John Chuckman
Doctor Frankenstein's frightfulcreature was assembled from the limbs of corpses collected in thedead of night.
The Pentagon, with a steadysupply of perfectly good severed limbs and heads from all its bombingruns, has decided the good Doctor's approach to the ideal soldier hascertain public-relations liabilities. Jerky, stitched-together bodiesin uniform with putrid blue-green skin would not make good photo-ops.So the Pentagon hastaken the high-tech approach, informing us recently that they are notmany years away from putting the finishing touches to a robotsoldier.
The picture of the creature released with thechirpy announcement--since the Pentagon has moved heavily into publicrelations and spying, its tone has become more chirpy, sounding oftenlike a 1950's announcement for new car models--shows a stubby thing,resembling one of Dr. Who's dreaded Daleks more than anything else.Only this delightful creature has all kinds of antennae, lens, andgizmos, making it also somewhat resemble a space probe sent to trekthe arid sands of Mars, blasting, digging, and probing as it humsalong on nuclear batteries.
Thinking people, naturally, regard the prospect ofimperial robot forces with dread, robots shooting and herdingcivilians after being parachuted into the mountains of Central Asiaor onto the sands of the Middle East. It is remarkable that such anightmarish concept should spring from the same people who fear somuch as cameras on their crime-ridden streets out of paranoid concernfor individual rights.
Many outside the United States comfort themselveswith the belief that it really isn't the same people makingnightmarish decisions, for America, just as George Orwell's Oceania,has several distinct citizenship levels, each with differing rightsand privileges. It is the group that George Bush comesfrom--arrogant, unthinking, virtually-get-away-with-murdersnots--that dreams up these horrors and sees that they are generouslyfunded by ordinary, hardworking Americans who must pay their taxes.
When I heard about American soldiers killing anItalian secret service agent who had worked to secure the release ofhostage journalist, Giuliana Sgrena, the thought occurred that maybethe robots couldn't do much worse. American sources first tried tomake it look as though the car carrying the two innocent victims hadbeen speeding towards a check-point. With all the bombings inBaghdad, people would understand the killing as regrettable butunavoidable.
It turns out this effort to influence publicunderstanding was a total fabrication. Just as in the case, somewhile back, of the American press's mythical Battle of Samara whichproved nothing more than a slaughter of Iraqi civilians by anothergroup of trigger-happy Americans shooting up a whole neighborhoodwithout being so much as shot at.
The car carrying the released hostage to freedomwas not speeding. The car was a very short distance from the airportwhen a patrol of American soldiers blinded it with a searchlight andan instant hail of bullets. The occupants had no idea what washappening until it was over, and the truly brave Italian agent laybleeding and dying in the arms of the wounded journalist.
It became obvious what happened as thetrigger-happy soldiers stood around the car containing wounded anddying occupants and wouldn't permit any access or help for severalminutes. From such events come the not-to-be-sneered-at stories ofAmericans targeting journalists they don't like (Ms Sgrena beingquite critical of Americans in Iraq). The scene must have resembledthe chilling one in Stanley Kubrick's "Full Metal Jacket" where agroup of American soldiers stands, with a wounded and dyingVietnamese woman at their feet, chatting and unblinkingly watchingher die.
The only thing special about this horrible eventin Baghdad was that the victims were prominent Westerners. Eventsjust like it happen all the time to poor Iraqis, whole families beingshot up sometimes by American soldiers, to say nothing of thecountless cases of brutality and torture inflicted on men unfortunateenough to imprisoned at the mercy of Appalachian Throwbacks inuniform.
The New York Times, in its subtle propagandacampaign supporting Bush, insists on referring to the troops in Iraqas "GIs," a term filled with sentimental suggestions from World WarTwo. GIs were recruited, civilian soldiers, fighting the horrors offascism. America's legionaries in Iraq are professional soldiers, andcertainly the world's most pampered, best paid and equipped. They arenot fighting fascism either, or anything remotely like it. They arethere, just as they were in a decade-long massacre in Vietnam, toenforce the will of a distant imperial power.
There are Americans, and the President chief amongthem, who will say, "Aw shucks, these things happen in war!" Trueenough, but then Iraq isn't a war, it's the aftermath of a calculatedinvasion. The troops shooting up civilians day after day are therefor no high purpose. Likely Bush would offer the same dismissivereaction concerning recent evidence of America's brave boys havingused napalm and poison gas in the Fallujah. In for a penny, in forpound: hell, after an illegal invasion, what's so bad about usingbanned weapons?
If you want just the tiniest insight into theminds of the bleak figures in lab coats running the horror-filledlaboratories of Washington, you have only to look at Bush's reactionto Canada's decision not to participate in a costly missile-defensesystem which has failed every test. Before Canada's decision wasmade, during Bush's trip to Canada and against all accepteddiplomatic protocol, he publicly brought up the topic of missiledefense, a controversial subject in Canada, where it is seen not somuch as an effort at legitimate defense as one to weaponize space. Inprivate, on the same brief trip, he belligerently insisted on hisway. We know this because someone with access leaked to the press atranscript of Bush's embarrassing, rather threatening words.
Then, only days ago, Bush literally wouldn'tanswer Prime Minister Paul Martin's phone call concerning Canada'sdecision against participation. His refusal to return the call wenton for days, resembling the behavior of a brooding bully who hadn'tgot his way. Bush's most unpleasant factotum, Ms Rice, cancelled ascheduled trip to Canada. These kinds of behaviors undoubtedly aren'twell-publicized in America, but how revealing they are of theintegrity and quality of people claiming to lead the world towardsgreater democracy and human rights.
Having made his spiteful point, Bush finallyreturned the Prime Minister's call, and Ms Rice re-scheduled hertrip. Canada does, after all, have a four-thousand mile border withthe United States, a fact which even Washington's most lunatic,safely-behind-the oak-desk warrior fanatics recognize as of somelong-term consequence.
I read recently of another Frankensteinian projectin which a mouse is to be given a brain composed of a clump of humanbrain cells. Perhaps the President personally inspired this one, hisbehavior resembling nothing so much as a human with the brain of amouse.
Copyright 2005 West Art, Prometheus 95/2005