• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

The death of King Hussein of Jordan marks the beginning of an era of
unprecedented international instability. King Hussein’s death also
demands that we shine a harsh spotlight on an American foreign policy
that is dangerously adrift.

When President Bush ordered coalition troops into Kuwait at the
beginning of
this decade, the whole world stood with America. When President Clinton
attacked Iraq as this decade was ending, only Tony Blair, Bill’s British
Third-Way friend, supported the attack.

What happened in seven short years? Where did America go wrong? Why
did our Gulf War Arab allies object to the latest attack on Iraq? What
happened to our Western European and NATO allies? Why did Russia stand
aside this time?

Bill Clinton planted the seeds of this massive international
defection with his
reckless “Wag the Dog” attack on the Sudan last August. At the time,
Clinton said that he had solid proof that the Sudanese plant was making
components for chemical weapons. Since then, he has refused to present
credible evidence to support his claims.

When former President Jimmy Carter asked the Clinton administration
to
submit its evidence to an impartial tribunal, Clinton refused to
cooperate. But when Saddam Hussein followed suit and refused to allow
U.N. inspectors to wander around his country, Clinton launched a
unilateral billion-dollar attack on Iraq. This double-standard has been
noted with dismay by the leaders of the world.

Although the Clinton administration still refuses to “prove up” its
case for
attacking Sudan, ABC News says that the owner of the Sudanese plant and
his American lawyers have presented compelling evidence that the attack
was unjustified. They retained the services of scientists to collect
soil samples from 13 locations at the site. Those soil samples were
subjected to sophisticated testing by three different laboratories. None
of the labs found evidence of the supposed chemical weapon agent.

The Clinton administration, on the other hand, based its decision to
attack
Sudan on one, small soil sample. The CIA did not subject this soil
sample to
rigorous analysis. Only one lab reviewed the sample and that lab did not
use mass spectrometry to analyze the sample. ABC News reports that
international experts believe that the “CIA’s test results are
questionable, at best.”

There is another, even more frightening test that the Clinton
Administration
has failed in Sudan. None of the Sudanese fire personnel, police
officers or
civilians who rushed to the bombing site wore protective suits or masks.
If that plant produced chemical weapon ingredients, scores of Sudanese
citizens should be experiencing “Gulf War Syndrome”-type illnesses six
months later. The fact that no one has gotten sick is chilling evidence
that the American attack was not justified.

You do not attack the capital of a foreign country on such shaky
evidence.
You do not attack the capital of a foreign country just to distract
attention from your personal problems. Apparently, Bill Clinton has
surrounded himself with aides who are unable to control his reckless
instincts.

Many Americans doubt that Sudan can retaliate against America. They
are
wrong. America faces two new threats to our national security. The first
is our lack of a missile-defense system. North Korea and China have the
capacity to drop nuclear missiles on our mainland and we can’t stop
them. Iran will likely join this group in two to three years. Maj. Gen.
John Singlaub, (ret) told me that Russia and the Ukraine have lost track
of hundreds of nuclear devices. According to Clinton’s CIA chief, Russia
is selling nuclear technology to Iran to raise cash. But that is not the
scary news.

The scary news is that it is now possible to build nuclear weapons
that will fit
in a suitcase. My fear is that Sudan will provide a safe haven for those
who would import suitcase-sized weapons of mass destruction into
America. My prayer is that Clinton’s “Wag the Dog” attack on the Sudan
will not end up costing the lives of hundreds, thousands or millions of
Americans.

There has never been a worse time for America to have no credible
foreign
policy. Israel and Jordan will have new leaders for the first time in 46
years.
Nelson Mandela is stepping down in South Africa and China has pointed
100 new missiles at Taiwan. South Korea is worried that North Korea will
start a new war. Japan, Brazil, and Indonesia have joined Russia on the
brink of economic and social collapse. Mexico has become so unsafe that
you can’t even trust police officers or taxi drivers. Clinton’s Haiti
experiment is an unmitigated failure and Canada’s economy is slowly
collapsing.

America needs a tough leader who will protect America’s interests in
these
dangerous times. America needs a tough leader who will place our
national
security in front of his personal insecurity. America needs a tough
leader who understands that Little Rock is not the center of the world.
Unfortunately, the Clinton administration’s foreign policy reflects the
selfishness and lack of discipline of its namesake.

We live in very dangerous times, my friends, and the old rules of
engagement have been scrapped. We can’t wait for our “leaders” to lead.
We must force the U.S. Senate to develop a new and sophisticated foreign
policy. Otherwise, Clinton’s bridge to the 21st Century will be covered
with the blood of innocent Americans sacrificed by new enemies
needlessly created by the master dog wagger.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.