7.08.2005

perspective

I'm loathe to praise the Poodle, who dragged his country into a useless and immoral war, and only a bit less reluctant to quote conservative columnist John Tierney again. But...

It was just so refreshing to watch people recover from hardship without the attendant flag-waving, patriotic songs and war-mongering that goes on here. I happened to catch Blair's post-G8 press conference on C-Span yesterday, and what can I tell you, I was impressed. John Tierney thought so, too.
Tony Blair was as eloquent as ever when he faced the press at the G-8 summit meeting yesterday, but what was most impressive was what he didn't say. After uttering three sentences of gratitude to the other leaders for their support after the London attacks, he dropped the subject of terror.

. . .

Television and print editors rushed to assign what is known in the business as the "Fear Stalks" story, as in, "We need a 'Fear Stalks Suburban Bus Riders.' " The commuters' alarm was shared by local experts. South Dakota's homeland security officials were reported to be "monitoring the situation closely."

I don't mean to minimize the bloodshed in London. I lived in New York in 2001 and later in Baghdad during months of car bombings. But I got the most useful lessons about terrorism when I moved to suburban Maryland just in time for the snipers to begin their famous spree near my home in 2002.

I could have written a "Fear Stalks" story about myself as I walked home from the subway the evening after the spree began. I was more tense than I had ever been in New York or Baghdad.

The assurances that the police were on the case meant nothing because there was obviously no way to stop one guy with a rifle from shooting me that evening.

That's the same situation we're in after the London attacks: it's clear that no one can stop terrorists from killing. Spending billions on airport security has simply diverted them to transit systems, and spending billions on transit systems could at best divert them somewhere else: stores, restaurants, sidewalks. Terrorists don't even need bombs. They could simply adopt the snipers' technique for spreading fear.

President Bush briefly admitted last summer to Matt Lauer that the war on terror couldn't ever be won, but he got so much criticism that he promptly backtracked. It was a textbook Washington gaffe: perfectly true but terribly inconvenient.

. . .

But I think that we'd be better off reconsidering our definition of victory in the war on terror. Calling it a war makes it sound like a national fight against a mighty enemy threatening our society... [Column here.]
This speaks to something Kyle mentioned in a comment yesterday. I wish more Americans would get hip to this. But of course, if they did, how would their government sell the war?

Gwynne Dyer, a writer from London - who I am now told is really Canadian! my goodness - had a similar perspective, though he was less impressed with Blair.
Tony Blair flew down from the G-8 summit in Scotland to be with Londoners in their time of trial, and you can hardly blame him. It's not that we needed him -- it was only four smallish bombs, and the emergency services were doing their job just fine -- but the tabloid newspapers would have crucified him if he hadn't shown up and looked sympathetic in public.

No doubt he was feeling sympathetic, too, but his words rang false. The accent was British, but the words were the sort that come from President Bush -- all about defending British values and the British way of life. He didn't mention God, so he's still British, but I'm pretty sure I even heard him use Bush's favorite words, "freedom" and "resolve." I'm also pretty certain that this cut very little ice with most Londoners .

This town has been dealing with bombs for a long time. German bombs during the Blitz in September-December 1940 killed 13,339 Londoners and seriously injured 17,939 more. In 1944 this city was the first in the world to be hit by pilotless cruise missiles (the V-1s or "buzz-bombs"), and later that year it was the first to be struck by long-range ballistic missiles (the V-2s).

During the whole of World War II, about 30,000 Londoners were killed by German bombs and three-quarters of a million lost their homes. Then, between 1971 and 2001, London was the target of 116 bombs set by various factions of the Irish Republican Army, although they only killed 50 people and injured around 1,000. And not once during all those bombs did people in London think that they were being attacked because of their values and their way of life.

It was clear to them that they were being attacked because of British policies abroad, or the policies of Britain's friends and allies.

. . .

I do recall thinking, however, that it was a good thing the bombs had gone off here, not in some American city. Even in London, terrorist bombs will be used by the Bush administration as an argument for locking people up, taking away civil liberties, even for invading some other country. One bomb in an American city, and it would have a free run down to 2008.

Whereas in London, it doesn't work like that.
Dyer's very good column is here.

15 comments:

B. W. Ventril said...

A quick note: Gwynne Dyer's a dude. And Canadian!

laura k said...

I knew Dyer is a man. That was a typo. But I was sure he was British. Go figure. Thanks, BWV! Now get back to packing!

Rognar said...

Rightwing Americans often criticize Europeans (especially the French, but sometimes the British) for not being sufficiently militaristic, but they have no grasp of what real war is about. Not since the Civil War have American cities been subject to the kind of wrack and ruin that total war causes and, of course, no one alive today remembers the Civil War today so Americans have a sanitized view of war (Canadians too, I might add). We could learn from the Euros.

Re: Gwynne Dyer

Gwynne Dyer was born in Newfoundland in 1943. After studying at universities in Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom, he received his PhD in military and Middle Eastern history from the University of London.

Dyer served in the Canadian, American and British navies. He taught military history and war studies for two years at the Canadian Forces College in Toronto and for four years at the Royal Military Academy in Sandhurst.

