Archive | December 1998 | Destroying liberty, one bomb at a time

Destroying liberty, one bomb at a time

By Michael R. Allen
web posted December 1998

"Oh, my, life has passed me by. The country I was brought up in fell apart and died. Oh, no, love's no longer there. A cold wind blew away the sun that used to warm the air."
-- Chicago, "Lowdown"

The President of the United States, when faced with 221 Congressmen ready to vote for his impeachment, immediately ordered a limited strike on the sovereign nation of Iraq. After having already emulated the model of his predecessor Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton now seeks to follow George Bush by being credited with a courageous military
action.

While the result has yet to be seen, one thinks he is more likely to be the next Lyndon B. Johnson and be credited with creating a useless escapade that wastes American resources. While Clinton has said this is part of a coordinated effort began in November, there is no reason he had to launch a strike this week.

Iraq's President Saddam Hussein has refused to acquiesce to the United Nations Security Council and that is being given as a reason for American involvement overseas. But the situation in the Middle East is not one that requires immediate action. First, since he has not violated any laws outside of his country -- save those of the UN -- all attacks on Iraq are unprovoked acts of war. Secondly, since inspectors have been denied access to weapon storage facilities in Iraq, the knowledge of what Hussein has at his disposal is not complete. Does he have anything Mr. Clinton does not have?

One also notices that many nations with documented weapons of mass destruction who are less than cooperative with the Western world have escaped any attack from the US under Clinton. Are China, Pakistan, North Korea, and the other countries not guilty of at least the same crimes of which Hussein has been accused?

Even if one concedes a need to attack Iraq, the need for immediate action is not apparent. The Pentagon has not promised a definite end to this "police action" after the Moslem holy month is over, so the excuse of wanting to avoid the Ramadan holiday is a hollow reassurance. So why could there not have been at least a hastily-arranged vote on the military action by Congress, as the neglected old Constitution requires? After all, one house of Congress is in Washington this week for the impeachment vote. (The resolution supporting the troops, which passed 417-5, is not what the Constitution demands.)

An inescapable answer is that Mr. Clinton indeed wants to delay the impeachment vote to another time more favorable to him -- when he appears to be a hero, or when a new Congress is seated. For once, Republicans are waking up to the dangers of allowing a President the right to make war. Senator Trent Lott (R-Mississippi), the Senate Majority Leader, denounced the attack but later issued a letter that supported the new "police action" if his preferred methods are employed.

Others were more cynical. "I think the President is shameless in what he will do to stay in office," said Florida Republican Representative Tillie Fowler. Fowler was joined by many conservative activists and fellow Republican members of Congress in viewing this attack on Iraq as a purely political act. So far, the Republican House leadership has played the President's current game; they are delaying the impeachment vote for at least one day.

The President's honor guard did not miss a beat, however, as Senator Robert Torricelli (D-New Jersey) called the Republican outrage "a betrayal of the interests of the US." Senator Torricelli, and Mr. Clinton's praised National Security Advisers have yet to explain what these interests are. Besides the impeachment deflection, no others are being mentioned -- yet other motives may be at work. Everything from a naked Unintended Nations power-grad to pressure tactics involving oil companies, or some combination thereof may be involved.

Whatever "national security interests" may be preserved by this, a true national defense is not being offered. American citizens abroad are at risk of terrorist attack now, and eventually American sons may be stolen through the evil institution of the military draft so they may fight the useless police action and join the ranks of the dead who were sent to Korea, Vietnam, and Bosnia before them by Presidents once despised by the young peacenik Clinton.

This nation has little to praise about its government during this holiday season. But there is a seditious spirit emerging as our Constitution is abused so blatantly by President Clinton. These unfortunate events may bring many Americans to demand a restoration of our rule of law. If this is not a time that sobers the conscience of the people, none is.