do as i say, not as i do
i was just catching up on a little reading. i thought of this shirt i have while reading about north korea and iran. got me thinking.
iraq? you can't have the weapons we have. sanctions. war.
iran? you either. sanctions. impending war.
north korea? ditto. ditto. ditto.
you could be next?
what i continue to be able to fail at getting my brain around, is how the u.s. can continue to develop weapons of mass destruction (not to mention use them) - and then act horrified and shocked when other countries attempt the same. how is that even remotely fair? how does that make any sense? given u.s. foreign policy of 'you are either with us or against us,' i can completely see how a good chunk of the rest of the world is frightened - not just those aforementioned future targets. but, then again, if you're deemed an international ally, your similar weapons are safe from question. which inevitably brings me to: how many "friends" have we helped to arm in the past that are now "enemies?" oh! i know! i know!!!! the secretary of defense and saddam were great pals back in '83!
and of course, we can't forget bin laden. cia trained and all to help fight the soviets...
what does this mean exactly for the rest of the world? you could be next. who knows? maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but you better watch your step... diplomacy at it's finest.
on another level - don't "we" already have enough nukes to be able to blow the world open at least 6 times? and who really wants to be ultimately responsible for vaporizing the planet? seriously. if it weren't such a problem with dire implications, i'd almost have to laugh at how ridiculous it all is.
Labels: politics, war, weapons of mass destruction