-Caveat Lector-

From
http://www.antiwar.com/rep/utley3.html

}}>Begin
American
          Interventionism & the Terrorist Threat
by Jon
          Basil Utley
Updated 9/12/01
Editors
                Note:
Antiwar.com first published this guest column by Mr. Utley on
                August 16, 2001. On Tuesday morning, September 11, unknown
persons
                attacked various targets in Manhattan and Washington, DC, in
what
                many are already calling the most deadly terrorist (that is, non-
state)
                attack in world history. We are republishing this piece in the
                hope that it will influence the national debate about terrorism
                that is certain to occur.
At an American
                Bar Association's meeting on preparing for the terrorist threat,
General Bruce Lawler, head of the Joint Task Force to coordinate
                military support for state governments, said that the threat was
                from "foreigners who envy us." I asked him in the question
                period if our having killed or ruined their families might not
                give some more reason to hate Americans and make them much
more
                dangerous than others who were just envious. He quickly backed
                down and said he was only repeating a statement of the
Chairman
                of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Similarly, Washington's prestigious
                Center for Strategic and International Studies' major report,
                "Defending America in the 21st Century," described the threat as
coming
                from those "who resent preeminent U.S power and/or disdain
                the West."
There's a reason for this silence about why many foreigners
                might want to do us harm. The bipartisan Washington
establishment
                – newspapers, reporters, think tankers, soldiers, security
                forces, intelligence agencies, Congressmen and the military-
industrial
                complex – thrives on war or preparations for war. They don't
                want Americans to learn and fear that there may be fatal costs
                to us for our actions abroad. Just as trade and business are the
                occupation of most of the nation, in Washington, "war is
                the health of the state," to quote old libertarian, Randolph
                Bourne. Every war, be it a World War or a War on Drugs or
                on Poverty, spreads money and power in Washington.
The other reason for silence is that American foreign policy
                is based almost entirely upon domestic political concerns, with
                little thought or concern for long run consequences. NATO expansion
                was promised by Clinton during the last election just to gain
                Midwestern votes from Americans of Central European ancestry.
                When Madeleine Albright ordered the bombing of Serbia, neither
                she nor Clinton thought about how Russia would react. In fact
                knowledgeable Russian experts believe that NATO expansion and
                the bombing of Serbia were the turning point, after which Russia
                started arming China with its latest weaponry, helping Iran and
                Iraq, and moving back to nationalist policies. Russia's military
                budget has now nearly doubled (to $8 billion) from what it was
                before the attack. Similarly, with intervention in Colombia, there
                is no thought of the new, possibly deadly, combination of Arab 
terrorists willing to do suicide missions, and Colombian drug
                smugglers who know how to bribe or blackmail their way into smuggling
                any weapons of mass destruction (WMD) into the U.S. The drug war
                in Colombia is, again, being fought to satisfy another domestic
  constituency, with no thought about possible wider
                consequences.
Equally, in fighting wars, Washington gives little thought
                to overall strategy. For example, when former Secretary of Defense
                Cheney was asked during the Gulf War, 11 years ago, about Washington's
                plans for Iraq after the war, he replied (honest man that he is):
                "Well, I don't know, we haven't thought much about that."
                So now we spend tens of billions of dollars maintaining a massive
                military presence in the area and are making new enemies by the
                millions.
In short, one almost never hears in Washington from either
                Party that foreigners might have legitimate grievances against
                us. Half a million dead children
                in Iraq, Palestinian teenagers raging against American-supplied
                tanks, Serbs without electricity and running water or diseased
                or ruined and jobless from our bombing, assorted Moslems who blame
                America for their dictatorships and misery, Colombians with relatives
                killed by those aided by America. The list of potential enemies
                grows and grows. Even Basque terrorists now look at America as
                their enemy after President Bush, during his recent visit, casually
                promised to aid Spain's government with electronic surveillance.
                They all now have reason to do us harm, they all want America
                out of their countries, "out of their faces," in street
                language. It’s not rocket science.
Right now, we have training missions in 60 to 70 nations, usually
                teaching counterinsurgency. Even Albanian guerrillas have now
                been trained by U.S. Special Forces. The military likes training
                missions because they build relationships with foreign junior
                officers all over the world. The Pentagon seems to have a clear
                field to determine which nations it wants to work with. But many
                nations also have those who are resisting local governments' tyranny,
                who then see American forces as their enemies. American ambassadors,
                I was told in Peru last March, don't have authority over assorted
                semiautonomous agencies – mainly military, FBI and drug war personnel 
– and often don't even know what those agencies
                are doing in the nations where they are stationed.
But you'll rarely read this in the Washington press. Nor much
                about the human misery in Iraq, caused by Washington's blockade
                of supplies needed to rebuild electric, sanitation and agricultural
                irrigation stations bombed by America. Chlorine, needed to disinfect
