In the name of the father

[Ivo Skoric]

Every day we hear how there are more countries supporting Bush's 
war against Saddam Hussein. We don't see the father who lost his 
only son in a helicopter crash. We saw him once. Then he was 
pulled off the air by the free media in the free country of U.S. of A. 
He did not bode well with reports on how now over 40 countries in 
the world support Bush's war. That's COUNTRIES, not PEOPLE, 
because PEOPLE do not support this war in ANY country, 
including the U.S. 

(Now, that the U.S. does not stand for freedom any more, as it 
proceeded to arrest asylum seekers from 33 countries, France 
should take the Statue of Liberty back, and return it only when the 
citizens of the U.S. become mature and responsible enough to 
impeach George Bush)

But is it true that the number of states supporting Bush's war is 
really rising so dramatically? Or is that yet another psy-ops action 
against the gullible domestic TV viewer? We have heard "Iraqi 
citizens" calling in on Larry King Live, in what would be wee 
morning hours in Iraq, begging Americans to come and liberate 
them. We have seen U2 airplanes turning back from their UN 
inspections mandated mission, allegedly scared by the non-
existent Iraqi anti-aircraft capabilities. We watched patiently the 
bizzare countdown on all 5 big US TV networks (Cee Nothing New, 
All Bow to Caesar, Nothing But Counterfeit, Cold Blooded Swindle, 
Faux 5) for the 48 hours ultimatum to expire.

Cameras were fixed on 4 or 5 potential targets for hours, and the 
clock in the bottom right corner was ticking, counting down hours, 
minutes and seconds to the moment we would see that bridge 
majestically destroyed by an ultra-sophisticated, highly advanced, 
mighty and precise, new, giant, and much better bomb, courtesy of 
Raytheon, Northrop Grumann, or Lockheed Martin. Now it is there 
and now it is gone. But the moment never came. The zero hour 
came and had passed, and the bridge in Bhagdad was still there, 
with the morning traffic slowly milling over it.

The networks, confused with the unexpected lack of the viewable 
war, brought in countless retired generals and eloquent pundits to 
debate on why this war is so incredibly neccessary and justified. 
"We'll bring freedom to others" said Bush in his address to the 
nation, while cruise missiles were hitting targets of opportunity, far 
away from badly positioned TV network cameras. The US will 
liberate other countries from their own freedom, and impose the US 
freedom on them, just as the Soviet Union used to do it in the pre-
Gorbachev era.

And 99% of US Senate is behind Bush on that. Just as 100% of 
Iraqi parliament is behind Saddam Hussein. In the name of the 
father, albeit old man is against it, the son will indeed easily 
conquer Iraq, but with no holy spirit to bless his victory. Nothing 
less should be expected from the military that devours a budget the 
size of the combined GDP-s of the former Soviet Union nations. 
Then, they will be stuck there with the oil, they desire so much, 
surrounded by enemies who hate them for years to come, with no 
one in the world, that they so arrogantly abandoned, to turn for help 
to. Isn't this a really great, absolutely fabulous, beginning of the 
New American Century?

As leadership targets proved to be low yield (Saddam, that colors 
his hair, but not his moustache, was still alive), the mighty power 
turned to other less important, but more media friendly targets, 
providing some 'shock and awe' for a domestic viewers to watch: 
fireworks over Bhagdad night, doesn't it look wonderful? And yes, 
back to the list of countries that support Bush's war: in a 
passionate speech on Croatian TV, Croatian president, Stipe 
Mesic, plead that Pentagon should take Croatia OFF that list, 
since Croatia: "We cannot accept the establishment of a model of
behavior in international relations which would allow, to put it 
simply, those that possess force ... to take military action against 
the regime of any country," he said.

U.S. ambassador to Croatia, Lawrence G. Rossin, already warned 
that there would be consequences. Threats, ultimatums, saber 
rattling, bribery - yes, indeed, there would be consequences - for 
the U.S. the foremost - a decade of life in fear, a decade of life with 
suspended Constitutional liberties, a decade of life with ruined 
social services safety net, a decade of life with high gas prices, 
weak currency, and dispirited stock market. Thank you Mr. 
President for such visionary leadership.

Ivo Skoric