A few weeks ago I commented
on the new book by Richard Perle and David Frum - An End to Evil: How to Win the War on Terror (Random House). See January 11, 2004 - New books this week... for that. Basically this is the new manifesto from the Bush "Freon Neocons"
showing how we can and must rule the world. Well, it sort of comes down to that.
"For us, terrorism remains the great evil of our time, and the war against
this evil, our generation's great cause. We do not believe that Americans are
fighting this evil to minimize it or to manage it. We believe they are fighting
to win - to end this evil before it kills again and on a genocidal scale. There
is no middle way for Americans: It is victory or holocaust."
You get the idea.
These two propose we overthrow the governments of Iran, Sudan, Syria, North Korea, perhaps Saudi Arabia and a few others,
like Cuba, and occupy those countries until we force them each to form a new government more to our liking.
Who are these guys? On the dust jacket of his book,
Richard Perle appends a Washington Post depiction of himself as the "intellectual guru of the hard-line neoconservative
movement in foreign policy." Before he was that - head of the policy board that advises Rumsfeld and Bush -
Perle worked for Conrad Black, running the Jerusalem Post for him. Needless
to say, these new governments we create in our image would recognize Israel. And
David Frum was Bush's speechwriter, the man who came up with the "Axis of Evil" wording.
I just came across a devastating review of the book by Pat Buchanan of all people.
See No End to War
The American Conservative, Cover Story, March 1, 2004 Issue
Its long and really detailed. I recommend it for observations like this.
...no nation can "end evil." Evil has existed since Cain rose up against his brother Abel
and slew him.
A propensity to evil can be found in every human heart. And if God accepts the existence of evil, how do Frum and Perle propose to "end" it? Nor can any nation "win the war on terror." Terrorism is simply a term for the
murder of non-combatants for political ends.
Revolutionary terror has
been around for as long as this Republic. It was used by Robespierre's Committee
on Public Safety and by People's Will in Romanov Russia. Terror has been the
chosen weapon of anarchists, the IRA, Irgun, the Stern Gang, Algeria's FLN, the Mau Mau, MPLA, the PLO, Black September, the
Basque ETA, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade, SWAPO, ZANU, ZAPU, the Tupamaros, Shining Path,
FARC, the ANC, the V.C., the Huks, Chechen rebels, Tamil Tigers, and the FALN that attempted to assassinate Harry Truman and
shot up the House floor in 1954, to name only a few.
have won the Nobel Peace Prize: Begin, Arafat, Mandela. Three lie in mausoleums
in the capitals of nations they created: Lenin, Mao, Ho. Others are the fathers
of their countries like Ben Bella and Jomo Kenyatta. A terrorist of the Black
Hand ignited World War I by assassinating the Archduke Ferdinand. Yet Gavrilo
Princep has a bridge named for him in Sarajevo.
The murder of innocents
for political ends is evil, but to think we can "end" it is absurd. Cruel and
amoral men, avaricious for power and "immortality," will always resort to it. For,
all too often, it succeeds.
But what must America do to attain victory
in her war on terror?
Say the authors: "We must hunt down the individual
terrorists before they kill our people or others We must deter all regimes that use terror as a weapon of state
against anyone, American or no" [emphasis added].
Astonishing. The authors say America is responsible for defending everyone, everywhere from terror
and deterring any and all regimes that might use terror - against anyone, anywhere on earth.
But there are 192 nations. Scores of regimes from
Liberia to Congo to Cuba, from Zimbabwe to Syria to Uzbekistan, and from Iran to Sudan to the Afghan warlords of the Northern
Alliance who fought on our side - have used torture and terror to punish enemies. Are
we to fight them all?
It seems so. And the curious thing is how Frum frames
It's that "Axis of Evil" thing. It seems is now our duty "to rid the world of evil," something even God doesn't try, as I understand it. I think the idea is God allows for the possibility of free will - and thus some evil
will occur. But now the United States can fix that, and should? We fight
evil. All of it. Terrorism is just
the outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual evil.
such as it is, will thus be over when, for a period of time, no evil occurs anywhere in the world, so we're sure we got it
all. Then we will know we have won - not sooner.
Well, think big, and be optimistic. It may seem like
madness, but it is a plan.
Of course, the price of wading into this Buchanan
piece is that you get his usual rant about how the US is becoming a puppet of Israel and the Jews. Sigh.
But Buchanan does give us this:
... who are these men who would plunge our country into serial wars of preemption and retribution
across the arc of crisis from Libya to Korea?
Frum is not even an American. He is a Canadian who did not become a citizen until offered a job in
the Bush speechwriting shop. He was cashiered after one year when his wife bragged
on the Internet that David invented the "axis-of-evil" phrase.
from the White House, Frum ratted out his old colleagues in a "hot" book and got himself hired by National Review,
where he produced a cover story about a dirty dozen "Unpatriotic Conservatives" who hate neocons, hate Bush, hate the GOP,
hate America, and "wish to see the United States defeated in the War on Terror."
Frum ordered all 12 purged from the
... Who is Perle? Unlike Frum, a cipher on foreign policy, Perle has been a serious player since the Nixon era. But throughout those years he has betrayed a passionate attachment to a foreign power. In 1996, Perle co-authored "A Clean Break," a now-famous paper urging Benjamin Netanyahu to dump the Oslo
Accords, seize the West Bank, and confront Syria. The road to Damascus lies through
Baghdad, Perle told the receptive Israeli Prime Minister.
Then an adviser
to Republican candidate Robert Dole, Perle was thus secretly urging a foreign government to abrogate a peace accord supported
by his own government. In 1998, he and other neoconservatives signed a letter
to then President Clinton urging the United States to initiate all-out war on Iraq and pledging neoconservative support if
Clinton would launch it.
Query: why is Perle permitted to retain his
post at the Department of Defense while agitating for wars on four or five countries, including Saudi Arabia, a friend of
the United States? Why does President Bush put up with this? His father would never have tolerated it.
Well, the son is not the father.
And the son doesn't like details and nuance.
And this is where
we are. This is our policy from those who set it.
Come November we vote for the somewhat dim emperor and his wars, or not.