                Iraq's water supply, and even pencils for school children are
                banned. Nor was there much reporting, after our bombing of the
                Danube River bridges, about the devastation
                of South Eastern Europe and Black Sea nations' barge trade,
                their major means of shipments to Western Europe. Most Americans
                would not have approved of these actions – had they known
                about them. As a New Republic writer put it, "The American
                Monster is more like an elephant – bumbling rather than bloodthirsty, 
oblivious rather than fierce."
CIVIL DEFENSE
This missing element,
                not wanting Americans to think that there may be consequences
                to our killing foreigners, seriously affects civil defense. CATO 
published a long and excellent report, (No. 387, 11/27/00) "Are
                We Prepared for Terrorism using Weapons of Mass Destruction?" It warns 
that:
"Average citizens are left ignorant of the fundamentals
                of preparedness.... The lack of any credible public education
                program in matters of awareness and response violate many entrenched
                principles of emergency management to minimize the phenomenon
                of 'crying wolf,' citizens must receive some realistic instruction
                on recognizing the difference between real 'suspected threats'
                and everyday oddball occurrences. It means that any attack may
                be misunderstood by the public, resulting in panic or far more
                death and destruction than if it was managed properly. At a minimum
                a simple protective mask and filter will block radioactive dust
                and fatal particles in aerosol. Closed windows and simple plastic 
raincoats and rubber rain boots will protect the skin against
                most chemicals. Household agents such as bleach, lye (in the form
                of drain cleaners), industrial strength detergents and even HTH
                (a swimming pool bleach that is a version of an old military agent)
                are readily available and useful in educated hands."
Still, the government is now spending $10 billion yearly on civil defense,
                most of it going to protect government personnel and installations.
                But very little, only some 2%, is going for civilian medical 
preparations.
                There is almost no surge capacity in hospitals nowadays which
                call for supplies and personnel on a just-in-time basis, according
                to Tara O'Toole, deputy director of Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian 
Bio-defense Studies. She added, speaking at the American Bar Association
                meeting, that hospital administrators have no training or preparation
                for triage decisions, that is treating those who can most likely
                be saved. Such would be contrary to law and open the hospitals
                to devastating lawsuits, even years later. For details on legal
                and medical preparedness, please see our handout, "Preparing
                for the Terrorist Threat,"published in Insight Magazine last January 
15th.
POSSIBLE TARGETS
Little is written about potential
                targets in America, but it's interesting to speculate. Hopefully,
                foreign terrorists would understand that mass killing of Americans
                would be very counterproductive and that we would retaliate massively.
                Rather, they could have much more effect for their causes by just
                making life inconvenient for us. For example, during the bombing
                of Serbia I used to joke that all they needed for defense would
                be to have some old Yugo jalopies breaking down or crashing on
                Washington's very congested Beltway during rush hour for a few
                days. Just that would paralyze Washington and cause public demands
                to ground our bombers. My joke often met with angry reactions
                from War Party advocates, as if I was giving away military secrets.
In a serious vein, I think that military bases and government
                organizations are the most likely targets. In spite of Washington's
                accusations about "cowardly terrorists," Bin Laden's targets have
                mainly been against the U.S. Military (and two Embassies). The
                Pentagon and CIA are surely the most juicy targets for any terrorist,
                but American bases overseas are easier – and more likely
                – targets now. An attack upon one would have the added possible
                consequence of foreigners demanding the removal of all American
                bases. The fear of this result seems already to be in Bush 
Administration
                thinking about building more long-range bombers instead of the
                short range F-22, which would depend upon foreign bases. Individual
                Americans overseas are also vulnerable. Already the Navy has cut
                back on shore leave over much of the world because of fear of
          terrorist attack upon our sailors. They now have steel beach parties, 
confined to their ships. (This news was not reported
                in the interventionist press; it obviously might reinforce opposition
                to American interventions in so many nations.)
However, as Jude Wanniski has written, no one controls mad fanatics. Very possibly any 
major
                American city could be targeted by those consumed with hate against
                us. A dirty bomb could contaminate much of a major city. A small
                tactical nuke (of which many are reportedly missing from Russian
                bases) would take out 4 or 5 city blocks; new breakthroughs in
                biology may develop truly horrendous agents of selective death. Or 
just plain suicide truck bombers with dynamite in a tunnel
                could wreak havoc upon us. In truth, we are immensely vulnerable
                to terrorists who would give up their lives for a mission. Still,
                we also have great advantages. Only the most hardened and embittered
                remain so after some time in our nation, where most Americans
                have no idea of the killing overseas being done in their name.
                In the 1970s and '80s when Washington allowed many Marxist and
                leftist refugees from Chile and then Central America to immigrate
                here, they didn't commit acts of terrorism. America is so 
all-encompassing
                and welcoming and has so much opportunity that they lost their Marxist 
fervor. They got jobs, settled down and built their communities.

