Wednesday, September 2, 2009
During the Bush/Blair years, we were told that "the world" no longer respected us,...that our relations with Europe had completely deteriorated to their "all time low",...that if Bush doesn't admit he was wrong and apologize to our former allies, they may never side with us again.
Well it appears the glory days of them siding with us might not have been such a solid love affair after all. Drudge is posting a story that links the Libyan "oil for blood" scandal to PM Gordon Brown. All the way to the top.
After a couple years of the American left pounding Bush and making this "Allies hate us" Meme, the European left, who quite often sheepishly follow the American left, started the taunt against Tony Blair that his choice to send troops to Afghanistan and Iraq, was a subservient and pathetic choice of a weak and brainless pet that sits in the lap of its master. The term they used was that Tony Blair was George Bush's poodle.
Let's remember, the UK sent troops to Afghanistan under the auspices of NATO (An organization created at the behest of the UK) which had invoked the article that compels support of members to defend one another if attacked. It should also be remembered that Iraq was the result of a simmering cold war in the region that started when Margret Thatcher told GHW Bush, "Don't get wobbly on me, George". So unless your view of history is blurred by attention deficit disorder, the question here is, Whom was the LapDog here?
Implied in the british poodle insult is that Bush was on an insane binge of bloodlust driven by his insatiable craving for oil and Blair was too feeble and weak to say no, because he needed something from the US. Now that we have won the war in Iraq, Bush doesn't look so insane and polls show that most in the US think the choice to go to Iraq was the right one. But this lust for oil is an interesting one.
The British (and other European allies) for years have expressed outrage when Americans accuse them of not being reliable allies when it comes to "siding" with us when we are either jointly or individually in danger. They buckle under pressure, or won't let us fly over their airspace, or won't extradite or if terrorists land and refuel, they fail to apprehend them, or if they do try them, they release them early or accept bribes. And lets not forget the largest "oil for European politician" bribery network ever, Oil for food at the UN.
270 lives were lost, most of them American, in a terrorist attack that took place in the UK. The US State Department received a tip that a plane would be bombed and our poodle allies were warned, but incompetence and in some cases mistrust caused them to disregard the warning. It departed from London Heathrow carrying a Bomb that ultimately was traced back to Qadafi and the Abu Nidal organization.
This relationship was the model of how rogue states operated in the region. An anti-western dictator threatened America and then used secret relations with terrorist leaders who survived by scooting from place to place being harbored by other rogue states. The success of the arrangement relied on the fact that western nations rarely attacked the rogue state in response to attacks or for harboring the terrorist leaders. This model lost that advantage on September 12, 2001.
After the Lockerbie attack, Abu Nidal would make his favorite safe Haven a government funded home in Saddam Hussein's capital, Baghdad. He moved there permanently in the late 90s. In the lead up to the Iraq War, Abu Nidal was one of several terrorists living under the Protection of Saddam that Tariq Aziz offered to hand over if Bush could be deterred. Bush would not be bought. Just before the US attacked Iraq, Abu Nidal was killed in Baghdad.
So in summary, the rogue dictators of the Islamic world developed a "rational" model that worked well against the european politicians that included using clandestine terror networks to attack the west, bribe the European leaders (usually with oil), and cause the Europeans to pressure the US to have a less vigorous security approach to the region. The "crazy" George Bush changed that. Obama and his supporters claimed they wanted the world to return to a simpler time when terrorists were an "annoyance" and Europe liked us. Obama wanted the old model.
The return of the Lockerbie bomber in a UK deal for oil, is a signal that the people that called Blair a poodle and Obama who called for change in European relations are getting their wish. We are going back to the way things were and soon the model that worked so well for leaders like Moamar Qadaffi will be back in place and we can go back to relaxing in front of our Televisions watching friendly news anchors telling us about the annoyances of American skyscrapers falling to the ground and Jetliners falling from the sky.
I guess the British can enjoy cheaper petrol and they won't have to worry about having their leaders act as "Poodles" to those crazy Americans. Now their leaders are poodles to the terrorists that kill their constituents.
The name of this blog, "Falling Beams adjustment" refers to the parable by Dashiel Hammet that describes the curious and almost subconscious way human beings adjust to traumatic shocks. Bush adjusted one way. Obama and Brown do not adjust in the same way.