Charley Reese: Too many coincidences for him
Published Thursday, November 29, 2001
Mathematicians argue that coincidences occur a lot more often than most people believe. And who am I to argue with anybody who knows calculus?
Nevertheless, there are a number of coincidences involved in the war on terrorism.
It is a coincidence that there are large oil and gas reserves in South Asian countries north of Afghanistan whose governments we have recently provided with undisclosed millions of dollars, allegedly for the use of old Soviet air bases.
It is a coincidence that the logical route for pipelines runs through Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Therefore, I suppose it is a further coincidence that the United States suddenly has an interest in not only getting rid of Osama bin Laden, but with replacing the government in Afghanistan.
And it is another coincidence that after nearly 10 years of dumping on Pakistan, we have suddenly re-embraced that country as one of our best friends.
And it is a final coincidence, and one that prompted this column, that the Central Command has just stated publicly that when the war in Afghanistan ends, it doesn’t mean there won’t be a need for a U.S. military presence in the region.
I suppose it is only a coincidence that we end up with a permanent military presence in the vicinity of huge gas and oil reserves, and that countries with oil and gas that think those resources should benefit them, rather than people in London and New York, end up on our enemies list.
The previous dictator of Sudan, for example, was just as enthusiastic about slaughtering rebels in the south as the current government. But he had cut a deal with an American oil company. And, by coincidence, the United States thought Sudan worthy of American military protection. The present government tossed out the American oil company along with the dictator and is now doing business with the Chinese. Hence, by coincidence, Sudan has become a big enemy, a sponsor of terrorism and a violator of human rights — which, by coincidence, is a perfect description of the previous American-loved dictator.
I don’t mean to sound cynical. If our president says his motivation is to save future generations from evildoers, I certainly believe that he believes that. I’m not sure his idealism is shared by everyone in his administration.
There is a cabal in the administration trying to make a case for attacking Iraq by claiming Iraq had something to do with the Sept. 11 attack. It is a coincidence that on Sept. 21, the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph reported that Israeli intelligence officials said they had not detected any link between Iraq and the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
I’m sure they’re better informed than the Saddam Hussein lynch mob in Washington. Saddam, by coincidence, is one of those nationalists who thinks oil profits should be invested in the Arab world to benefit the Arab people rather than in London and New York. He is one more former ally of the United States (oh, yes, we were all for him when he was fighting Iran) who has run afoul of the internationalists.
It is naturally only a
coincidence that all too often, American foreign-policy
objectives dovetail nicely with the economic objectives of