Anger at the U.S.
James Lileks, toward the end of a really long, rambling column about nothing in particular, asks some interesting if rhetorical questions:
We stopped pretending we would ratify Kyoto. We only spent $15 billion on AIDS in Africa. We did not take dictation from Paris. If we had done these things, it would minimize the worldÃ¢€™s anger.
Is the world angry at Russia, which spends nothing on AIDS and rebuffed Kyoto? Is the world angry at China, which got a pass on Kyoto and spends nothing on AIDS for other countries?
Is the world angry at North Korea for killings its people? Angry at Iran for smothering that vibrant nation with corrupt and thuggish mullocracy? Angry at Syria for occupying Lebanon? Angry at Saudi Arabia for its denial of womenÃ¢€™s rights? Angry at Russia for corrupt elections? Is the world angry at China for threatening Taiwan, or angry at France for joining the Chinese in joint military exercises that threatened the island on the eve of an election? Is the world angry at Zimbabwe for stealing land and starving people? Is the world angry at Pakistan for selling nuclear secrets? Is the world angry at Libya for having an NBC program?
Is the world angry at the thugs of Fallujah?
Is the world angry at anyone besides America and Israel?
It doesn’t seem like it. And, strangely, many of those people acted unilaterally.
And this picture is priceless:
By toppling the fascists in Baghdad without French seal of approval, we have encouraged recruitment in terrorist organizations. ItÃ¢€™s not the invasion that ticked off the Man in the Arab Street, itÃ¢€™s the lack of a 17th UN resolution on Iraq. Right now in a cafÃƒ© in Beirut an educated man, a chemist by trade, schooled in the ways of the West, is reading an article about how the US will only spent $15 billion on AIDS and probably wonÃ¢€™t reduce its carbon emissions to 1817 levels, and he throws down the paper in disgust: bastards! I must join Al Qaeda, move to Iraq and kill the contractors who are upgrading their outmoded infrastructure!