(Just as a warning, some of you aren't going to like this. But I maintain that it is apt.)
Remember when Britney Spears divorced Kevin Federline?
There was this outpouring of sympathy and support, but then she quickly blew all the goodwill she had gotten by doing a bunch of stupid things and alienating people, because she no longer cared what they thought about her; she was determined to do whatever she wanted, no matter who it hurt (in this case, I mean her baby boys) or how it made her look to the world.
And this is rather like the United States after September 11th.
Once it happened, people all around the world (with the exception of a handful of committed haters) expressed their sympathy and support, but then we decided to blow up stuff and more stuff and more stuff, and gave the diplomatic equivalent a hearty "screw you" to all the countries that questioned the policy of blowing up.
All I'm saying is, I hope the odds of other countries liking us again are better than Britney's of releasing another successful album.
What’s next, CRANBERRY SAUCE out of CAN?????
12 hours ago
5 comments:
I would submit that the world support you mention was not really that deep. It's easy to express sympathy, but few countries were really interested in taking on terrorism. Sure, they did not disapprove of our actions in Afghanistan, but they had their own reasons for not coming fully on board, like Great Britain did. Denial of the problem, fear of upsetting domestic Muslim populations, and financial dealings with Saddam were some of these reasons. I think the extent of post-9/11 world unity against terror is overestimated.
Well, I'm not saying support for Britney Spears all that deep, either.
Seriously though, when "denial of the problem" includes major components like questioning the existence of WMDs in Iraq or links between Sadaam Hussein and Al Quaeda, why do you blame the other countries?
Speaking of Britney Spears, there was a guy singing "Hit me baby one more time" in the subway today. It was almost awesome.
France has had an anti-terrorism policy in place since world war two. Many countries have. You can't say they weren't willing to "come on board" considering they've been fighting Terror for ages. I suggest it's America that had the reluctance to take on Terror for real, and instead run off to some piddly little catastrophe of a war and ignore the domestic front.
By the way, Rach, hilarious and indeed apt contrast.
Post a Comment