Newsgroup: it.arti.cinema
Titolo: [OT] I'm with Dick! Let's make war!

[
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/28/opinion/28DOWD.html
]
August 28, 2002
I'm With Dick! Let's Make War!
By MAUREEN DOWD
WASHINGTON ? I was dubious at first. But now I think Dick Cheney has it
right.
Making the case for going to war in the Middle East to veterans on Monday,
the vice president said that "our goal would be . . . a government that is
democratic and pluralistic, a nation where the human rights of every
ethnic and religious group are recognized and protected."
O.K., I'm on board. Let's declare war on Saudi Arabia! Let's do "regime
change" in a kingdom that gives medieval a bad name.
By overthrowing the Saudi monarchy, the Cheney-Rummy-Condi-Wolfy-Perle-W.
contingent could realize its dream of redrawing the Middle East map.
Once everyone realizes that we're no longer being hypocrites, coddling a
corrupt, repressive dictatorship that sponsors terrorism even as we plot
to crush a corrupt, repressive dictatorship that sponsors terrorism, it
will transform our relationship with the Arab world.
We won't need Charlotte Beers at the State Department, thinking up Madison
Avenue slogans to make the Arab avenue love us. ("Democracy! Mm-mm,
good.")
If America is going to have a policy of justified pre-emption, in Henry
Kissinger's clinical phrase, why not start by chasing out those sorry
Saudi royals? If we're willing to knock over Saddam for gassing the Kurds,
we should be willing to knock over the Saudis for letting the
state-supported religious police burn 15 girls to death last March in a
Mecca school, forcing them back inside a fiery building because they tried
to flee without their scarves. And shouldn't we pre-empt them before they
teach more boys to hate American infidels and before they can stunt the
lives of more women?
The vice president declared on Monday, "This nation will not live at the
mercy of terrorists or terror regimes." I am absolutely with him.
Why should we (and our S.U.V.'s) be at the mercy of this family that we
arm and protect and go to war for? The Saudis have never formally
apologized to America for the 15 Saudi citizens who came here and killed
3,000 Americans as they went to work one sun-dappled September morning.
They have never even tried to rewrite their incendiary terrorist-breeding
textbooks or stop their newspapers from spewing anti-American,
anti-Semitic lies, like their stories accusing Jews of drinking children's
blood. They brazenly held a telethon, with King Fahd and Crown Prince
Abdullah giving millions, to raise money for families of Palestinian
suicide bombers, or "martyrs." Last week the Saudi embassy here put out a
glossy brochure hailing their "humanitarian work" at the telethon.
It was embarrassing yesterday, given President Bush's swagger on Iraq, to
watch him fawn over the Saudis. At lunch at his ranch he entertained
Prince Bandar, the man who got private planes to spirit Osama bin Laden's
relatives out of the U.S. after the attacks. Mr. Bush also called Crown
Prince Abdullah yesterday to assure him of the "eternal friendship"
between their countries and to soothe hurt Saudi feelings over a lawsuit
filed by 9/11 victims charging Saudi support of terrorism.
Mr. Cheney argues that we must invade Iraq while we have a strategic
window for action, while Saddam's army is still reeling.
But attacking the Saudis would be even easier. They are soft and spoiled.
Only yesterday Jerome Socolovsky of The A.P. wrote about how King Fahd
brought thousands of members of the House of Saud to Marbella, Spain,
where they stocked up on luxury items and hired North African servants.
Women in veils and waterproof robes rode Jet Skis and members of the royal
family talked about the 9/11 attacks as an Israeli-C.I.A. plot.
A Saudi invasion would be like the Panama invasion during Bush I. We
already have bases to use there. And this time Mr. Cheney won't have to
beg the royals to use their air space, or send American forces.
Once we make Saudi Arabia into our own self-serve gas pump, its neighbors
will get the democracy bug.
The Saudis would probably use surrogates to fight anyway. They pay poor
workers from other countries to do their menial labor. And they paid the
Americans to fight the Iraqis in 1991. The joke among the American forces
then was: "What's the Saudi national anthem? `Onward, Christian Soldiers.'
"
We haven't been hit at home by any of Saddam's Scud missiles. But the
human missiles launched by Saudi Arabia have taken their toll.
-- 
ste

 [
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/28/opinion/28DOWD.html
]
(...)
Ottimo articolo.
Mi ricorda un dialogo che si vuole sia avvenuto nel 1942 tra l'ambasciatore
americano in Ungheria ed il reggente al trono - l'ammiraglio Horthy de
Nagybanya - al momento della consegna della dichiarazione di guerra:
Ambasciatore USA: "Avete delle rivendicazioni territoriali nei nostri
confronti?"
Horty: "No!"
A: "Avete delle rivendicazioni territoriali nei confronti dei nostri
alleati?"
H: "No!"
A: "Avete delle rivendicazioni territoriali nei confronti di qualcuno??"
H: "Si, nei confronti della Romania, sa, la Transilvania..."
A: "Ma allora perche' non dichiarate guerra alla Romania?"
H: "Perche' sono i nostri alleati!"
--
ArAmesh
--------------------------------
Inviato via 
http://usenet.libero.it

 Ottimo articolo.
Da quando il NY Times ha cambiato direttore e rotta (ovvero: 
dagli addosso al cretinone) e' una vera goduria leggere gli
editoriali :-)
-- 
ste