272

IRAQ 11

(Author's note: There is a tendency to forget that Bill Clinton pursued the glory of
kicking the crap out of Saddam Hussein with almost the same zeal as the Bush Gang
has. Not having had the "good fortune" of a September 11th rallying cry, his task was
made more difficult. This essay was written during that time.)

One of the most positive aspects of making a movie like "The Titanic" is that a
great ocean liner can only sink once. This spares us a predictable string of sequels trail-
ing behind the mother hen like an obedient flock of chicks. Unfortunately, the same
cannot be said for the Gulf War, which seems to have been given an open ended con-
clusion in anticipation of an eagerly awaited sequel.

But Iraq 11 turned into a box office bust. There seems to be much less of a market
for military mayhem than the Clinton cowboys had expected.

I write this essay just two days after one of our now traditional "crises" with Saddam
-the-fart-face-villain was averted. Translation: the United States, finally realizing that
Iraq 11 was not a very rentable product, dispatched the elegant African who now speaks
for the U. N. to the Middle East in search of a "diplomatic solution". For those of us with
the "chutzpah" to know that the cowboys were folding their cards, the consummation of
such an accord came as no surprise. The cowboys had invested in the wrong script and
were minimizing their losses. As time goes on, they will surely look for a better script
with which to amuse themselves.

It is almost an impossible task for people such as this writer, or you the reader, to
analyze the events leading up to Iraq 11. Only the political-financial elites of the most in-
ner circles of power could possibly know the real reasons for the clandestine subterfuges
that truly govern the Global Economy. Such concepts as "democracy" or the "free press"
are just meaningless illusions meant to stroke some self-congratulatory idea of civility
when juxtaposed against this shadowy realm of genuine power. The "free press" is no
more than a prop used in staging this game.

1, for one, am convinced that the Clinton-Albright animal was in heat and wanted to
"get it on". Iraq I had been so much fun; we got to try out our new toys, we kicked
some ass, we waved some flags, we lit up some poll numbers ... a good time was had
by all. Why couldn't they pull off Iraq 11?

It's very easy to over analyze the reasons for Iraq lI's short run on Broadway. In the
end, perhaps it can be explained with things more primal, more carnal, more knee-jerk
reflexive. Before delving into such things, allow me a cosmetic run at the political
pundit game.

In assessing the potential market for Iraq 11, its producers failed to see the almost
complete lack of enthusiasm of the international community. Except for Great Britain,
there was virtually nobody else at the dance on Saturday night. Why were the Brits on
board?

There is one word that is suspiciously absent from Iraq lI's pre-opening hype:
"oil". It should always be remembered that if there were no oil in this region, Saddam
Hussein could be Hitler, Stalin and Mike Tyson all rolled into one, and no one would
give a damn. Kuwait, which was a prime player in Iraq 1, is really just a euphemism for
British Petroleum (BP). This could have something to do with something.

But all the other prima ballerinas have other interests. France, Russia and China
have their own business dealings in the region, some with Iraq and some with Iran, who
hates the Americans as much as the fart-face-villain does. To have the cowboys go in
and destroy much of the china in the gift shop cannot be an attractive scenario for them.

Not to be forgotten here is the Moslem-Christian face off, which has been one of
history's traditional jousts going back to the discovery of females in heat. The Moslem
world is a vast one, stretching from the western shores of North Africa all the way to the
Indo-Malay archipelagos. One of the great myths perpetrated during the successful run
of Iraq 1, was the formation of some kind of anti-Saddam coalition amongst this con-
stituency. That's a good one. Except for our most closely connected client state "oil
whores", like Kuwait (see essay "Kuwait"), Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the Gulf Emirates,
countries which make up an infinitesimal part of the Moslem world, the revulsion for the
death and destruction could almost be considered unanimous. Given the circumstances
surrounding Iraq 11, not even this limited number of "oil whore" states could stand the
thought of Christian bombs killing Moslem people. This certainly weakened Iraq lI's box
offfice appeal.

In spite of all this negativity, the Anglo colossus still seemed hell bent on having its fun
... if not for one most unexpected development: the reluctant attitude of their own people.

The knockout blow was delivered one evening at a "town hall" meeting staged by
a Clinton-CNN conspiracy. Secretary of State, Madeline Albright, who's generally sour
puss has all the warmth of a hockey fight, and Secretary of Defense, William Cohen,
who's well tailored, preppy glow is about as spontaneous as a waxed floor, were set be-
fore a live audience in something that resembled a pep rally before the big game. For
weeks now, the American people were slowly being prepared for the eventuality of war -
-- excuse me, we never go to "war" anymore --- the eventuality of a military action
(there, that's better). By now we all knew that a thimble full of a certain chemical agent
could wipe out the Super Bowl and silence Hulk Hogan forever, and Saddam had tons
of it. Why he needs so much of such a lethal material is somewhat perplexing, but I
guess you can never have enough good pitching. In addition, if so little of this stuff could
cause such apocalyptic disaster, what good would bombing Saddam have in controlling
it? Better safe than sorry, I guess.

The Clinton cowboys, in holding this "town hall" meeting, completely misread the
mood of the American people. It turned into a partisan shout down between skeptics
and patriots, and although there could have been as much support for kicking butt as
there was for peace, the expected flag waving love-in on the eve of our heroic defense
of cranberry sauce and Nike's latest ghetto-leaper-dunking-shoe, never materialized.
Albright and Cohen slipped away like mangled cats from a losing fight and Iraq 11 was
put back in the can.

Why did the American people balk?

If you are the type of person that believes in such adolescent idiocy as the
"world's only super power", or in America, America, "uber alles", then the failure to use
military force against Iraq is a debatable point. But, as I alluded to near the beginning of
this essay, it seems the American people were operating in a much simpler dimension.
No such geo-political hieroglyphics played a role in the public reluctance. It could be
that the American people are a bit tired of killing defenseless people. The country is do-
ing fine; the kids are at soccer practice, the mortgage is being paid, and the sport vehi-
cle is loaded and ready to go to Wally World. Why are we being asked to kill people?
Nobody else wants to do it.

The American people are asking for a better reason to kill.

Bravo!

Back to: Post-Consumerman Main Page
Back to: keywestgallery. com Main Page