Who will tell the President, Bush?

THIS IS a huge question without any takers. Unfortunately, the world cannot afford to be complacent any more with this question and someone must take on this issue and tell the President of the United States. Otherwise, the world will become more and more vulnerable to blatant beliefs and capricious collusions that in turn would metamorphose into a heap of nuclear ashes. Is it a proposition worth ignoring in today’s world of mutual coexistence? I do not think so. Therefore, someone will have to tell George Bush at any cost.

We must tell Bush that what he terms as Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) are not found elsewhere in the world but in his own backyards. We may add that poor Iraq is as sovereign a nation as United States is, and Saddam Hussein was as honourable a leader as the President himself. We must tell the United States President that no national or rational leader would be respected if he is heard saying, “kill him”, referring to another leader, framed for possessing WMD.

Who is going to make Bush deviate into ordinary sense and understand that war breeds war, not peace? I think a three or four year old child, whose father is keeping peace in Iraq, will be the right person to tell this to him. Or a kid of that age who has lost his / her father, mother or sister or someone known to him or her, in Afghanistan or Iraq will carry out this mission impossible.

Troops pull out’ in military terms means, withdrawal of troops from the war front when they are no longer required there or they have done their job or when they have failed to do the desired job. This is normally done either en masse or in a phased manner. Unfortunately, the president has been telling the world that he is going to withdraw troops. At the same time, he is knocking at the doors of the Congress for more war funds. He even prepares more troops to be deployed in peacekeeping operations. Who will tell him that ‘troops withdrawal’ in plain English means calling the troops back and not ‘pumping more money and military in’?

The sheer size of the loss of troops in Iraq would make any military leader introspect or at least heed the words of thousands of families whose near and dear ones are on the war front fighting for something imaginary. Do these families need to tell their President every time they get information that there was an ambush, bomb blast, sabotage and suicide attack on United States marines?

Who can tell Bush that his own intelligence agency is able to undercut his own White House saying that Iran has not been pursuing nuclear programmes for the last four years? He must be told that a notion of war with Iran is better shelved and the president start doing something to save his and Dick Cheney’s face in the first place, and should stop imagining of getting other countries to team up against Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.





Don’t you readers think that it is not fair for Bush to ask another president to explain why the latter defeated or defamed the former? With his own intelligence report in hand, which clears Iran off a much discussed Nuclear position, is it sensible for a president to cry out, “Iran was dangerous, Iran is dangerous.” “And, Iran will be dangerous if they have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon.” “And, we are not going to change our position on Iran.” Somehow, we must tell the President that the whole world is laughing at him.

We forgot one thing. We must tell him that ‘if someone is not with the United States, that someone (let him be anyone) is with someone else in the world, and not necessarily with the enemy of the US’. This wisdom would have secured him a lot a PR mileage in the gallop polls. Unfortunately, Bush went vociferously describing everyone as enemies of the US.

It is the duty of every citizen of the to do something to stop terrorism, whether it is masterminded by Bin Laden or some other Al Qaeda stalwarts. Meanwhile, we must tell Bush that, ‘if an organisation is able to hijack a few flights with full complement of passengers and crash them against the twin towers of World Trade Centre, converting them into a Ground Zero, and pilot one of the planes to crash-land under very nose of Pentagon, certainly that organisation will have the common sense to harbour its leader, Bin Laden, somewhere safe.’ The President need not have gone for a ransacking operation in the mountain ranges of Afghanistan. It was foolish. We must tell the President that Bin Laden is an intelligent man.

Who is going to apprise the President of the fact that it is not his job to invent peace or reinstate democracy elsewhere in the world? When will he get to know that one nation, however big and powerful that may be, cannot keep on aiding and supporting and strengthening and safeguarding the interests of the rest of the world? This is to be told very urgently, because one of his colleagues the other day, at a congressional hearing on Capitol Hill, defended US aid to Pakistan and described Pakistan, ‘a key ally in the war on terror’.

As a writer I won’t be doing justice to my creed if I fail to tell the President that carbon emission, global warming, ozone depletion, climate change, melting ice caps, rising sea levels are very much real and scientifically proven.

I must add that it is this common sense that makes around 200 representatives from more than 190 countries around the world sit in Bali, Indonesia, to find ways and means to offset this crisis. I am confident that when these people meet the next time, there will be at least one member from the United States to address this life threatening problem caused more by the United States than by all these counties put together. I must tell him at any cost.

And finally we have to tell Bush that Indo US Nuclear deal involves two parties, India and US, and it is an option give to both parties either to decide in favour of it or against it. But he need not rack up his little brain and worry about Indian energy security and its nuclear and defence capabilities.

Yes, it has been long time since we started parading issues that we need to tell Bush. It has been so long that we need to remind him once again, else he may forget, the fact that Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declares victory over the United States and other world powers in the dispute about Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. And the United States intelligence report supports Iran’s assertion that its nuclear programme is for energy not weapons.

Who will tell him that the world has gone far ahead of his current tenure, and the new world order is going to be decided more by consensus and common sense than by United States and its intelligence? We must tell him.

It is extremely urgent to tell President Bush that it would be better he reads newspaper reports to understand how his intelligence agency works.

A leading American newspaper reports the United States based its analysis of Iran’s nuclear weapons activity on the intercepted conversations of Iranian military officials.

The New York Times quoted unidentified senior United States intelligence and government officials as having obtained notes on the conversations several months ago. ‘The officials then tried to verify the information extracted from the notes, which found that Iran stopped a nuclear weapons programme in late 2003’ (Voice of America).