By William Markiewicz
According to the attackers, the current bombing of Iraq is largely a preventive operation to impede Saddam Hussein from becoming dangerous. In other words the same methods we use in preventive medicine are applied to political strategy. We vaccinate people against microbes before they become dangerous. So, automatically, and without any objections from the public, we divide humanity into two categories -- true humans and microbes which may attack even if the danger is only virtual. The difference is that neither Iraq nor any other "rogue country" is composed of microbes but of humans, nor do they possess the potential deadly power of microbes. It's not enough to possess means of massive destruction to be dangerous. One must also be big and powerful enough to sustain the consequences of using such weaponry or else be smashed into dust. Iraq, et al, are well aware, and don't need to be reminded, that however powerful & deadly their arsenal, it wont protect them from the terrible vengeance that would take place if they used it.
Therefore I challenge those arguments that the bombing in Iraq serves to protect Western interests or whomever. It is an addiction to the bad habit of a gratuitous show of power, if not one step toward total hegemony. The more powerful you are the less you tolerate anyone else's autonomy. A real or imaginary adversary is tolerated only if he is totally on his back.
We can follow the linear destruction pathway since the NWO took power: squeezing NATO's cordon over the Russian border, making a Chernobyl of Kosovo, and aerial apocalyptic ballets in Iraqi skies.Back to the index of the Vagabond