- "We do not have any defence treaties with Kuwait,
and there are no special defence or security commitments to Kuwait."
-- Margaret Tutweiller, US State Department spokeswoman, 24th July 1990,
nine days before Iraq's invasion of Kuwait
-
- Once again Pat Robertson has stirred a hornet's nest. Commenting
on Joel Mowbray's book - Dangerous Diplomacy: How the State Department
Endangers America's Security - the broadcaster offered this assessment:
"I read your book. When you get through, you say, 'If I could just
get a nuclear device inside Foggy Bottom, I think that's the answer.' I
mean, you get through this, and you say, 'We've got to blow that thing
up"'. He was referring to that bastion of the American Way - the preverbal
core of the establishment bureaucracy itself - the U.S. Department of State.
-
- Foreign Policy has long been the Achilles heel of our
county. For well over a century the corridors of realpolitik have waged
a war more often against true internal interests, than alien foes. The
premise upon which the most privileged of public service elites operate
is that they are the guardians of the keys to the kingdom. When Charles
de Gaulle said: "Diplomats are useful only in fair weather. As soon
as it rains they drown in every drop", he was stating the obvious.
But when Colin Powell asserted: "Over the years, the United States
has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight
for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked
for in return is enough to bury those that did not return", he was
repudiated the inescapable.
-
- Waging foreign wars is a way of life for the forces that
control policy. Inventing circumstances, when none exist, requires talent
far above the average appointee. Ambassadors who bought their assignment,
usually carry out orders. Diplomats who perfect the craft of obfuscation
do so in order to advance the interests of the cabal that shapes the culture
of political expediency. All the time the public is told that the program
of policy is designed to protect them and promote freedom. Letâs
be honest, is the world more free after a bloody century of continuous
global interventions, or has the uninterrupted plot for world conquest
just been lucky in eliminating any and all competitors?
-
- The State Department works the back waters of intrigue
at social functions, as it doles out favors and administers penalties.
Forging an empire following the tenets and tactics of Bismark conflicts
with the personal diplomacy persuasiveness of Aristide Briand, that attacks the heart of a problem
rather than its symbols or symptoms. Manifest Destiny has transitioned
into a "hyperpower" that seldom resembles a beacon of liberty.
-
- Why does the public accept this failed record of incessant
global deployment? If being a superpower requires interminable intervention,
what is the purpose of generating conduct that fosters inevitable hatred?
Making the case that subduing tyrants is the ultimate purpose for America
is psychotic in its transparency. National interest is the recurring theme,
with little discussion of what constitutes that interest. The State Department
seeks to be the master of security and defense, making policy for the military
to execute, as they ignite and invite situations to shed Îcommon
citizenâ blood and spend our treasure. The public continually gets
caught up in the hype; yet, they bear their own liability for accepting
the irrational interference that an internationalist policy demands.
-
- In the WW II movie Anzio, Robert Mitchum played a pacifist war correspondent
in search of some philosophical reasoning for why men wage war. His conclusion
at the end of one of the bloodiest battles in the European theater was
simple, pure and alarming. They like it! Who can argue with the historic
record? If you donât relish the perverse repetition of duly sanctioned
and organized carnage, why continue to engage in the practice? Before the
allegiant apologists assault the argument, it is incumbent upon them to
prove that circumstances are necessary to send their sons (and now daughters)
off for sacrifice! If a just war is feasible in an age of impersonal and
strategic GPS weapons, it has yet to be confirmed that it is essential
to maintain our freedom.
-
- Pat Robertson absorbs the retaliation from Richard Boucher,
the State Department Agency's top spokesman. Remarks implying final relief
from the foggy bottom feeders on the Christian Broadcasting Networkâs
- The 700 Club - are seen to Mr Boucher as "despicable" as he
lacks "sufficient capabilities to express my disdain". When will
the ÎBoucher Butchersâ reflect upon their own culpability as
the participant in fostering policies that cause the carnage, weakens our
actual defense and diminishes our domestic civil liberties?
-
- The price is too high acting the role of a belated planetary
benefactor. The State Department has a general leading troops, as he ignores
his own doctrine. "Articulated by General Powell when he was chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Gulf War, the Powell Doctrine was designed to avoid, as Powell once
put it, "halfhearted warfare for half-baked reasons that the American
people could not understand or support." The Powell Doctrine held
that military force should only be used if there was a clear risk to national
security; that the force used should be overwhelming; and that the operation
must have strong public support and a clear exit strategy."
-
- Compared to the long line of previous Secretaries of
State, Powell has shown some independence. But in the end the good general
would fall on his sword for his president.
-
- Pat Robertson is no model preacher, heâs a dispensationalist.
However, he makes a point worth consideration. What he fails to recognize
is that his own support for the rogue Lukid policies resemble the same
willing complicity that the State Department has exhibited for decades.
Excavating the ruins of a failed bureaucracy doesnât guarantee a
restoration of traditional foreign policy. Washington, the man was right.
The culture of Washington DC is the problem.
-
- SARTRE - October 12, 2003
-
- "The article published originally at <http://www.rense.com/>Rense.com;
republication granted with this tagline and hyperlink intacts"
-
- "To maintain this position of disparity (U.S. economic-military
supremacy)... we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming....
We should cease to talk about vague and... unreal objectives such as human
rights, the raising of the living standard and democratization. The day
is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts....
The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better."
--George Kennan [Director of Policy Planning U.S. State Department 1948]
-
- <http://batr.org> BATR site
-
- © 2000-2003 by BATR All Rights Reserved
|
