>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rick Rozoff)
>Subject: Check THIS out!
>Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 15:26:06 -0600 (CST)
> [The following is written by a lifelong, dedicated ANTI-communist.
>Draw your own conclusions.]
>The Red Tide Turning?
>by George Szamuely
>New York Press
>Ten years ago this week the Berlin Wall came down. Cold War stalwarts
>like myself rejoiced. Today, however, I rejoice every time I read of a
>poll that suggests the Communists will soon be back in power in Russia.
>The demise of the Soviet Union gave rise to the unrestrained global
>tyranny of the United States. This tyranny brooks no rivals. It
>disregards election results and robs nations of their dignity. Armed to
>the teeth with missiles and a relentless self-righteousness, the United
>States is unable even to respect worthy adversaries like Yugoslavia or
>Iraq. Military victory is never enough. There have to be sanctions,
>ostracism, isolation and half-witted attempts at subversion. In this
>U.S.-led order there is no room for friends – only client-states or
>Today, the Communists – in Russia, China or Cuba – are heroic
>fighters. Almost alone they are resisting the relentless juggernaut of
>the United States and its mindless "market democracy" ideology. Perhaps
>– and this is what Cold Warriors like me failed to grasp – it was
>always thus. The Communists were a dreadful bunch. Stalin's Gulag, Mao's
>"Great Leap Forward," Cambodia's "killing fields" can never be
>forgotten. Yet, strangely, Communists also often succeeded in restoring
>dignity to downtrodden nations.
>In 1917 Lenin took Russia out of a terrible war and proclaimed his
>supreme indifference to the war's outcome. He did the right thing and
>was rewarded with absolute power. Czar Nicholas II and the hapless
>liberals who followed him were the Yeltsins of their day. Forever
>seeking guidance on all matters from Western liberals, they led the
>Russian people to disaster and themselves to oblivion. In retrospect, it
>seems amazing that the Communists stayed in power for as long as they
>did. Surrounded by a capitalist world that wanted them gone, they used
>all the guile and ruthlessness they learned from Lenin to outmaneuver
>their enemies. By the 1980s the Communists had made Russia into a
>formidable rival, if not quite the equal, of the United States. Mao
>Tse-tung freed China from its century-long submission to foreign powers.
>Fidel Castro restored dignity and pride to an island with a miserable
>recent past. For 40 years he defied the United States. He defeated a
>U.S.-sponsored invasion. He thwarted innumerable assassination attempts.
>He overcame a crippling trade embargo. What's in store for Cuba after
>Castro? Probably nothing more inspiring than becoming a satellite of
>Unlike most members of my generation, I supported the U.S. involvement
>in Vietnam. Whatever the atrocities the U.S. perpetrated, I believed
>that they were a price worth paying to resist Communism. It is obvious
>now that Ho Chi Minh, unlike the assorted political hacks who played
>musical chairs in Saigon, was an authentic leader of Vietnam. He did not
>need 500,000 Soviet or Chinese forces to assist him. Left to its own
>devices, South Vietnam collapsed in a few weeks. The Hanoi regime, on
>the other hand, took everything the United States threw at it and still
>Today there is no countervailing force to U.S. supremacy. There is no
>power that can offer support to a nation asserting old-fashioned
>independence. Washington's tantrums are international law. Consider the
>following: Hans von Sponeck runs the United Nations "oil-for-food"
>program, which allows Iraq to sell $5.2 billion of oil every six months
>to purchase food and medical supplies. The other day the U.S. let it be
>known that it wanted him out. His crime? He had blurted out something
>self-evident to everyone in the world except for Washington. The
>sanctions on Iraq were hurting civilians and made little sense.
>Unusually for him, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan stood his ground and
>refused to follow Clinton administration orders. In the meantime, the
>U.S. government hosted a conference in New York – to the tune of $3
>million – for an organization called the Iraqi National Congress.
>Billed as a meeting to unite Saddam Hussein's opponents, it really was
>nothing more than a gathering of out-of-work Iraqis on the U.S. payroll.
