Apropos Rummy’s departure, a pundit had this to say (among other things):
Indeed, Rumsfeld’s dominance of the cabinet and the Bush administration may have guaranteed that America chose the entirely wrong paradigm for the past five years. Notwithstanding the spectacular violence of the Sept. 11 attacks, America might have done better had it not chosen a war paradigm to fight terrorism and instead chosen to employ a comprehensive array of diplomatic, intelligence, military, and law enforcement approaches. Doing so might have encouraged more of our allies to stand by our side. It might also have put America on a better footing to sustain its efforts for what promises to be a generational struggle against terrorism.
Gee, ya think?
It would be great if we (meaning people in a position to influence policy—in other words, they) could train this sort of clear-headed thinking on the present—i.e., flip hindsight into foresight.
But after 9/11, would the braying punditocracy and the M/I/M* complex have permitted anything other than out-and-out war? Is it inevitable that an attack, or a perceived threat of attack, or a bad night’s sleep of attack—or the succubus of world domination—will unleash the dogs of war? It need not be. But how can a “drumbeat of peace” be kept up, so that it takes a huge effort to convince us that war makes sense?
US Rep. Dennis Kucinich and others have pushed for a Department of Peace. It apparently strikes most people as a soft-headed. It is actually the opposite. But it requires memory. And the sad fact is, remembering is hard work. And it requires humility. You’d think that would be easy for a predominantly self-professed Christian nation.
__________
*Military/industrial/media.
