An oldie but a goodie – this article by Nina Khrushcheva has an interesting perspective on Bush, paranoia and rhetoric. Even though it was written more than four years ago, it feels relevant today.
Regardless of how true Bush's words about evil dictatorships may be, they are hardly made believable by of their repetitious, mechanical, Brezhnevian nature. Especially when "compelling" reasons to start the war in Iraq–from WMD to terrorism to democracy there–were based on falsified evidence and were devoid of consistency.
George Orwell was right: "All propaganda lies even when it tells the truth." As much as newspeak was a signature of the Kremlin, it is an equally apt description of today's White House. Its resolute war message is similar to Brezhnev's insistence on the superiority of socialism: Both lack public debate and are handled top-down.
Meanwhile, as some are again declaring Mission Accomplished in Iraq (we can but hope!), Simon Tisdall has an interesting article at Cif with a timely reminder:
"Attempts to partition or divide Iraq by intimidation, force or other means would produce extraordinary suffering and bloodshed," the US government warned.
But many reply that, despite the surgistas' recent successes, extraordinary suffering is what Iraq has already got – and the illusion of central control cannot be sustained much longer.