| Are your ready for WW IV? |
|
Neoconservatives are
preparing the groundwork for far-reaching and interminable U.S. involvement in
the Middle East. Neoconservative leader Norman Podhoretz makes the case in the
current issue of Commentary, the influential magazine of the American Jewish
Committee, that it is not enough for the United States to attack only
Afghanistan and Iraq. Podhoretz argues that "changes of regime are the sine qua
non throughout the region."
The challenge that President
Bush faces, says Podhoretz, is "to fight World War IV -- the
war against militant Islam." He identifies the enemies: "The
regimes that richly deserve to be overthrown and replaced are
not confined to the three singled-out members of the axis of
evil" (Iraq, Iran, North Korea). At a minimum, the axis should
extend to Syria and Lebanon and Libya, as well as 'friends' of
America like the Saudi royal family and Egypt's Hosni Mubarak,
along with the Palestinian Authority." Unlike the Bush
administration, Podhoretz realizes that to overthrow the
Taliban and Saddam Hussein is merely to stir a hornets' nest,
while leaving in place multitudes of anti-Israeli and
anti-American militants. Bush must own up to the true task,
says Podhoretz, and find "the stomach to impose a new
political culture on the defeated" Middle East, just as we did
unapologetically to Germany and Japan. There is logic to
Podhoretz's argument. But do Bush and the American people
understand that the imposition of secular democracy on
Afghanistan and Iraq are merely beginning steps in the
forceful political reconstruction of the entire Middle East by
U.S. might? Americans are indebted to
Podhoretz for making it clear that a U.S. invasion of Iraq is
the beginning of World War IV. President Bush and his
strategic thinkers should ponder this carefully and be upfront
with the American people. Getting rid of Saddam Hussein will
not solve the Israeli-American conflict with militant Islam.
On the contrary, it will widen the conflict. How many sons, husbands,
fathers, brothers, grandsons, uncles, cousins and friends are
Americans willing to give to a war, the object of which is the
social and political reconstruction of the Middle East?
Are the American people
prepared to bear the tax and economic burden of such a
prodigious undertaking? Indeed, with significant portions of
its manufacturing and high-tech capability now located
offshore, can the U.S. economy bear the burden? Would such a struggle leave
us exhausted, unable to confront the rising power of an
ambitious China? A more critical question is
whether open borders have turned "the American people" into an
abstraction. The Washington Post has always favored massive
immigration because it builds Democratic voting rolls. But on
Sept. 15, the newspaper called the United States a "Tower of
Babel" whose sense of community has been shattered by the rise
of ethnic media. The Post reports that the
penetration of what we are accustomed to call the major media
is down to 43 percent of the U.S. population and dropping.
Increasingly, "people in key metropolitan areas now get their
news from ethnic newspaper and broadcast outlets." California has 500 ethnic
newspapers, magazines, TV and radio stations, and online
publications. The Post reports that there are "15
Thai-language newspapers in Los Angeles, several 24-hour radio
stations for Pashto and Dari Speakers." Orange County has 30
Vietnamese publications, and California has 7 major ethnic
dailies and flourishing Spanish-language TV networks.
The Post asks: "If you can't
understand what your fellow subway rider is reading, if you
can't follow the opinions he or she listens to each night, how
can you hope to hold a discussion about national politics?
Aren't our opinions and national discourse likely to become
ever more Balkanized?" Bush should ponder this
question before he undertakes to reconstruct the Middle East.
He must face the fact that his own country has been
reconstructed by massive immigration from the Third World. Are
these legions of hyphenated-Americans in sympathy with the
neoconservative goals that control U.S. foreign policy?
Before the United Staets
finds itself embroiled in a Middle East conflict for which it
lacks both economic means and popular support, I propose a
different solution: Terminate the Middle Eastern conflict by
inviting the 5 million Jews in Israel to settle in the United
States. The entire population of
Israel amounts to no more than two years of illegal Mexican
immigration. The Jews can function here, if they wish, as an
autonomous ethnic enclave just like all the other enclaves
created by our short-sighted immigration policy. Despite extreme measures,
Israel is unable to defend itself from Palestinian terrorists.
The United States will not be able to defend Israel or itself
from one billion Muslims. Trying to create a small
Jewish state in a sea of Muslims was a 20th century mistake.
Trying to reconstruct the Middle East would be a bigger
mistake. Why not recognize the mistake, evacuate the Jews,
leave the Muslims to themselves and focus on saving our own
country?
|
| By Paul Craig Roberts - Courtesy: Townhall.com |