Do you remember the old fallacy about dictators, not
democracies starting wars? Well, anyone that knows anything about history will
tell you that the only time a dictator started a war was 79 years ago when the
democratically elected Hitler started World War Two, and then decided he likes
it better governing as a dictator. It must also be said that Hitler's initial
successes whetted the appetite of Imperial Japan that joined the war and fought
against the United States of
America .
Other than that, there were a number of civil wars directly
related to the way that the colonial democracies fused together and/or
partitioned their possessions. The list includes Iraq 's
invasion of Kuwait ,
the Ethiopia-Eritrea mini-war and the Morocco-Algeria on-and-off skirmishes.
There were Soviet involvements in Hungary
and Czechoslovakia
aimed at suppressing uprisings that did not rise to the level of war. And there
was a Soviet involvement in Afghanistan
in response to an invitation extended by the Afghan government which feared the
eruption of an uprising.
When it comes to what can be classified as real wars, you'll
find that democratic India
was responsible for a handful of them. And there were dozens of other full
blown real wars. Some were started by the United
States of America ; the others by its terror arm: the
avatar of infamy they call Israel .
This prompts the asking of a sad question: Why is this
happening to a beautiful blue planet called Earth, located in the suburb of a
magnificent galaxy called the Milky Way? Well, we may never have a full answer
to this question, but we can get inkling as to what it may be when we parse the
article that came under the title: “Trump may not intend to start a war. But he
sure could bumble into one.” It was written by Jackson Diehl and published on
April 1, 2018 in The Washington Post.
Although Diehl is describing a specific situation by naming
names, places and events, the strength of his piece lies in the fact that it is
modulated by human impulses common to people everywhere. But in the same way
that there are calm days and gusty days, there are times and places on this
planet when peaceful coexistence is the order of the day, and there are times
and places when belligerence has the upper hand.
That last condition is what's simmering locally in America at this time, and what's raging in many
parts of the world where America
maintains a military presence. It is what prompted Jackson Diehl to start his
discussion by asking a question that went something like this: Now that a war
cabinet has been assembled, will the commander in chief actually start a war?
To try answering that question, Diehl explains that there is
a standoff between the United States
and North Korea on one hand,
and a standoff between the United States
and Iran
on the other hand. To wonder aloud what may happen next, he asks the two
obvious questions: Is the commander in chief really capable of initiating war
with one of those countries? With both?
He explains that the war cabinet wants to see regime change
in those countries even if it takes murderous wars to bring about that outcome.
The problem is that if the chief goes along with the idea, the consequences
will be that he'll run into a wall of opposition from America 's
allies, the Congress, the Defense Secretary and the Pentagon brass; even from
the political base of his own party. And that's why Diehl sees the commander in
chief caught in a quandary, forced to choose between two bad options.
One option has it that the commander in chief should
compromise with Iran and North Korea … as the French would say, he should put a
little water in his wine. But that would raise the question as to why he
assembled a war cabinet of hawks in the first place. It was not to throw them a
wine party.
The other option has it that he should adopt a hardline with
Iran and North Korea
regardless of what might happen next. But no matter what happens, this move is
certain to isolate America ,
a consequence that will “hand the initiative to America 's enemies,” a situation
that's absolutely unacceptable.
In other words, America finds itself cornered. This
happened perhaps because America
conducted its foreign policy clumsily for many years, or perhaps because it was
outmaneuvered by smarter opponents.
In either case, it is obvious that America was not
coerced by a foreign power to go into that place. Rather, it took the time to
cook-up the recipe that's leading it to the horror show rearing its head on the
horizon.