|
 Press the buttonOne cannot have a dialogue with uncivilized nations By Arya Abedin December 27, 2002 The Iranian Last year, my AP Composition teacher assigned an implied argument essay based on Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal", which exposed the English stereotypical and oppressive relations relations with the Irish living in the United Kingdom in the 19th Century. I wrote an essay similar to Swift's last March regarding President Bush's reference to Iran, Iraq, and North Korea as members of an "axis of evil". As the United States prepares for war with Iraq, I found it appopriate to submit this work. You may find it interesting. Some people might not that understood the implied argument so I will explain it. I do not believe that what is written in my piece is the correct course of action to take. I am an Iranian myself. Even if I was not, I would not write something like this about any country. I assume the voice of an American extremist and write an extreme version of pro-war sentiments in the United States. It is purposely meant to be extremist, and by reading it, the reader would then be aware of the ignorance and outlandish nature of some of the views of the current administration. Throughout it I use language that has been used by President Bush and others in the United States (e.g. Reverend Falwell and Pat Robertson) like "Crusade" or "Axis of Evil". By reading this piece, the reader is supposed to realize the error of the US's current course of action, which is politically motivated. This, of course, is an extreme version of the current US policy. A Righteous Crusade against an Evil Axis* It has been over 2,000 years since the advent of the Christian Era. The world has come a long way. After two of the bloodiest conflicts on the continent of Europe during a century of almost uninterrupted global warfare, the world lies at a crossroads in human history. The past century has affirmed one truth that the nations of the world are reluctant to accept: the United States of America, as the inheritor of the great civilizations of the West, is solely responsible to bring justice and order to the uncivilized governments of the world. In the past, we have brought democracy and prosperity to the evil empires of Germany and Japan. However, like Richard the Lionhearted, we must again journey East to beat back the barbarian hordes and shine the light of American culture and democracy on our enemies during this time of uncertainty and terrorism. The countries of Iraq, Iran, and North Korea have long been a thorn in the side of progress and America's interests, refusing to submit to the will of this peace-loving and civilized nation. Some may argue that these regimes are in fact not an axis. These skeptics may use evidence such as the fact that Iran and Iraq fought an eight-year war, the bloodiest in the modern history of the Middle East, with each other and that North Korea has little to do with either of those countries. I respond to those skeptics with the following question: Why, in such a time of national unity and reliance on the current administration for guidance, would the President of the United States lie to the public? The Axis of Evil's foreign ways of evil-doing and treachery have blinded the world to their obvious pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. America has revealed this unholy alliance for the world to behold. It is now our duty to take action against the enemy, regardless of what other nations including our allies believe. What would be the best way to eliminate this threat to American sovereignty? The most efficient way would be to wipe the existence of these countries off the face of the earth. However, some pacifists might label that course of action as too extreme. In the interests of pursuing a greater peace, since this country and its citizens are a peace-loving people, I suggest a different course of action. In order to effectively ensure that the threat from the enemy is removed, I suggest a three phase Crusade against evil.  The first phase of this war will be strategically attacking the capitals
and major cities of Iraq, Iran, and North Korea with nuclear weapons. This would
serve several purposes. It would severely weaken the enemy and save countless American
lives in the ensuing conflict. Much of the infrastructure of these corrupt governments
would be destroyed in this initial phase of attack, and the nations' governments
might even surrender as a result of this onslaught.Some skeptics might argue that nuclear or thermonuclear weapons would be far too destructive. However, the latest generation of "smart nukes" would be able to attack precise targets and minimize the spread of fallout. The second phase of this war is the most important. The resources and ancient lands of Iran, Iraq, and North Korea have been misused by their insidious leaders. Americans would best cultivate and govern those countries. That is why I suggest eight million Americans be relocated to Iraq, ten million to Iran, and seven million to North Korea. Those Americans would not only guarantee the flow of oil from Iran and Iraq to where it is needed in the United States and ensure an influx of North Korean minerals to American manufacturers, but they would bring democracy, capitalism, and Christianity -- the pillars of civilization -- to these misused lands. The final phase of this Holy War would be the relocation of the indigenous populations to make room for more incoming Americans. I suggest the native people of Iraq, Iran, and North Korean be placed in prisoner-of-war camps that would be located in the vicinity of the cities that were destroyed during the initial nuclear attack outlined in Phase One of this operation.  When I first suggested this part of my proposition
in public, many found Phase Three particularly senseless, arguing that these people,
if anything, were victims of their governments. I on the other hand believe that
they were not victims.Nearly every citizen of the Axis of the Evil, by failing to revolt against their dictatorial regimes long ago, is a potential threat to American interests. Those who survive the effects of radioactive fallout in these camps will be incorporated into their former countries as a labor class. This way, they can observe and possibly learn from the success of Americans and our civilization. Skeptics who question this three-phase plan exist, but there are also radicals that vehemently oppose this resolution. They illogically suggest that the US should resort to diplomacy, negotiations, or a policy of détente with these nations. These radicals would like it if we let our militaristic guard down and initiate some outlandish diplomatic overture like continuing former President Clinton's negotiations with North Korea, implementing "smart sanctions" and weapons inspections on Iraq, and embracing the Iranian President's call for a dialogue among civilizations**.  How
can we have dialogue or associate in any way with such a treacherous enemy? I respond
to the concerns of our reluctant "allies" in Europe and the Arab world
by declaring that one cannot have a dialogue among civilizations when the opposing
nations are uncivilized!Some call my proposal a medieval suggestion that would place America in unilateralist overdrive. This is a misconception. When dealing with an enemy that does not understand diplomacy or reason, one must resort to seemingly unreasonable measures. This three-phase plan will not only destroy the enemy but revitalize the American economy and generate new jobs that were lost as a result of the September 11th attacks. I am confident that my proposition will soon become a precedent in dealing with evildoers and making the world safe for democracy. Notes * The phrase "Axis of Evil" was first used in President Bush's January 29th, 2002 State of the Union Address in reference to Iran, Iraq, and North Korea. Soon after, the President received criticism regarding his remarks by much of the international community, including the European Union and other US allies. ** The term "Dialogue Among Civilizations" was first used by Iranian President Mohammed Khatami during a speech addressed to the General Assembly of the United Nations in the year 1999. In response to Khatami's call for dialogue, the United Nations declared 2001 the official Year of Dialogue Among Civilizations. * Printer friendly Does this article have spelling or other mistakes? Tell me to fix it.
 |
|
|
|
Web design by Bcubed
Internet server Global Publishing Group