The word "appeasement" has been on the lips of many in the Bush administration of late--including those of The Man himself. Barely ten minutes will pass on a Fox News broadcast before a Team Bush member tosses the obligatory A-word at a member of the rival party or anyone else not displaying sufficient enthusiasm for "staying the course" in Iraq and our interminable War On A Tactic. The companion piece to the favored word is of course, "Islamo-fascism". What better way to stampede a terrified public into supporting (yet another) war of aggression against a fabricated threat, than to conjure up the specter of goose-stepping mullahs marching triumphantly down New York's Park Avenue?
Missing from all this talk of "appeasement" and "fascism" is any serious inquiry from the Free Press about the Bush administration's curiously timid response to the rapidly deteriorating situation in the Darfur region of Western Sudan. Writer David Morse contributed two essays to TomDispatch.com that addressed this very subject. In the first he outlines the confluence of Big Oil, ethnic cleansing, stupendous profits, and Bush in the ongoing atrocities. His latest piece, however, provides an illuminating look into the world of realpolitik--where moral questions do not arise when "vital interests" are at stake.
While reading these essays by Morse I ask that you keep the following words in mind: hypocrisy, mendacity, hubris, and moral depravity. When applied to US foreign policy, they come dangerously close to the mark.
Reading the “traitors” – a good or a bad idea? - [this article was written for the Unz Review] There are two names which often trigger a very strong and hostile reaction from many Russians: Alexander Sol...
1 hour ago