“Current noise?” Would that be white noise? Background noise? Gee, failure to act and the realization that a sense of urgency on the part of our security agencies did not exist is marginalized to a dismissive comment by our leading press secretary! I thought that a meaningful discussion about the whys and hows of September 11th might be greeted with a little more respect than that arrogant remark. The President followed up with a speech detailing a new bureaucratic revamping to be in place by January 1st. January 1st! You have got to be kidding. Does the phrase “rapid response” mean anything to this group? This is a war! So, I’ve been hearing and seeing all too vividly. Bureaucracies don’t understand the meaning of the word “urgent.”
We seem to be using the wrong paradigm here, folks. Mobilizing our forces is not going to happen within the framework of a host of government agencies fumbling for turf position. War is war, and I, for one, would like to see this war being waged with greater intelligence. Wisdom would be helpful, also. Wisdom comes with experience and knowledge of the territory. This particular battleground is not suited to blind, albeit colorful, charts. Rather, strategy and tactics should be formulated and prioritized, concentrating on immediate prevention of nuclear annihilation. That would demand negotiations at the highest levels, with experts from the fields of science and medicine at the table elucidating the facts, thereby making woefully apparent the absolute folly of such irresponsible action. The flavor of such a gathering would appeal to the innate humanity of those leaders whose frustration has risen to such a level of hostility that it threatens this planet’s existence.
Unfortunately, the Manhattan Project comes to mind. Ironic that it should be the program that started this global threat in the first place. At the time, as I understand history, the Allied Powers were in an end-run game, the finish line being the development of an atomic weapon. Seemingly, all that would bring an end to the second of the greatest wars was a weapon of mass destruction, hitherto unbeknownst to humankind.
Well, now it is time, beyond time, to retract that strategy, seeing how successful the project was. It is exactly those same kinds of minds that must cut to the chase because, once again, there is a world war in play, and no resolution is forthcoming.
Charts! I say, give them the colors of mushroom clouds, burning landscapes, dead carcasses. New prisms may have to be accessed to even contemplate the shades of such visions.
Concurrently, an expression of acknowledgment relative to the many issues at hand that have given rise to the global terror war must be offered by the United States. As the only “superpower,” and I use that phrase lightly, it is imperative that we, as a people, accept responsibility for the consequences of our nation’s actions. We have had the privilege of the democratic process and touted it mightily for two hundred and ten years. That process implicates us, as citizens, in the policies of our institutions. The particular aspects of our elective structure have not always produced what the absolute majority may have had in mind. Nonetheless, these structural idiosyncrasies have resulted in the current power status. In the words of Abraham Lincoln, “Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure.” I believe this is the ultimate test of our endurance. It is our elemental principles that should direct our plan of action. These principles derive from an evolutionary political process begun in 1215 AD with the signing of the Magna Carta by King John. Intrinsic in this document was the belief in the right to have grievances addressed by the powers that be.
If, indeed, we are the “power that be” then to our court should come all those whose grievances necessitate attention. Instead of righteous indignation, however justified we may feel, it is not in our best interests to continue to pursue our current course of action. We must think “outside the envelope,” which might counter long-held hypotheses about the strategy of conflict.
Protecting our turf means protecting our planet. ALL OF THIS EARTH. The use of the planet’s natural resources greedily and in a hegemonic fashion has resulted in large-scale brutality and seemingly irrepressible hostility.
Dire straits call for dire measures. If this is a picture show, I don’t want to be in the dark room.
Mary Elizabeth Ciccone 06-09-02
