Recent Posts
2006 - The year which will go down in American History as the most infamous of them all.
A country which tried to dominate and failed, which tried to spread democracy and failed,
which tried to do everything for its own self and destructed itself. Inspired by one of the worst leadership ever, it has had searched its own nemesis for catostrophe.
It wasn't that all was not well in 2006. Lets take the world cup football which took place in Germany. That U.S.A tried to prove itself in the global sport was not surprising. China qualified before than them, the africans are vying for the next sporting prowess and asia is poised to take on the ever solid europeans at some stage. Even ranked at number six in the FIFA world rankings was not satisfying for a country used to dominate everything and everywhere.
Back in the 1980s where America was the lonely superpower with U.S.S.R trying invain to match it, the world had no choice but to accept whatever the U.S did. Fast forward a couple of decades, America is found wanting for its self-image and pride. Yes, it still has the mightiest and the most modernised army in the world, but that is not a sign of domination. Now the world has been accustomised to multi-polar world, where China and India are dictating the economic terms, Latin Americans giving a run for American democracy and last, but not the least, the ever growing Russians, having greater influence on world politics than the United States in recent years.
The popularity of U.S is also at all time low. North Korea and Iran doesnt give a damn about America and its U.N council. Leaders in the middle-east are now having greater confidence in Russia as a neutral negotiator than America. No need to mention Iraq and Afghanistan for the billionth time. The foreign policy has failed tremendously under the 'devil', as stated by Hugo Chavez.
The loss of Republicans last November to the Democrats resounds throughout the U.S and its allies. The whole world is now hoping that there will be a change, at last, and that too, a good one. The country itself needs a drastic change if it wants to regain its very own self. It will change, but not yet, not yet... Football (sadly) isn't everything in life.
It has been an eternity since I wrote here. Being entangled with personal and corporate life, I was thinking who on earth would have a life so miserable as me. And suddenly a thought flashed my mind. Yes, there is one man who suits this category, whose life is worse than me, whose very actions have killed thousands and displaced millions. He is none other than the President of the United States, George Bush.
Hundreds of books and articles have been written about him, some supporting him and most criticizing him. When Osama Bin Laden attacked U.S, there was overwhelming support for Bush. He could have ruined the whole middle-east if he had wanted to. The whole world watched afghanistan destroyed and applauded it. Overall sympathy for U.S among other countries was at an all time high.
But now, the popularity of U.S is at an all time low. Latin America, bitten by the past, has more or less turned towards socialism. There are very few countries in this world who would now say that they like U.S or especially its foreign policy. Iraq has become a disaster, another vietnam with no solution at sight. China is poised to be the next economic super power which gives other countries more options for trade and commerce, which means less influence for America..So where it went wrong for Bush and his advisers? What is the answer to this situation?
When the november elections came out against Bush, no one was surprised. It has been long coming. His foreign policy has failed, his economic policies has failed, his domestic health policies has failed and even supporters within his own party became disillusioned with him. American soldiers were dying not for America, but for Bush's personal revenge. America was in a terrible mess. Appalling growth rates, stagnant incomes, real estate bust and climbing inflation was taking its toll.
America has to be cleaned and changed. Easier said than done. Bush has lot to think about if his party has any chance of winning the all important Presidency elections in 2008. He has his work cut out for him. He has to get America out of the mess he has created in Iraq, improve the country's economy and popularity, spread democracy through peaceful means and at the same time counter China, North Korea, Iran and especially, the nuclear deal with India. Because, the last thing he wants is the world's larget democracy giving him a snub.
Many disturbing words are written about Ahmadinejad, Iran’s leader. That he believes the next Imam is coming. That a child who was thrown down a well will rise again. That he denies the holocaust. That he supports the cause of the working class in Iran. That he wants his country to have nuclear power. But let's not be hasty about his beliefs. America has a leader who believes that a man who was nailed to a tree two thousand years ago will save him from Hell. The UK has a leader who believes the American leader. And lets not beat around the bush.
