CULTIVATING LIBERALISM
FOR ALL CLIMATES
SINCE 1759
 
Google
 

Free daily alert to Candide's Notebooks
Your email:

By Feedburner (more versatile)
By The Notebooks
(quicker)

Baghdad Dick
Cheney’s Central Fraud

The only men smiling in Baghdad

“We’re fighting a war against terror,” Dick Cheney said in Baghdad. “We are here, above all, because the terrorists who have declared war on America and other free nations have made Iraq the central front in that war.”

So we’re back to that fraudulent syllogism: Terrorists declared war on America on 9/11. Terrorists made Iraq the central front in the war. America and its allies attacked terrorists in their central front. Interesting timeline. The vice president isn’t just rewriting history. He’s reinventing time. There’s an even more startling reversal in that line: The implicit admission that the United States in Iraq, “above all,” not because of weapons of mass destruction, not because of Saddam Hussein’s regime, not even because of democracy, but because terrorists chose the place and time for the war. And one more startling admission: That Iraqis themselves, who don’t figure in Cheney’s syllogism of infinite justice except as welcome mats, don’t matter. Not even as part of those on whom terrorists declared war. They just happen to provide the venue. The bodies. The roadies. And they’re non-union. Fabulous. The line brings the administration once again to that other fraud: We’re fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here. That one is such an article of faith that I’ve yet to see its underlying principle challenged anywhere, let alone to the president’s or vice president’s faces. The reasoning doesn’t merely suggest but asserts flat out that it’s acceptable and defensible for the United States to use another country as its guinea-pig buffer. It’s somehow more acceptable that in America’s self-declared war on terror, Iraqis may die, but Americans may not (except for the poor shmucks in uniform forced to slaughter).

Study the reasoning for a moment—a reasoning the president and every member of his administration never hesitate to use—and you quickly realize that its kinship with the imperial hubris of the 19 th century is a direct DNA match. So Dick Cheney’s words have, after all, a logic of their own. It’s the logic of the colonialist, shorn of the desire to colonize, but hopped up on the presumption of superiority. The West, and America in particular, are what deserve protection, praise and propagation. The East is barbarian territory. Beyond redemption. It’s not just a war to protect the West. It’s a war to ensure a perpetual war on the East.


| Back to the Front Page  
 



The Daily Byte

V. S. Naipaul Flatters Himself (As He So Often Does)
“That idea of ruin and dereliction, of out-of-placeness, was something I felt about myself, attached to myself: a man from another hemisphere, another background, coming to rest in middle life in the cottage of a half-neglected estate, an estate full of reminders of its Edwardian past, with few connections with the present. An oddity among the estates and big houses of the valley, and I a further oddity in its grounds. I felt unanchored and strange. Everything I saw in those early days, as I took my surroundings in, everything I saw on my daily walk, beside the windbreak or along the wide grassy way, made that feeling more acute. I felt that my presence in that old valley was part of something like an upheaval, a change in the course of the history of the country.”

—From “The Enigma of Arrival” (1987)

  Back to the Front Page 

 

The Latest in Pierre’s
Middle East Notebooks At


 
The Latest Comments
 

In The Notebooks:
The Latest

Featured Essays:

From the Notebooks' Blog:



GOOGLE GOOGLE NEW YORK TIMES NEWSPAPERS NETFLIX UK INDEPENDENT NETFLIX
  
Add to Google Reader or Homepage Subscribe in NewsGator Online Subscribe in Rojo   Add to My AOL Subscribe in FeedLounge Add to netvibes Subscribe in Bloglines Add to The Free Dictionary