5 May 2003

Another Wonderful Day In The News

I have always believed that Internet Access for the masses is more of a good thing than a bad largely because it promotes freedom of information. However this freedom of information does nothing to insure the quality of the information that you are getting.

One of the first things that I do when I get out of bed for the day is check my E-Mail. Then, after having performed my daily flushing of Spam, I peruse some of the global news services.

Out of all the American news services I am most partial to CNN, largely because of the sheer breadth of content. When it comes to Canadian news services, I am tied between The Globe And Mail Online and The National Post. I'm still trying to decide what I think about BBC England and BBC Scotland.

During the war, though, I noticed a distinct difference between the way that Canadian news services reported events and the way that the American news services reported events. The Canadian services devoted equal amounts of space to events in Iraq and events elsewhere in the world. The American services continued to devote space to events at home and abroad, but the majority of their attention seemed to be focused firmly on the War In Iraq.

There are reasons for that, and I'll go into those some other time.

But I was looking at the news services today and I came across three items that caught my attention.

US Warns Syria To Move In New Direction

I pulled this off of the CBC web site.

It seems that our much beloved neighbors to the south have issued a message to the Syrian nation advising them that it would be in their best interests to fall into step with the Middle Eastern Peace initiative that the White House has been promoting.

I have believed for years that peace in the Middle East is essential to peace the world over, because I have always been of the opinion that the impetus for the start of World War 3 will come from the Middle East. Bring peace to the Middle East and you eliminate the possibility of World War 3. Simple logic, yes?

It is an undeniable truth that America has become the major world power, and they have not hesitated to use that power and that influence. American foreign policy has always been somewhat on the invasive side, but no one is powerful enough to provide us with an alternative.

The role currently being played by America is the role that should be played by the United Nations, but the United Nations is divided and unable to reach a decision. That means that the United Nations is powerless, in just the same way that the League of Nations was rendered powerless decades ago.

And that, my friends in one scary thought, at least from my point of view.

If the United Nations were effective, at least we would have some amount of certainty that the solutions imposed in the Middle East to insure peace would be less inclined in favor of American National Interests. As it stands now there will be peace in the Middle East, but that peace will be sanctioned and enforced by a less than neutral third party.

Of course, all this is just more evidence that the United States of America is becoming less of a Republic and more of an Empire. More on that when I have a chance to sit down and logically consider all of the implications of what that means.

Military Acknowledges Canada To Be Hit By Downed Warheads

So, the Americans have come up with a plan to shield North America from missile attacks. Canada's role in this plan? Drop zone for downed warheads.

On the one hand someplace has to be a drop zone for downed warheads. As long as the warheads in question are, in fact, disabled and do not impact in densely populated areas, then the plan should pose no problem. There should be no danger to Canadians.

On the other hand, Canada did refuse to participate in Coalition activities in Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom. The Americans were less than impressed with us for this decision, and it was only a matter of time before the payback began. Well, now it's coming.

Okay, so maybe I'm being a little bit paranoid about this, but sit down for a moment and think about it.

Our wonderful Prime Minister did step on a few American toes when he refused to pledge Canadian forces to the Coalition effort. Canada and the States have always been allies in operations like that, a tradition which was broken this one time because the Prime Minister believed it was improper for us to participate without UN sanction.

But the UN has been rendered essentially powerless.

Which puts us back in the position of falling into step with America and their plan to remake the world in their image.

So, here's the question. Will their image really be that bad?

Probably not, but I suppose that depends on your point of view, and the kind of reservations you have. More on that later too.

Future Of US Nuclear Arsenal Debated

This comes to us courtesy of the Washington Post.

Congress is in the process of considering the latest 2004 Defense Authorization Bill, which contains language that will eliminate current restrictions on researching low yield nuclear weapons, and give added money for research on a high yield nuclear bomb for use against deeply buried targets, among other things.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the United States just finish a military action against a sovereign nation because they were in possession of weapons of mass destruction? And is a nuclear weapon not a weapons of mass destruction?

One of the reasons Iraq was invaded was because it was believed they were in the middle of developing a nuclear weapons program of their own, and now the Americans are having problems with North Korea over the same kind of weapons.

But I guess it isn't the weapons you have that makes the difference, but rather the perceived quality of your government.

I hope that I'm not the only person who's frightened by this.

The Americans were so proud of their technological and tactical superiority during the Iraqi War. They were so proud of the way that they were able to precision guide their munitions and minimize the non military damage.

But as soon as you start to consider the use of nuclear weapons against a target you eliminate any possibility of preventing collateral damage. Whether you're using a low yield or a high yield bomb, if the blast doesn't kill you the associated radiation will. And that takes us right back to the state of military weaponry during the Second World War, when cities were destroyed wholesale because the government of their country declared war against the wrong people at the wrong time.

So much for moving forward.

Maybe that's why I've been paying so much attention to the news lately, because the direction that I see the world heading in both intrigues and frightens me.

We are literally walking a fine line. Step in one direction and we can have global peace within our life time. Step the other way and we will have global chaos. And the odds are dead even as to which one it's going to be.