Iran NEEDS nuclear weapons. It does not need nuclear power. It has enough oil for itself and its young 70million odd population. It needs nuclear weapons because it needs to defend itself. It needs the threat that North Korea has - to be "un-attack-able". The first rule of American military politics now is that the state you attack has to be undefendable. Iraq had nothing, nothing! And American and UK planners knew this. This is why they did not say that al-Qaeda was in North Korea. North Korea has nuclear weapons. This is why they did not say that al-Qaeda was in Pakistan. Pakistan has nuclear weapons (and they are compliant). They said that al-Qaeda was in Iraq. Al-Qaeda, in all its shapes and forms, has not really been into a champagne-guzzling regime like Saddam Hussein's. Iraq was defenceless. It had nothing. And the Amerikans knew it.
Iran knows too well that its democratically elected government can be overthrown by the CIA, American and Western interests. Indeed witness the Shah. Iran's defence policy, for any rational person who understands Amerikan Real Politik, and who understands what causes that great monster to move, and who knows the history of Iran will know that Ahmadinejad NEEDS nuclear weapons to deter an American attack. The Americans are already at his border. They have already occupied his neighbour. Its client state Israel has nuclear weapons, and (despite their failure with Hizbollah) a highly effective army. Virtually everyone in the state has military training. Iran only has the most precious commodity on earth, oil. You can't set fire to all that oil on the soil of Amerika. You need a bloody big bomb to deter the narrow fascist state that is America. What would your policy be if you had armies on your borders who have little problem in invading a country on any pretext? You would want that invasion to be unwinnable. The same politics that informed America and USSR mutually assured destruction in the cold war applies here.
Ahmadinejad, for all his failings, knows this. He may be a nutcase. If we read and believed all the Western reporting then we would assume so. We would also assume the same about George Bush Jr. But the aspiration to nuclear weaponry (let's not pretend its for energy), is a sensible policy in a world where America can support its clients with lethal weaponry for no regard to life nor limb, nor age nor infirmity, nor right nor wrong (wrong place wrong time = "soft target"). It can only respect annihilation as the appropriate deterrent. Hence, Iran needs a big gun.
Ahmadinejad stands for his own country and people. And says it loud. And he understands that even if Iran had done nothing, and was the purest of the pure states, they would still be liable to invasion if they upset American corporate interests
Since the dawn of the 21st century very few nations have been recognized or emerged to have the largest economic stability in the world. Leading nations like the United States entered the 21st century with an economy that was bigger, and by all means more successful, than ever. Despite enduring two world wars and an everlasting depression in the first half of the 20th century, it faced challenges which ranged from a 40-year Cold War with the Soviet Union to the existence of sharp inflation, huge unemployment, and enormous government budget deficits in the second half of the century. Finally this great nation had the opportunity to relish a period of economic calm in the 1990s. Prices on goods were steady, unemployment dropped significantly, the government posted a budget surplus, and the stock market experienced an unprecedented boom.
The United States however has been undergoing philosophical economic change right at the start of the 21st century. They witnessed a wave of technological innovations in telecommunications, computing, and other biological sciences, which profoundly affected Americans work and play. At the same time, the growing economic strength of Western Europe and the emergence of powerful economies in Asia and the increased global integration of business and finance posed new opportunities as well as risks. All of these rapid changes resulted or lead to the Americans in re-examining everything from how they manage their workplaces to the role of government. Perhaps this is the reason why many workers, while contented with their current status, looked to the future with uncertainty
[ Click here to read more ]
When the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 1718 on October 14, it agreed to impose economic sanctions against North Korea for testing a nuclear device earlier in the month. The resolution condemned the atomic test, demanded that the DPRK conduct no further tests or ballistic missile launches, and called upon all United Nations member states to stop the trade of various weapons systems, luxury goods, and certain technologies with North Korea.
[ Click here to read more ]
|
|
Recent Comments
I've not commented on anything yet :(
|
Comments (2)
Add Comments
Read More