Finally a little mainstream truth, essay in today's Chicago Trib

[never cry wolf]

A long essay in todays Chicago Tribune regarding unlateralism. I wish the author would have pinned a little more blame on the mis-administration and mentioned the PNAC but I'll take what I can get.

snip-------------

With American casualties in Iraq mounting and weapons of mass destruction remaining elusive, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told Congress recently that he is suspicious of United Nations offers of help because they might entail some constraints on U.S. actions.

About the same time, South Korean students marking the 50th anniversary of the Korean War armistice called America more dangerous than North Korea; production of opium destined for the U.S. heroin market was reported to be soaring in Afghanistan; looting and slaughter continued under Liberia's thuggish dictator as Washington declined a UN request for humanitarian intervention; and African cotton farmers faced growing penury as President Bush failed to reduce subsidies to U.S. growers as they flooded world markets with excess production.

snip--------------

The lack of interest in NATO and UN help is the natural result of the adoption by the United States of the radical new doctrine of preventive and pre-emptive war developed by Wolfowitz and a small group of self-styled neo-conservatives after the collapse of the Soviet Union in late 1991.

Although the United States won the Cold War with a strategy of deterrence and by building alliances and multilateral institutions such as NATO, the UN and the World Trade Organization, the new thinking argued for military superiority such that no other power would even consider a challenge and a unilateral approach based on the view that while friends are nice to have they are really not necessary for the United States to achieve its objectives.

more.............

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/perspective/chi-0308170260aug17,1,4870339.story?coll=chi-newsopinionperspective-hed

[wtmusic]

1. Constraints on US actions like...

Legality?

Moral Responsiblity?

Justice?

[gratuitous]

2. Watch your language there!

Those concepts are strictly verbot--I mean, forbidden under the benevolent regime of our Dear Leader, son of Glorious Leader! Please report to the nearest Freedom Sanctuary for re-education.

[aquart]

3. Odd that these corporatist fascists are such crappy

BUSINESSMEN.

Business requires alliances. Agreements. Ironclad contracts. Business has to know that a treaty signed means it will be honored and enforced. It will take fifty to 100 years to restore the reputation for instability George has bequeathed to us.

The American word is now worthless. Nothing signed by one president is binding on another. Law means nothing. Might makes right.

That means business can't depend on anything we say or do. Everything depends on strength and strength demonstrated by military action disrupts business and long range business planning.

The economy will not begin to recover in even the most faltering way until George is gone, his policies repudiated with jail sentences, and the economy-gutting tax cuts repealed.

Doesn't look good.

[never cry wolf]

4. A gratuitous self kick here

It is a good article though nothing new to the people on this site. What I do find important about it is that it was on over a million doorsteps this morning in the 7th largest paper in the nation. Hopefully tens or hundreds of thousands of sheeple finally got a glimpse of the truth.