The Bushnami of freedom
"Bush does not get credit for Iraq's fleeting glimpse of democracy for the exact same reason you don't give the tsunami credit for cleansing the streets of Indonesia."
Of course the Bushnami will not strike where it is really needed: Saudi Arabia, the font of Islamist terrorism, a well of discontent in the Middle East and a profoundly undemocratic nation; Pakistan, ruled by a military dictator, a wellspring of Islamism (a nation where Islamists have some positions of power even) and horribly corrupt; Russia, a kleptocracy that has made a joke of the democratic ideal; America, ditto.
He might leave Iran to the Israelis. If he does, I wouldn't want to be a Syrian.
Actually, Syria would be a lot easier than Iran. It's another largely desert country with a weak army. It certainly does not have WMDs, although Rumsfeld, I think it was, planted the seed of a claim that Saddam sent his imaginary ones there. It is not linked with Al Qaeda, for much the same reasons Iraq wasn't, but it wouldn't be hard to fake a link. After all, the American people bought al-Ansar as Saddam-supported, even though it operated in the Kurdish areas that Saddam could not enter because we were protecting them. There's no huge complication with Syria's minorities: they're quite small minorities and the Moslems are mostly Sunni (although interestingly Assad is not -- he's an Alawi). Syrians are mostly Arabs, and Arabs attacked the WTC and comprise much of Al Qaeda, so that link is still there. All they need do is line up a tame Syrian for the interim preznit, start telling some big lies about Syria and we're away.
And no one can say it's about the oil because Syria didn't get too lucky when Allah handed it out.
However, a big drawback might be that Assad is not hugely unpopular. He is relatively progressive and although he has suppressed opposition, he is nothing like as brutal as Saddam. The people of Syria won't necessarily be enthusiastic about being "liberated".
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home