In any case, the best defense is "to give foreigners less
                offense," in the words of Ivan Eland at CATO. Already under President 
Bush we seem much less
                ready to go about bombing other nations as Clinton did. Except
                for Palestine and Iraq, no blood is being shed by American bombs.
                American conservatives did all they could to undermine the 
Israeli-Palestinian
                peace talks when Clinton was supporting them. Hopefully, they (other 
than the Dispensationalists who almost want chaos over there) will now support peace 
negotiations,
                for we are hated much in the Arab world. Still, Bush is vulnerable
                to Washington's sophisticated and entrenched War Party, which
                wants empire and is now pushing for conflict with China, or any
                other nation that dares to challenge our might.
WHAT YOU CAN DO
Be
                  informed – check regularly the anti-intervention websites:
                  AntiWar.com, AgainstBombing.com, and CATO.org.
Print out pertinent articles and distribute copies to your
                  friends.
Go
                  to meetings. At most major Washington think tanks, hardly anyone 
challenges the prevailing War Party views.
Talk radio – call in and explain. Our points are simple
                  and true, they are easy to get across and people respond once
                  they are heard.
Write and call editors of the interventionist media, asking
                  them to publish such information as in this article.
Go
                  to your Congressman's town hall meetings and ask him the 
embarrassing questions about our interventions overseas and ask for civil
                  defense.
Start a movement asking that our military send guards to
                  protect key bridges and reservoirs and electric stations. The
                  real threats are here, not overseas.
Prepare yourself and for your family. Obtain a stock of antibiotics
                  (tetracycline easily cures Anthrax if used early on), gas masks
                  and other items, as above.
Thank you for coming and for your interest. Spreading the kind
                of information I've described above can only help us to prevent
                the catastrophic event which many pundits consider inevitable.
                Terrorism here is not inevitable, but we have work to do in making
                people aware of the reasons for the threat.
This article is a slightly-edited version of a speech by
                Mr. Utley to the Convention of the Libertarian Party of Washington,
                D.C., Summer, 2001.
Mr. Utley is Robert A. Taft Fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Formerly,
                he was a businessman and then foreign correspondent in South America
                for Knight Ridder newspapers. He has written on Latin American
                nationalism for the Harvard Business Review and on terrorism
                for Insight Magazine. He has been a commentator for the
                Voice of America and has written widely on 3rd World issues.
Back

    to Antiwar.com Home Page | Contact

    Us

End<{{{
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe
simply because it has been handed down for many generations. Do not
believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do
not believe in anything simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures. Do not
believe in anything merely on the authority of Teachers, elders or wise men.
Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when you find that it
agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it."
The Buddha on Belief, from the Kalama Sutta
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
A merely fallen enemy may rise again, but the reconciled
one is truly vanquished. -Johann Christoph Schiller,
                                     German Writer (1759-1805)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that
prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless
of frontiers."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut."
--- Ernest Hemingway

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to