UN OR US
Chirac presented us with a good example of conniving comment the other day when he alluded to the nature of his and Bush's viewpoints as being either “black” or “white”.
I don't have his exact phrasing at hand at the moment, but the gist of his statement was designed to keep him from seeming to be a chronic fault-finder. He does not want to be seen as being hard headed or obstinate. This, in turn, suggests changes are possible in his view which can be seen as a weakness based on being, essentially, unsure of his original stance.
The situation in the Greater East is not a simplistic thing which can be said to be as clear as the rather limited differences between “black” and “white”. It has long been realized by men and women of only moderate intelligence, to be much more “colorful” with the prevalent hue being red - blood red!
The black-white reference which, sadly, may be mis-read by more people than one might surmise, too. It is very nice of Mr. Chirac to say he is not being petty about who is going to run the governmental in Iraq. He wants it turned over promptly to as yet to be designated Iraqi officials under the guidance and control of United Nations.
This is very much like asking sight-impaired persons to guide others who are in the same stage of unawareness through an undetermined labyrinth of vague uncertainties. The UN has, long ago, become so complex as to able to see only in sepia tones.
President Bush has had a far more intimate view of the situation than others and his opinions should not be summarily discarded in favor of those concocted by some far off observer ... especially by one who has blithely looked the other way when danger was first noticed in the area. He should, if honesty were the basis of his actions, be eager to associate himself with the one man best suited to teach him the rudiments of leadership in such a complicated era.
We had best leave race, color, religion and a few other important facets of it all lie as sleeping dogs, until such time as we have re-established competent rule of the Iraq area. Then, it will be the duty of the new Iraqi nation to deal with those element they deem to be most urgent.
Chirac, and his followers both here and in France, Germany and other such areas would seemingly foresee Iraq as a UN occupied state more or less forever.
Is that what Iraq needs? Is that what the Iraqi people want?
A.L.M. September 22, 2003 [c445wds]
