What About the Sudetanland?


John Wright


My memories of WWII history are not particularly keen, but I seem to remember hearing about Hitlerís first offensive move being the capture of that land area known as the Sudetanland. It seems that France and Great Britain were quite willing to cede that territory to Hitler, for whatever terrible rationalizations that possessed them at that time. They certainly had nothing important to lose, and appeasement seemed the best path, particularly since the Sudetanland and the people within it meant absolutely nothing to either France or Great Britain. After all, they didnít own the territory and I suppose it had no commercial value. Perhaps there was even an historical precedent that suggested Germany should rule that area.

Well, here we are some 60+ years later, with the UN getting ready to cede Iraq to "W," for the worst reasons. The latest dissembling is about missiles Iraq possesses that can travel somewhat further than 120 kilometers, that they are refusing to destroy, which violates a UN resolution limiting Iraq to having missiles capable only of about 120 km range. Ho, hum. I actually believe that the UN could be pressured by the USA to pass a "no-Creamsicle™" resolution re Iraq, and, by golly, we would find someone there eating a Creamsicle™ and use that as an excuse to attack.

Ultimately, "W" and his minions are bent on attack, and some excuse will be found to "justify" the carnage that will follow. The administration will deflect all questions pertaining to oil and regional political control. I simply ask all readers to search their hearts and minds to realize that the USA has become disgusting, as our leaders are about to make us become mass murderers. Our national behaviors are textbook examples of the schoolyard bully in action. Nothing will save Iraq from our beating. There is no hero and no teacher or principal to intervene, for we have corrupted even the UN, not to mention Turkey. I was sickened to hear that minor financial negotiations with Turkey were all that was necessary for that country to offer the USA one more land-based point from which to attack Iraq. Our own population seems powerless to intervene to stop the pending atrocity, as massive demonstrations here and around the world are having zero effect.

Nations like France and Germany are trying their best to rein us in but we refuse to listen, for our apparent military might is blinding us to the ugly reality of a post-Iraq world for USA citizens. I am certain that "W" feels as invincible as Hitler did in the late 1930ís and early 1940ís. In the end, we common citizens, like those in post-WWII Germany, will pay the price for our leadersí conquests. And letís remember that we put "W" in office and then proceeded to give the Republicans a congressional majority in the next election. I think stupid is too mild a term to use to describe the American public. We deserve to fail on a grand scale due to that stupidity, and we will.

I despise Saddam Hussein for his low value for human life. I believe there could come a time when we need to destroy him and his military capability. But only after he uses it outside Iraq against an innocent and USA friendly nation, using weapons of mass destruction, either through direct military conflict or through proven supply of those weapons to terrorists. At that point I would be ready to support even nuclear annihilation in the absence of total capitulation, but as of now, the sovereign rights of Iraq are being denied. We have the cart before the horse. Think about having your rights to self-defense taken away because the powers that be decide you might commit a crime or start a war. This presupposition logic infects our criminal justice system today in the USA, and we are simply attempting to export our sickness.

In other articles I have attempted to show how post-war terrorism will become commonplace within the USA. The point is that the evolution of methods of war since 1945 has been massive, such that total capitulation by a pummeled Iraq will have no influence whatsoever in stopping future terrorist attacks, as the terrorists occupy many countries instead of being one country. We will lose the cooperation of most of our "allies" because we are choosing to ignore them now, and that will only help the terrorists. If you believe our announced intention to ignore even a UN Security Council veto does not poison the whole concept of a United Nations body, you best wake up and smell the coffee. We are laying the groundwork to ruin international cooperation and international peacekeeping.

I think about a bullfight and the apparent disadvantage of the human, who is obviously pathetically weak, compared to the bull. The bull loses. First, it is deceived with trickery and caused to exhaust itself running at a simple piece of cloth. Then, multiple little wounds are caused by stabbing the bull and slowly bleeding it out. The bull seldom, if ever, gets to use its massive power effectively, for the game is stacked against the bull.

Can you imagine the USA as a bull in the future, where it is brought to its knees due to repetitive attacks from disguised enemies and blind-eyes on the part of our former allies? I can think of many reasons why France, Germany and others will choose to shun us, while appearing to cooperate, for if I put myself in their place today I perceive a strong need to bleed out the bully, so as to elevate my own comparative power in world events.

The USA has been an accident waiting to happen, as our gradual achievement of global military dominance simply awaited the coming of a president ready and willing to use military power to force his will on the rest of the world. "W" does not and will not understand that the purpose of having overwhelming power is to avoid war, not encourage it.

I bite my tongue to avoid uttering words that could be construed as the crime of treason. Yet I know that nothing short of physical action will stop this pending horror. Unlike the British, we cannot force an election by a no-confidence vote, so we are legally bound to endure the gross stupidity of our elected leader and his advisors and cabinet. The elections in November 2004 are too far away in time to help. We are in major trouble, with no legal recourse except impeachment, which will come too late to help, i.e., after the future course of world events is decided by virtue of our coming war crimes. You need to understand that our Congress is too weak-willed to act now, just like the Reichstat was in pre-WWII Germany.

Let us remember that a mere four years ago President Clinton had to endure impeachment proceedings for something so trivial in the grand scheme of world progress that we were the laughing stock of the rest of the civilized world. Today, there is a crying need for impeachment to avoid the serious near future decline of the USA, but do you hear anyone talking about impeaching "W" for demonstrating a warmonger attitude? No, it is too early for the gutless Congress to act in the best interests of the USA and the rest of the world. We are at the brink, our military forces are poised to strike, and the silence from all but a few in Congress is deafening.

This is, of course, the worst nightmare of people who believe in the rule of law, for it is our bad laws, and the lack of good laws, that allowed the present situation to occur within the USA. We have had over 200 years to prepare against this day and we have failed. Our children and our grandchildren will pay the consequences, long after "W" is dead.