Read this AP News Story about recent events in Pakistan only if you've got a strong stomach.
Wars cause you to make deals with the devil. In World War II, we allied ourselves with Stalin, a monster as bad as Hitler, but less threatening at the time. During the 1970s, as the Carter administration went wobbly on the Cold War, we dropped support for a brute Shah in Iran and wound up letting Iran fall to an even more brutal group of maniacs. In Chile, our Cold War goals had us allying with the brute Pinochet, which eventually led to greater freedom there, and which was undoubtedly better than supporting the Communist Allendeists--but some Chileans will never forgive us, and it's hard to blame them.
Today our war requires us to ally with people like the Musharaaf in Pakistan. We shouldn't flinch from doing it if we have to. But we shouldn't have our eyes closed about the kind of people we're dealing with, either. General Musharaaf, the President of Pakistan, is a bad man in charge of a country with some (some) not-very-nice people living there. We'd do well to remind ourselves of that periodically.
Frankly, I'm surprised. I was expecting something a lot worse. Not that gang-raping a teenager isn't a sick, vicious, twisted act to perform, no. What else would you expect from a culture that (to a great degree) glorifies violence and a contempt for women?
Anyway, yes there are some Nasty People out there.
But I don't think that reflects on Musharraf directly, any more than that "hate crime" trial a couple years ago (a couple of crackers dragged a black kid to death behind a truck)reflected on Clinton. Just look: ignorant white southern bigots (aka crackers) murder a black kid. We all know that all Southern males are bigots. We also know that Clinton is from the South. Therefore Clinton is an example of Southern cracker racism, right? And the murder is a reflection of that, right?
No, Musharraf is not a "nice person". And yes we need to keep an eye on him.
But we also need to remember he is willing to work with us _against_ the islamofasicts. A suggestion: perhaps he isn't personally powerful enough in Pakistan to have all the radicals rounded up & shot tomorrow?
Of course it could be his cooperation is the result of the U.S. saying something like "If you don't play ball with us, we'll let India pound you back into the Stone Age and take over what's left", too... Don't you just love Republican diplomacy? ...
Don't forget, Dubya is a fellow who expects results, and (for better or worse) he seems to be a fairly Christian fellow. So I doubt he'll put up with either excuses or unrestrained terrorism from Pakistan very much.
Speaking of vomit-inducing stories... Check out Jerry Pournelle's mail column. Someone by the name of Casey Tompkins [heh] passed along a truely disgusting story wherein US Marines were ordered to toss American citizens out of the US Embassy in Saudi Arabia. Apparently it's an "internal matter" for the Saudis according the butt-lickers in the State Department:
Jerry,
"See what free men can do..." What about free women? Amjad Radwan was born in 1983 to an American mother, but
that's not "American" enough for the State Department...
Say, rather: "Friend to liberty nowhere, and we won't even guard our own!"
Opinion Journal Article.
FOGGY BOTTOM BETRAYAL
'I Am an American' The State Department sends in the Marines to consign a U.S. citizen to Saudi hell.
BY WILLIAM MCGURN Thursday, July 11, 2002 12:01 a.m. EDT
The words crackle over the phone line from Riyadh, in softly accented English. "I am an American woman," Amjad
Radwan repeats. "My mother always tells me how free America is, and how much my grandmother, my aunts and
uncles and cousins in America love me. But though I am American I cannot go see them."
If Miss Radwan appears at pains to stress her adult status, it's because the same U.S. government that trumpets its
liberation of Afghan women suddenly begins shuffling its diplomatic feet when the subject turns to adult American
women languishing in Saudi Arabia. In the last month alone, when asked publicly about Amjad Radwan and Alia and
Aisha Gheshayan, at least three senior American officials--Secretary of State Colin Powell, White House spokesman
Ari Fleischer, and Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs William Burns--all muddied the issue by resorting to the
State Department line that the fates of at least a dozen American women in Saudi Arabia are "custody" spats
involving "children."
I liked his reponse:
"Of course these American citizens are not "children" any longer. And what the hell is the Marine Corps for if not
to rescue Americans from slavery? Millions for defense, not one cent for tribute, but really, Mr. Decatur, we
don't need you any longer..."
I'm all for respecting other country's sovereignty, and the old American motto "friends to Liberty everywhere, but guardian only of our own", but... Shouldn't we be bloody GUARDING it? How much more basic does it get than allowing an American citizen into America? And, no, this is not a trick question...
Musharaaf is more than not-nice, he's a brutal dictator. We should have no illusions about that. Nor about the fact that he presides over a society that is still, in parts, stuck in a medieval mindset. Which is, I suppose, part of why he's a brute. We should just try not to have any illusions about some of our allies.
The OpinionJournal article you link to is not a new story to me, but it illustrates my point even better--in fact I'm going to post it. There may be good people living in Saudi Arabia, but the Saudi government is made up of pigs. They are our allies, for a variety of reasons. But let's hope to God that after the shooting is over "over there," there'll be some changes made.
Truely tremendous blog!