent structure of empire. Now the Iraqi government should not only be accountable to their own people for success or failure, but accountable to us in so far as their actions help or impede our goals of peace and defeat of terrorists in the region. We of course have the option of withdrawing our support and ending our mission there if reasonable prospects do not exist, if continuation actually contributes to a situation antithetical to our interests (i.e, Iraq or major parts of it irretrievably capitulate to Iranian and / or Al Qaeda agendas).

    But to in advance impose "benchmarks" as key determinants, ultimatums in fact and de jure on WHEN a foreign legislature meets and takes action (i.e., Iraqi parliament should not adjourn for any summer recess, at least with required work undone) and HOW they take actions on measures internal to their government (i.e. Oil distribution law and the "softening" of De-baathification measures) to meet our specifications is strictly speaking, imperialism. (I could say more on the folly of soft-pedaling the Baath party issue when it is still anathema to have been a Nazi party member, and it is clear that a tougher stand against former Communist party membership, or at least KGB rank, by Russia at the Fall might have forestalled the rise of Putin and his ilk).

    Of course again because of the exigency of Iraq forming a strong economic and govermental union quickly against sectarian extremism there may be a need for such action. But will we, or should we do the same in specifying Lebanese army actions this May against the AQ threat or when (not if but when) Pakistan's new government takes over from Musharraf, what should we impose on them? I'm not talking about sanctions or threats or preemptive actions on perceived enemies, that is warfare and diplomacy, I am talking the dimunition of sovereignty of our allies, that is imperialism.