California Expert Software

Introduction

I strongly believe in this heuristic: correct understanding leads to expected results. This is a heuristic because it is not a prescription for acquiring "correct" knowledge, but suggests post hoc evaluation of what we know.

Using that method, Bandit foreign policy - if we can call it that - is an utter failure. Instead of arriving where the Bandit's soothsayers predicted, the United States finds itself in deeper and deeper "doo-doo" (Geo. H. W. Bush's expression). This fact is demonstrated in North Korea, Iran and Iraq everyday.

What do you do when the Great Leader is incompetent?

According to the neo-cons, this Administration's activities in the Middle East should have produced democracy in Iraq. Calling Iran, Syria and North Korea an "Axis of Evil" was supposed to bring other countries together to fight those named. But none of that happened.

The Bandit has fallen prey to another heuristic: the world is what you make of it. This heuristic is related to sayings like 'you get what you pay for' and 'be careful what you wish for.' The actual, observable results of Bandit choices are incontestable because anyone can see what is happening. That those are the results of the Bandit's handiwork cannot be doubted. It was the Bandit who sent troops to Iraq. He refused to honor a 1994 treaty and negotiate directly with North Korea. He failed to engage the Palestinians in any meaningful way, and snubbed the Syrians who gave shelter to Hezbollah. He disconnected from the United Nations. He showered abuse on our oldest allies.

American citizens put a Bandit in charge of the world's most powerful country. It does not matter that they did so for trivial reasons. When someone suffers the delusion that mud is honey, Nature does not play along. When you spit on those around you, they will loathe and resent you.

So, again, what's to be done?

There are really only two choices at this point: either the Congress can assume direction of U.S. foreign policy, or things will continue to degenerate. In the case of Vietnam, the Congress cut off the money, forcing an end to American involvement. However, that was done in the shadow of Watergate - a proven criminal Administration. Despite all the scandals, scandals far worse in every way than Watergate or the Clinton-Lewinsky farce, Americans have failed to identify this Bandit regime as incompetent or criminal. So, there is no domestic motive for impeachment or other regulatory action. Even if enough Democrats are elected next month to overturn Republican control of the House and the Senate, it is unlikely the Democrats will make any significant change in the government or its policies. This is just to say that most of the Democrats running for office are unwilling to challenge the Administration. This election is about whose career will be ended or advanced, not whether the United States should do this or that.

I was appalled the other day when Rep. Charles Rangel (D-Harlem) announced there would be no change in tax policy until 2010, even if Democrats took control of Congress. The Bush tax cuts would stay put. If Democrats take control, Rangel would be Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which sets tax policy. His word amounts to law. So much for the will of the people.

Thus, I think Congress will not intervene in the Administration's policies. This means things will drift wherever the winds take them.

Since the Bandit refuses to remove troops from Iraq as long as he is in office, and there is no Congressional will to challenge him in any of that, it is almost certain U.S. troops will remain in Iraq through 2008. This means the so-called insurgency - actually both a civil war and a war against foreign intervention - will probably get much worse. In the end, probably the only way to avoid the total destruction of Iraq is a U.N. sponsored partition of the region. Otherwise, at some point there is likely to be massive flight from Iraq, creating a problem of supporting millions of angry refugees. That would be a repeat of the Palestinian problem on a much larger scale.

There is little that can be done about North Korea's activities. Whether or not they conducted a successful A-Bomb test, there is no doubt they have or nearly have nuclear bomb technology. Thus we can expect a more militant North Korea in the future. This leads to a nuclear armed South Korea and Japan, possibly with overt U.S. assistance. The only power capable of stopping this juggernaut is China. So far, while the present Chinese government is squirming, it has not been sufficiently discomfited to undertake any control of their puppets, the North Koreans. There are two factors motivating Chinese tolerance of North Korean impudence. First, it diminishes the Japanese, China's traditional competitor and enemy in Asia. (This rivalry has gone on for at least 700 years.) Second, it brings Taiwan within Beijing's grasp. Both those things leave China the undisputed master of the Orient, and undermines the U.S. presence in South Korea. South Koreans, of course, are catatonic about the prospects, as they have been a pawn in the Great Game played by China and Japan for many centuries. They are the nut in the nutcracker, being physically surrounded by those Great Powers. I would be surprised if Kim Jong Il is not a Korean patriot, well aware of the position of the Korean peninsula. Nuclear weapons are not just a way of alienating the United States, but they also put the fear into the Japanese and Chinese.

There are only two world powers capable of balancing Chinese and Japanese ambitions in Korea: the United States and Russia. Russia is physically adjacent to Korea, and was the original sponsor of North Korea. It may be an actively scheming Russia is the only hope for Korean independence. Otherwise, the most likely outcome is a united Korea once again dominated by China. That outcome probably causes those occupying the Forbidden City to lick their chops, and ignore the pesky antics of a North Korean porcupine.

Given the course of events in Asia, it seems unlikely anything can be done to prevent Iran's accession to nuclear status. U.S. involvement in Iraq, and the very sour taste in our former allies' mouths, inhibit any direction confrontation with the Iranians. Thus any belligerent mouthings in Washington only reveal American weakness. The United States has become a Paper Tiger in much of the Middle East. The American presence in Iraq is only destructive, and further enhances the influence and power of Iran. Thus, we can expect Iran to achieve its old glory as Persia reincarnated. This creates two major powers in the Middle East, Iran and Pakistan, which have in common religion and other cultural sympathies. While lately Pakistan has been making peace with its Indian and Chinese neighbors, a resurgent Iran may increase hostilities in both directions, thus further destabilizing the Middle East. In turn, that may bring back the older Indo-Russian alliance, and generally reduce American influence in the region.

I am not able to predict exactly what will happen, but it should be obvious to readers that events have a certain "inner logic." That logic is definitely unfavorable to the United States, and more favorable to China. Japan, Europe, Russia and India are all "in play" as a result of the Bandit and neo-con insanity or incompetence which has gripped Washington since 2001. All that should be overwhelming reasons for drastic changes, if the American people and their representatives in Congress are capable of grasping them.

Introduction
I strongly believe in this heuristic: correct understanding leads to expected results. This is a heuristic because it is not a prescription for acquiring "correct" knowledge, but suggests post hoc evaluation of what we know. Using that method, Bandit foreign policy - if we can call it that - is an utter failure. Instead of arriving where the Bandit's soothsayers predicted, the United States finds itself in deeper and deeper "doo-doo" (Geo. H. W. Bush's expression). This fact is demonstrated in North Korea, Iran and Iraq everyday. What do you do when the Great Leader is incompetent?

Bushwhacked (Again)