The Writers Voice
The World's
Favourite Literary Website
Eight Years of Clinton’s Dirty Diapers
by
Gregory J. Rummo
A baby walking
around with a loaded diaper is an obvious
distraction to anyone within sniffing distance.
When our second son did his best to contribute to
the sulfurous quality of the atmosphere in the
Rummo household, it was left up to me or Mrs. Rummo
(usually the latter) to change his diaper. My older
son, a toddler at the time, was always pre-occupied
with his own playthings. Despite the rank odor, he
somehow managed to ignore it long enough until the
adults got wind of the crisis and did something
about it.
Loaded diapers remind me of Bill Clinton’s foreign
policy, particularly in three areas: North Korea,
al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.
These festering stenches have all come back to
haunt us at the same time like screaming triplets.
They were largely ignored by the toddler in the
Oval Office who was pre-occupied with his own
plaything and more focused on his legacy. Now that
the adults running the Bush administration are back
in charge, the clean-up has begun.
Al-Qaeda was active during Clinton’s presidency and
bin Laden undoubtedly emboldened by the US’s limp
response to the first bombing of the World Trade
Center, the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, the 1996
Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, 1998 bombing
of U.S. embassies in Africa, and the 2000 bombing
of the USS Cole.
The sum total of Clinton’s military response to
these attacks was to lob a few cruise missiles at
what we were told was an al-Qaeda training camp in
the Sudan. It later turned out to be an ibuprofen
factory and the timing coincided with Monica
Lewinsky’s Grand Jury testimony.
On the other side of the world Clinton was equally
inattentive when North Korea withdrew from the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1993.
A Congressional Research Service report, prepared
by Richard P. Cronin, Coordinator Specialist, Asian
Affairs, Foreign Affairs and National Defense
Division in 1994 stated, “Congress has tended to
regard the threat posed by North Korea's actions as
one of the most important U.S. foreign and security
policy concerns, and Members have monitored and
often criticized the Clinton Administration's
handling of the issue. What some see as judicious
Administration adjustments to a very difficult
negotiating environment have been interpreted by
others as vacillation and wavering.”
As to Clinton’s confrontation of Iraq, I’ll let him
explain in his own words from an address to the
nation in December, 1998: “Earlier today, I ordered
America's armed forces to strike military and
security targets in Iraq…Their mission is to attack
Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons
programs and its military capacity to threaten its
neighbors. Their purpose is to protect the national
interest of the United States, and indeed the
interests of people throughout the Middle East and
around the world. Saddam Hussein must not be
allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with
nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.”
What prompted Clinton’s actions? Again, in his own
words: “Six weeks ago, Saddam Hussein announced
that he would no longer cooperate with the United
Nations weapons inspectors called UNSCOM. They are
highly professional experts from dozens of
countries. Their job is to oversee the elimination
of Iraq's capability to retain, create and use
weapons of mass destruction, and to verify that
Iraq does not attempt to rebuild that capability…”
Why attack Iraq? Don’t other countries have weapons
of mass destruction?
“…Other countries possess weapons of mass
destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam,
there is one big difference: he has used them. Not
once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons
against Iranian troops during a decade-long war.
Not only against soldiers, but against civilians,
firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel,
Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only
against a foreign enemy, but even against his own
people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq.
The international community had little doubt then,
and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked,
Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons
again.”
“…This situation presents a clear and present
danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf and the
safety of people everywhere. The international
community gave Saddam one last chance to resume
cooperation with the weapons inspectors. Saddam has
failed to seize the chance. And so we had to act
and act now.”
Where were all the protestors, the dissenters in
Congress and how come all of the
hypocrite-Hollywood hand-wringers were MIA? For
one, they were still busy helping to defend
Clinton’s behavior with an intern named Monica.
(The strike against Iraq was ordered on the eve of
the impeachment vote in the House of
Representatives).
But even more to the point is simply this: Deep
down inside these phonies knew Clinton wasn’t
serious about ending Iraq’s chemical and biological
threat.
The fact that we are still stuck with the same
stench in our nostrils five years later is all the
evidence we need. Fortunately the adults are back
in charge. But what a mess they’ve been left with.
Gregory J. Rummo is a syndicated columnist.
Visit his website;
www.GregRummo.com
Critique this work
Click on the book to leave a comment about this work
