Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Clappy who wrote (20953)	6/24/2003 2:53:46 PM
From: lurqer	Respond to of 89467

even when their hands are full. They can still point I would say that could be handy, except that could lead to a discussion of the infamous "handy" list. Message 18456933 lurqer

To: Clappy who wrote (20953)	6/25/2003 8:31:41 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Promises Unfulfilled ___________________________ by Steve Chapman Syndicated Columnist Published on Tuesday, June 24, 2003 by the Baltimore Sun In the months leading up to the war in Iraq, the Bush administration gave the impression that bringing down Saddam Hussein would be like hitting a piñata: We would not only destroy the target but release a cascade of blessings. Democracy would blossom in Iraq and spread throughout the region. Rogue states would cower in fear of American power. The Palestinians would abandon terrorism in favor of making peace with Israel. And all those people and leaders abroad who criticized us beforehand would jump on the American bandwagon. Forgive my lousy memory, but can someone remind me when the fun is supposed to begin? Nothing has gone quite as the supporters of war envisioned. Rather than being hailed by cheering throngs welcoming them as liberators, arriving American troops were generally met with wary caution. But it turns out the critics were wrong, too, when they warned that in time, the Iraqi people would resent the occupiers: It took no time at all. Instead of restoring Iraq to normalcy, the invasion unleashed a chaos that the administration admits it failed to predict or prepare for. Armed resistance by remnants of the old regime has been gathering strength. This week, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was forced to acknowledge it may continue for months. Much of Iraq is hostile territory, and even in the relatively peaceful zones, Iraqis are sorely dissatisfied. Protests are common, Shiite groups are threatening to boycott the American administrator's advisory council, and the exiles we imported to help out with political reconstruction are expressing disenchantment with us. One sign seen in recent demonstrations says "America = Saddam." Ouch. The occupation, which was supposed to be short and sweet, now looks to be long and bitter. A few weeks ago, the United States was talking about cutting its troop presence to 30,000 or less by the fall. Today, everyone admits that upward of 150,000 American troops will be needed indefinitely. That democracy we promised as a model for the region? The Iraqis have been demanding the right to form their own government, but the U.S. civil administrator, L. Paul Bremer III, has refused. For the time being, Iraqis are going to be living under a form of government quite familiar to that part of the world - a dictatorship, even if it has the novelty of being an American one. Things are not going so well outside Iraq, either. During the war, ultra-hawkish Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer proclaimed that the American removal of Mr. Hussein represented nothing less than "a revolution in world affairs." He assured us, "From Damascus to Pyongyang, totalitarians everywhere are watching this war with shock and awe." So why don't they act shocked and awed, instead of stubborn and defiant? Troublemakers didn't receive the message we tried to deliver: Be good or be gone. They're doing pretty much what they were doing before. The International Atomic Energy Agency recently accused Iran of not complying with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and says that even today it has yet to account for its nuclear programs. Mr. Bremer has been complaining that Tehran is fomenting Shiite extremism in Iraq. Mr. Rumsfeld says Iran is harboring senior members of al-Qaida. If invading Iraq didn't intimidate Iran, right next door, whom exactly would it intimidate? Apparently not North Korea. Instead of abandoning his weapons of mass destruction, Kim Jong Il has concluded that the best protection against a U.S. invasion is a robust nuclear deterrent, brandished menacingly. The Palestinians were supposed to deduce from Mr. Hussein's fate that terrorism is a ticket to nowhere. But militant factions are still carrying out suicide attacks, and Washington's preferred Palestinian leader, Mahmoud Abbas, lacks the will and the power to stop them. Nor do neighboring Arab states show much interest in trying to rein in the terrorists. Elsewhere in the world, victory has paid no dividends. A new global survey by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press finds that "in most countries, opinions of the U.S. are markedly lower than they were a year ago." In such predominantly Muslim states as Indonesia and Jordan, most people have a favorable opinion of Osama bin Laden. Not everybody loves a winner - at least if they see him as a bully. Meanwhile, far from being scared into submission, our enemies apparently have concluded that with all the burdens of occupying Iraq, we can't afford to attack anyone else. The heavyweight champion isn't so scary once he's punched himself out. The Bush administration said we were whacking a piñata. Turns out it was Pandora's box. ________________________________________ Steve Chapman is a columnist for the Chicago Tribune, a Tribune Publishing newspaper. Copyright © 2003, The Baltimore Sun ### commondreams.org