![]() February 2003 March 2003 April 2003 May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 September 2009 October 2009 December 2009 January 2010
|
Friday, July 25 I have not always agreed with what Mr. Tony Blair has been saying or doing recently, but one quote from his recent speech to the United States Congress I thought was rather poignant: "As Britain knows, all predominant power seems for a time invincible, but, in fact, it is transient. The question is: What do you leave behind?" It is a question that I hope the Bush administration and more importantly the American people are asking themselves. As it stands right now, the record is not too great. Their rise to preeminence was all but saving western civilization from self-annhilation in the Second World War but since then their legacy has been, well far from the British standard from the 18th and 19th century. I am often wrong (just ask Allie) but I worry that the methods in which the United States is choosing to influence other nations is not positive (well, I am still happy with the jobs done in Japan and Germany, but other than that). Mao may have been right in saying political power came from the barrel of a gun but I am not sure democracy does. A democratic regime takes effort, time, understanding and most importantly resources, things which the United States seems reluctant to put into Afghanistan and now Iraq. As the American administration sits in their office planning their next campaign, I hope they remember the after-war costs as well. Since 1945 the United States has demonstrated time and time again they can kick the shit out of any nation on Earth, be it Vietnam, Russia or Iraq - but it is how they have dealt with military victory that has been an absolute disaster. People have asked what I think the United States should do. I'm not sure why I am being asked, but since they asked - if the United States is going to engage in violent military conflict (and this is a if, because I don't think they have to as often as they do) they should be prepared to end it. The cost of peace far exceeds that to wage war and it takes billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of personnel and a sensitivity to what they are doing. Regardless of whether the United States is right or wrong in going to war, there is undoubtedly a right way to finish the war you have started. And so far, the plan in Iraq is not it. posted by Duncan @ 9:08 PM © 2003-2010 Duncan Wojtaszek No reproduction whatsoever, in any form, without permission. All views expressed here are those of Duncan Wojtaszek and no other person or organization. |
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home