Since he left teaching in 1973, Dyer has worked as a freelance journalist, broadcaster and lecturer. His syndicated columns on international affairs appear in a dozen languages in nearly 200 newspapers published in more than 40 countries around the world.

In 1980, Gwynne Dyer and Tina Viljoen collaborated on a seven-part television series for the National Film Board of Canada (NFB): War first telecast in Canada in 1983. Eventually, War was shown in 45 countries and one episode, "The Profession of Arms," was nominated for an Academy Award. With Viljoen, Dyer wrote a book based on the series: War, published in 1985. For the NFB and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC),Dyer and Viljoen again collaborated on Defence of Canada, a three-part series aired in 1986. Their book The Defence of Canada: In the Arms of the Empire was published in 1990. In 1994 Dyer completed a four-part series, The Human Race, which looked at the roots, nature and future of human politics. In 1995, his three-part series on peacekeeping in Bosnia, Protection Force, first aired.

Dyer has also made several radio documentaries, including a seven-hour series, The Gorbachev Revolution, and a six-hour series entitled Millennium, which aired on the CBC in the spring of 1996.

Gwynne Dyer is frequent lecturer. His reflections on "Globalization and the Nation-State" were published in 1996 by the Canadian Institute of International Affairs in its series Behind the Headlines.

laura k said...

Thank you for the Gwynne Dywer info! I frequently read his essays on Common Dreams - he has a lot of pieces in various US newspapers. I had no idea he was Canadian. I will add him to my list!

Rightwing Americans often criticize Europeans (especially the French, but sometimes the British) for not being sufficiently militaristic, but they have no grasp of what real war is about.

Very, very true. The people who lost an entire generation in the Great War, then only a few decades later saw their civilization come to the brink of total ruin, know what real war is. Americans fight their wars "over there" - and their veterans are usually too scarred to talk much about it. (And if they do, they are ignored.)

Plus American culture has no memory or knowledge of history, that adds to the problem.

David Cho said...

Tony Blair is a silver throated orator. I love listening to him just for the sake of reveling in his eloquence.

laura k said...

Tony Blair is a silver throated orator. I love listening to him just for the sake of reveling in his eloquence.

I used to feel that way about Mario Cuomo.

allan said...

I did notice that at the end of making a point, he would lean his face forward in an insistent manner and make a stupid smile, a trait often used by the former Governor of Texas.

He seems to have picked up some speech tics from his little buddy, judging from what little I watched across the room.

Yuck.

Kyle_From_Ottawa said...

"This speaks to something Kyle mentioned in a comment yesterday."


You know, what I think makes the difference is the media. All news outlets around the world love a fear story. However, the American media seems to "personalize" the fear more than others. If talking about terrorism, for example, +
a Canadian news report will talk about "keeping Canadians safe". But the American news will talk about "what you need to know to keep you and your family safe". Its a subtle, but powerful difference.

Crabbi said...

Kyle, Excellent point. If someone sneezes halfway across the globe, American TV news will have a story about the folks at home can avoid catching a cold. Because it's all about us. Not us as a community. Us as in me.

Plus American culture has no memory or knowledge of history, that adds to the problem.
Yes. Sigh.

David Cho said...

Why do you feel differently about Mario Cuomo? I really can't remember much about his public speaking style. I think I he spoke at a Democratic convention in 1992.

He is probably the most "courted to run for President" politician in history.

laura k said...

Why do you feel differently about Mario Cuomo?

I don't. He's just not much in public life anymore, so I don't hear him speak.

I did ultimately take issue with his extreme risk-avoidance (never even trying to run for prez). But he is a man who lost his office because he wouldn't vote for the death penalty when it was fashionable. He's unusually principled for a politican.

I think I he spoke at a Democratic convention in 1992.

He gave the keynote address at the DNC in 1984 - brought down the house. Many who heard that speech will never forget it. You can read the text here.

Cuomo might have spoken in 1992, also. He was definitely around then. I met him (for two seconds) backstage at a march on Washington I helped organize. Didn't pee next to him, though. ;-)

There was talk that Clinton might appoint Cuomo to the Supreme Court. If only, if only.

laura k said...

Oh hey, there's audio at that link, too. Cool.

David Cho said...

You know, people are gonna laugh when I say this, but I really enjoy listening to Jimmy Carter. His Southern voice fascinates and charms me, and his intellectual prowess is a force to be reckoned with.

One might say Clinton has both, but everytime he opens his mouth, I feel the stench of sleaze woozing out of his mouth which gets me to rush to the power off button.

I don't quite get why Clinton gets high marks as a public speaker while Carter doesn't.

laura k said...

I don't quite get why Clinton gets high marks as a public speaker while Carter doesn't.

Well, that's an interesting perspective. I do find Clinton very charismatic, and Carter very bland, despite my admiration for Carter.

Your opinion reminds me of my feelings about Ronald Reagan. For the life of me, I never understood the whole "Great Communicator" thing. I never found Reagan charismatic or charming in the least. I always thought his speeches sounded like he was reading a script without the slightest bit of conviction.

Anonymous said...

I strongly recommend Gwynne Dyer's archives at

Gwynnedyer.com, also .net and .ca, I do believe.

The man actually writes about events all over the world, not merely those involving us. Crazy, I know!