Skip to main content

Two "loser" leaders compared

In an interesting op-piece in Haaretz Yossi Sarid compares 2 failed leaders, Bush and Olmert, thus:

"Lady Luck has come to Bush and Olmert's aid. The mess in New Orleans has almost overshadowed the Iraq fiasco, because Bush now has an urgent national mission: to put Louisiana and Alabama back on their feet again. And don't bother him about the 800 or so who are shot or slaughtered or beheaded in Iraq every month - and a few more in Afghanistan.

And what would Olmert have done without his own hurricane? Now, thank goodness, he too has a national mission of the highest priority. Without the war, the government would have remained devoid of vision, and without vision the nation would have settled accounts with it. So don't bother Olmert about the 1.5 million poor, or the malignant corruption, or the occupation whose final countdown to a unilateral withdrawal has been stopped.

Bush will continue and Olmert will continue, because in practical terms there is no way to get rid of lame ducks, and the road of the lame is sometimes a long cul-de-sac. American protests and Israeli protests have so far been unable to gain momentum, and are still at the stage of a low-category tropical storm. The protesters and demonstrators have not managed to close ranks, to formulate a clear message, to identify an alternative, to erase unfounded suspicions of each other. All this is true, but it is not the most important thing.

In an article in the New York Times last week, Andrew Rosenthal attempted to solve the enigma: Where have all the Vietnam War protesters of the 1960s and 1970s gone? After all, the great majority of Americans are fed up with Bush, so why is their voice not being heard? Rosenthal finds the explanation in the repeal of compulsory military service. At a personal level, the war in Iraq hardly touches the middle class. It is not their sons risking their lives far from home, only the sons of the lower classes.

Compulsory service is still in force in Israel, so Rosenthal's thesis does not quite solve our own enigma. Still, I will propose a similar explanation. Perhaps this war was too limited, limited in time and scope. Perhaps the number of fatalities on both the battlefield and the home front was not high enough to fuel a protest movement. Perhaps only the next war, which is likely to be longer and more lethal, will fill the country with protest - and what a protest it will be."

Read the full piece here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reading the Chilcot Inquiry Report more closely

Most commentary on the Chilcot Inquiry Report of and associated with the Iraq War, has been "lifted" from the Executive Summary.   The Intercept has actually gone and dug into the Report, with these revelations : "THE CHILCOT REPORT, the U.K.’s official inquiry into its participation in the Iraq War, has finally been released after seven years of investigation. Its executive summary certainly makes former Prime Minister Tony Blair, who led the British push for war, look terrible. According to the report, Blair made statements about Iraq’s nonexistent chemical, biological, and nuclear programs based on “what Mr. Blair believed” rather than the intelligence he had been given. The U.K. went to war despite the fact that “diplomatic options had not been exhausted.” Blair was warned by British intelligence that terrorism would “increase in the event of war, reflecting intensified anti-US/anti-Western sentiment in the Muslim world, including among Muslim communities in the

An unpalatable truth!

Quinoa has for the last years been the "new" food on the block for foodies. Known for its health properties, foodies the world over have taken to it. Many restaurants have added it to their menu. But, as this piece " Can vegans stomach the unpalatable truth about quinoa? " from The Guardian so clearly details, the cost to Bolivians and Peruvians - from where quinoa hails - has been substantial. "Not long ago, quinoa was just an obscure Peruvian grain you could only buy in wholefood shops. We struggled to pronounce it (it's keen-wa, not qui-no-a), yet it was feted by food lovers as a novel addition to the familiar ranks of couscous and rice. Dieticians clucked over quinoa approvingly because it ticked the low-fat box and fitted in with government healthy eating advice to "base your meals on starchy foods". Adventurous eaters liked its slightly bitter taste and the little white curls that formed around the grains. Vegans embraced quinoa as

Climate change: Well-organised hoax?

There are still some - all too sadly people with a voice who are listened to - who assert that climate change is a hoax. Try telling that to the people of Colorado who recently experienced horrendous bushfires, or the people of Croatia suffering with endless days of temps of 40 degrees (and not much less than 30 at night time) some 8-10 degrees above the norm. Bill McKibben, take up the issue of whether climate change is a hoax, on The Daily Beast : Please don’t sweat the 2,132 new high temperature marks in June—remember, climate change is a hoax. The first to figure this out was Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe, who in fact called it “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people,” apparently topping even the staged moon landing. But others have been catching on. Speaker of the House John Boehner pointed out that the idea that carbon dioxide is “harmful to the environment is almost comical.” The always cautious Mitt Romney scoffed at any damage too: “Scientists will fig