Busy, Busy Empire

[Ivo Skoric]

Abroad, Saddam showed that he can also use the war for domestic 
politics. People voting with their blood - the whole spectacle was to 
show the world that Iraqis will offer tremendous resistance to the 
advancing U.S. troops. Barking of a small dog? But, only 100% of voters 
voted for Saddam Hussein. I think he should decapitate that bozo 
Ibrahim who reported the results. What a shame! Enver Hoxha of Albania 
used to have 102% or more people voting for him. Here are some clues 
for 2004, Bush Jr. How to make voter turnout more respectable (i.e. over 
50%)? Make voting compulsory. How to make people vote for you? 
Have no other candidate, and make voters put yes votes in one box, and 
no votes in another, with your armed guards watching.

At home, eleven victims and counting, the elusive* sniper may or may 
not be Al Qaeda. What he is, he is a man who likes to instigate fear in 
others and have no conscious prohibition to kill, well organized, logical, 
controlling individual, with good sense of planning, excellent knowledge 
of DC suburban roads, with a high-powered rifle, a white van and a lot of 
time to spare. He also has a preference for one particular chain, which 
may suggest that he used to shop there. But if he is Al Qaeda, then he is 
more than one. And the vans are more than one. And the vans must be 
rigged with explosive, as to prevent capture.
				
Then, the reclusive*  Korean leader decided to come out of the closet: he 
is a nuclear fetishist. Now, besides the customary bashing the 
intelligence community for not knowing the minutiae of N. Korean 
nuclear weapons program, what is this society going to do about it? If N 
Korea decided to be honest and open about it, is it then a lesser or a 
bigger threat? Why would some countries be allowed to have nuclear 
weapons and some not? Who is there to judge? Is N Korea going to get 
delisted from the ‘axis of evil’, or is it going to become the next in line 
after Iraq? 

Most importantly, why did Kim decide it was important to tell the grim 
truth right now, since, obviously then, he was lying to the world since 
1994? Maybe, because the US presented him with some offer he could 
not refuse (and the US needed that admission to get dovish Japan and 
South Korea back in its camp). On the other hand, maybe, because it was 
easy to establish that his nuclear program was made possible by co-
operation with Pakistan, discrediting that flouted American ally in the 
Arab world, right at the time the US contemplates the war in the Middle 
East. 

Clearly neither Pakistan had resources to develop its missiles program to 
counteract India, neither N Korea had resources to develop its nuclear 
program, to trade blackmail of its neighbors for international support, but 
N Korea had the missile technology Pakistan needed and Pakistan had 
the nuclear technology N Korea needed, making this simple secret barter, 
where both countries violated international agreements, possible. But 
will Pakistan share N Korea’s fate? Is Pakistan also planned for liberation 
and democratization?

A couple of days ago there was one of those memorable moments on TV. 
Hardball show was going live with senator McCain from Fordham 
University. The anchor asked that everybody, who would actually join 
the military to fight the war in Iraq, stand up. Two pale loners stuck out 
of the crowd, the proud, the few, the real Slim Shady, nervously scanning 
the room for the presence of the enemy. Then the anchor asked that 
everybody, who is pro-war against Iraq, stands up. Roughly half of the 
hall, with the loudness and determination of a collective hurray, stood 
up: chicken-hawk hatchlings. But who is actually going to fight all those 
upcoming wars? Drones? Clones? Foreigners?

(* Kim Jong Il is always described in media as ‘reclusive’, and the 
Beltway sniper as ‘elusive’ - kind of like Homer always used same 
adjectives for the characters in Iliad).

Ivo