FOX NEWS
Going to war is not simply a matter of ordering
soldiers to fire missiles and drop bombs. There's a lot more involved. The
public must be induced to accept and even cheer the bloodshed. That requires
some careful preparation. Prior groundwork is needed. Top U.S. officials will
deserve a lot of credit -- but they will not get the job done without assists
from reporters in Washington and their colleagues overseas.
Oh yes, there will be exceptions -- some
skeptical journalists will raise pointed questions about the harm being done by
launching a military assault on Iraq -- but they will mostly serve to underscore
that dissent which will be properly subsumed by a war agenda. Let's face it: The
world is filled with countries run by governments that abuse human rights. (Iraq
is one of many.) But the USA has to be very selective. After all, a lot of those
governments are closely allied with Washington. And you can't exactly bomb a
government while you're sending it millions of dollars every week! Pakistan just
a simple example, openly admitted by O`Reilly.
An evenhanded approach to human rights would
seriously damage the capacity of the United States to launch attacks across the
globe. If you're going to demonize certain leaders -- and that's just about a
prerequisite for building a war agenda -- then you've got to pick and choose. To
create the proper conditions for war, leave as little to chance as possible. Certain
criteria must be met in order to exercise appropriate leadership for war: If
you're going to bomb a country, it may as well be one that arrogantly refuses to
allow U.S. troops to be stationed on its soil. (European countries are
wonderfully hospitable in this regard, but Iraq is a notable exception.)
Steadily vilify the leader
of the country you're interested in bombing. Repeatedly emphasize his evil deeds
so that reporters, editorial writers and pundits will relay the message. Meanwhile,
to avoid distractions, be careful to downplay or ignore the evil deeds of the
governments of countries you're not interested in bombing. If a regime is allied
with Washington, you'll want to ignore its human rights violations as much as
possible.
Don't even think about
applying a single standard for human rights. The Pentagon would sure look
silly firing cruise missiles at countries that receive massive amounts of U.S.
aid, such as Egypt, Israel and Turkey. Get it straight: Some torture is
deplorable, some is fundable. Most skills must be learned, so don't hesitate to
sit at the feet of the masters of war. You can appreciate -- and emulate --
their achievements.
About an hour before the first missiles struck
Yugoslavia, viewers heard a Fox News Channel anchor make an understandable slip:
"Let's bring in our Pentagon spokesman -- excuse me, our Pentagon
correspondent." The fact that it's so often difficult to tell the
difference is a triumph for effective perception management.
And, across television screens, a parade of
former military officers will begin. Retired Marine Corps generals a fawning
anchor with euphemisms like "neutralize" and "take out. "
State-of-the-art TV graphics will continue to enhance the war-viewing experience
for a large nationwide audience of Americans who could see their tax dollars at
work -- dramatically underscoring President Bush's assertion that the government
can do some things very well. More than one Pentagon spokesman -- er, Pentagon
correspondent -- will hail the "combat debut" of the B-2 stealth
bomber.
The war will be off to a fine
start. The Fourth Estate will function smoothly as a fourth branch of
government. Let that be a lesson to you.
Leon Chame