>Now the United States knows perfectly well that this bunch can never
>hope to overthrow Saddam Hussein. By resisting relentless U.S. pressure
>for almost 10 years, Saddam has shown himself to be the authentic leader
>of Iraq, something these toadies can never hope to be. The only way they
>can come to power is by riding in to Baghdad in U.S. tanks. Since
>hysteria about Iraq can be turned on and off at will, a full-blown U.S.
>invasion can never be ruled out.
>U.S. policy has been pitiless on Yugoslavia as well. No humanitarian
>aid. No aid to clear the Danube of the debris from the NATO bombing. No
>support for the European Union policy of supplying oil to two cities in
>Serbia, led by opponents of Slobodan Milosevic. Then the other day, to
>much fanfare, it was announced that the U.S. was changing its policy. It
>was doing nothing of the sort, of course. Following a meeting of some
>people described by the State Dept. as a "delegation of Serbian
>Democratic Opposition Leaders," the hideous harridan of Foggy Bottom
>announced that she was prepared to "evaluate the EU's pilot project."
>She would also "be watching closely to see if the assistance actually
>gets to the intended recipients in the manner proposed." That was
>heartening to know. She also announced that the ban on flights and the
>oil embargo would be suspended as soon as free elections were held in
>Serbia. However, the pathetic bunch of losers groveling before Dr.
>Albright (as The New York Times ingratiatingly likes to call her) could
>not win an election if their lives depended on it. So what happens in
>the almost certain eventuality that the winner of any elections in
>Serbia is the nation's true leader – Slobodan Milosevic? "I have made
>quite clear that there have to be free and fair elections
>internationally supervised with observers that come as a result of a
>free and fair campaign," the fat and stupid one spluttered. "I find it
>very hard to believe that Milosevic could ever win those kinds of
>elections… I expect that the people of Serbia…when they have the
>opportunity to vote for people that are going to provide freedom for
>them…will choose correctly." In other words, as far as the U.S.
>government is concerned, "free and fair elections" are those that yield
>the "correct" results. Interestingly, one of the "opposition" leaders
>who failed to attend this meeting was Vuk Draskovic. According to The
>New York Times, earlier this summer Draskovic was all set to lead a
>transitional government in Belgrade. When the Clinton administration
>heard of this, it threatened to indict him for war crimes. "Leaders"
>have to follow Washington's orders or they might end up in prison.
>An arrogant United States has recklessly expanded NATO to Russia's
>borders. However debilitated Russia has become as a result of blindly
>following the "privatization" nostrums of Western advisers, it still
>mustered the energy to voice a protest. The U.S. response was smugly
>dismissive. "Quite bluntly," the loathsome Strobe Talbott explained,
>"Russians need to get over their neuralgia on this subject." That the
>Russians might view with some concern the American bombing of their ally
>Serbia or the machinations in the Caucasus would never occur to Talbott.
>The United States is always on the side of the angels and is always a
>A recent opinion poll in the Czech Republic had the Communists ahead of
>every other political party. This is an amazing reversal of fortunes.
>Only a few years ago President Vaclav Havel was a national hero. He had
>resisted Communism and had paid for it by spending years behind bars.
>Today he is a discredited figure, a man who is seen as little more than
>a toady of the Western leaders whom he is so anxious to be included
>among. Not long ago, he spoke of the Czech Republic as being "at a
>historical crossroads." The Czechs could either embrace "responsible
>participation in improving the world," or they could build "walls from
>concrete or [impose] visa requirements, import surcharges and quotas,
>and a ban on evil foreigners buying houses here." One can see here how
>much Havel has made his own the gobbledygook of the "market democracy"
>ideologues. It is a relief to learn that this stalwart of the Cold War
>is now a deeply unpopular figure in the Czech Republic. Like other
>nations the Czechs want to retain at least a little bit of dignity.
>Today's fighters for freedom are no longer Lech Walesa or Vaclav Havel.
>They have names like Jiang Zemin, Vladimir Putin and, yes, Slobodan

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

     --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Reply via email to