Newsgroup: it.economia.borsa
Titolo: come si può perdere una guerra vinta

April 8, 2003
The Last Refuge
April 8, 2003
The Last Refuge
By PAUL KRUGMAN
(New York Times)
In 1944, millions of Americans were engaged in desperate battles
across the world. Nonetheless, a normal presidential election was
held, and the opposition didn't pull its punches: Thomas Dewey, the
Republican candidate, campaigned on the theme that Franklin Roosevelt
was a "tired old man." As far as I've been able to ascertain, the
Roosevelt administration didn't accuse Dewey of hurting morale by
questioning the president's competence. After all, democracy —
including the right to criticize — was what we were fighting for.
It's not a slur on the courage of our troops, or a belittling of the
risks they face, to say that our current war is a mere skirmish by
comparison. Yet self-styled patriots are trying to impose constraints
on political speech never contemplated during World War II, accusing
anyone who criticizes the president of undermining the war effort. 
Last week John Kerry told an audience that "what we need now is not
just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime
change in the United States." Republicans immediately sought to
portray this remark as little short of treason. "Senator Kerry crossed
a grave line when he dared to suggest the replacement of America's
commander in chief at a time when America is at war," declared Marc
Racicot, chairman of the Republican National Committee.
Notice that Mr. Racicot wasn't criticizing Mr. Kerry's choice of
words. Instead, he denounced Mr. Kerry because he "dared to suggest
the replacement of America's commander in chief" — knowing full well
that Mr. Kerry was simply talking about the next election. Mr.
Racicot, not Mr. Kerry, is the one who crossed a grave line; never in
our nation's history has it been considered unpatriotic to oppose an
incumbent's re-election.
Anyway, what defines patriotism? Talk is cheap; so is putting a flag
in your lapel. Citizens prove their patriotism when they make
sacrifices for the sake of their country. Mr. Kerry, a decorated
veteran, has met that test. Most of his critics haven't.
I'm not just talking about military service — though it's striking how
few of our biggest hawks have served. Nor am I talking only about
financial sacrifice — though profiting from public office seems to be
the norm, not the exception, among those who wrap themselves in the
flag. (Mr. Racicot himself accepted the job as R.N.C. chairman only on
the condition that he remain on the payroll of Bracewell and
Patterson, a law firm that specializes in lobbying.)
The biggest test of a politician's patriotism is whether he is willing
to sacrifice some of his political agenda for the sake of the nation.
And that's a test our current leaders have failed with flying colors. 
Consider the case of Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, who also
piled on Mr. Kerry last week. As it happens, during the war in Kosovo
Mr. DeLay was a defeatist, and blamed his own country for provoking
Serbian atrocities; any Democrat who said similar things now would be
accused of giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
Mr. DeLay's political agenda hasn't shifted a bit now that we're at
war again. He's still pushing for huge, divisive tax cuts that go
mainly to the rich: "Nothing is more important in the face of a war
than cutting taxes," he says. And he's still eager to slash any and
all domestic spending. In the midst of war he pushed through a budget
that included sharp cuts in, yes, veterans' benefits. 
You can see why Mr. Kerry blasted back, "I'm not going to be
questioned in my patriotism by the likes of Tom DeLay."
Some timid souls will suggest that critics of the Bush administration
hold off until the war is over. But that's not the American tradition
— and anyway, when will this war be over? Baghdad will fall, but
during the occupation that follows American soldiers will still be in
harm's way. Also, a strong faction within the administration wants to
go on to Syria, to Iran and beyond. And Al Qaeda is still out there.
For years to come, then, this country may be, in some sense, at war.
And all that time, if Mr. Racicot and his party are allowed to set the
ground rules, nobody will be allowed to criticize the president or
call for his electoral defeat. You know what? If that happens, we will
have lost the war, whatever happens on the battlefield. 

Ci hanno messo un po', ma gli americani si stanno svegliando.

 Ci hanno messo un po', ma gli americani si stanno svegliando.
...sono ancora troppo pochi... quando entreranno i proventi della
ricostruzione (ONU adesso va bene) saranno comunque tutti contenti, la
memoria è corta, perlomeno più corta della "pecunia" che non puzza ma spesso
sanguina.
La volgarità di tutta questa vicenda, fatti ed attori, è terribile.

 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:rGPka.37068$%
p6.24...@news.edisontel.com

E' un articolo del Times, giornale vicino ai repubblicani.
Se persino fra le file dei suoi compagni di partito inizia a farsi largo la
convinzione che Bush stia usando la guerra in Iraq per soffocare il dissenso
e nascondere la inadeguatezza della propria ricetta politica su tutti gli
altri fronti, Bush ha i giorni contati. Il dissenso anche di molti
repubblicani verso la guerra in Iraq era già forte quando la guerra era
ancora teoricamente evitabile.
Guarda cosa scriveva sul Wall Street Journal il 15 agosto scorso Brent
Scowcroft, consigliere per la sicurezza nazionale di Ford e Bush padre,
quasi uno di famiglia in casa Bush.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002133
Scriveva, sintetizzando al massimo, che la guerra in Iraq sarebbe stata una
"distrazione" rispetto all'obbiettivo prioritario della lotta al terrrismo.
Aveva certamente ragione. E quando questo diventerà evidente a chiunque,
tutta la retorica circa la minaccia terroristica a cui gli USA sarebbero
soggetti si ritorcerà contro Bush, come un boomerang.
Abbi fede.
Gli americani, i cittadini americani intendo, hanno molti difetti, ma non
amano farsi prendere per i fondelli da chi li governa. Passata l'emergenza
(sempre che passi) presenteranno il conto a chi di dovere.


ciao
lorenzo