Carpet-bomb Turtle Bay

I have to admit that, my deep-seated cynicism about American politics aside, the God-Emperor of Mankind has proven to be even more energetic and effective over the last few days than I had thought possible.

The Mayor of Tampa has already bowed to Trump's executive order demanding an end to so-called "sanctuary cities". President Trump is, quite sensibly, looking into bringing back waterboarding as a form of interrogation. The Great Wall of Trumpmerica is very much on. The Ordo Hereticus of the Inquisition Department of Homeland Security looks like it's going to be given the teeth, and the claws, required to actually, y'know, enforce the damn LAW and deport invading law-breakers.

And now- amid a true torrent of good news- we hear that the God-Emperor could very well be looking into ways to cut funding for the United Abominations:
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is preparing executive orders that would clear the way to drastically reduce the United States’ role in the United Nations and other international organizations, as well as begin a process to review and potentially abrogate certain forms of multilateral treaties. 
The first of the two draft orders, titled “Auditing and Reducing U.S. Funding of International Organizations” and obtained by The New York Times, calls for terminating funding for any United Nations agency or other international body that meets any one of several criteria. 
Those criteria include organizations that give full membership to the Palestinian Authority or Palestine Liberation Organization, or support programs that fund abortion or any activity that circumvents sanctions against Iran or North Korea. The draft order also calls for terminating funding for any organization that “is controlled or substantially influenced by any state that sponsors terrorism” or is blamed for the persecution of marginalized groups or any other systematic violation of human rights. 
The order calls for then enacting “at least a 40 percent overall decrease” in remaining United States funding toward international organizations.
I could barely contain my glee upon seeing this news. I have been waiting for years for an American President with balls the size of Imperator-class Titans to cut funding and eventually exile the United Nations from American shores.

And now, we might just see this useless, stupid, corrupt, inept, decrepit, vile, horrible, miserable, incompetent, [insert another 15 pejoratives of your choice here] organisation sent to the ash-heap of history, where it belongs.

As my alt-Right brethren are greeting each other with huge grins across our faces these days: ARE YOU TIRED OF WINNING YET?!

Now, to be as resolutely fair as possible, there are actually some good reasons to have a global organisation like the UN. It can be, and has been, argued that the reason why WWII erupted twenty years after the fatally flawed Treaty of Versailles is because the League of Nations was not backed by the two major global powers at the time, the USA and the USSR. It can also be argued that because the League lacked any serious teeth, it was unable to present a serious threat to the rise of Nazi Germany.

But this is, in my opinion, a highly simplistic and deeply flawed reading of history. In fact, when Hitler was expanding the Third Reich by sending the Wehrmacht into both the Saarland in 1935 and then the Rhineland in 1936, his grip on power was still actually fairly weak. At that time, Hitler's generals were deeply wary of their new Fuhrer and were terrified of the possibility that the other Great Powers- specifically, Britain and France- would intervene.

When Hitler gave the order to occupy the DMZ of the Rhineland, in direct violation of the terms of the Treaty of Versailles and other pacts, his generals were seething and close to open revolt.

We now know, thanks to various documents unearthed since the end of WWII, that if Britain or France had posted so much as a single marching band on the bridges to the Rhineland, it is highly likely that the Germans would have simply turned right around and slunk straight back to Berlin- and that if this had happened, a coup led by the generals would almost surely have taken place to depose Hitler.

That would not be the last time that a simple show of strength by Germany's enemies would have stopped Hitler and resulted in his overthrow, by the way. With the benefit of hindsight, it is clear to any reasonably impartial observer that there were multiple points along the road to WWII on which Hitler could have been slowed down and even stopped cold.

And the League of Nations, which had by that time devolved into little more than a glorified talk shop, stood by and did nothing as Europe's worst mass-murderer* pushed the world inexorably toward the most horrific war that humanity has ever fought.

The point is that the League of Nations failed not because the USA and USSR weren't part of it- but because its most powerful members lacked the nerve to stand up for themselves. They were weak and frightened and they let themselves be exploited by a man who knew perfectly well how to deal with cowards.

Just as was true of our present time until fairly recently, back then "internationalism" was the order of the day; multilateral treaties between powers were thought to be the way forward to an era of everlasting peace.

Then, as now, free trade and dialogue between entrenched elites were thought to be the best safeguards against the horrors of total war.

And then, just as now, the serious structural problems of such a worldview were papered over and ignored until they simply became too great to ignore, and could no longer cope with the stresses to which they were subjected.

Global organisations like the UN have been able to ignore certain fundamental realities of the human condition because, up until now, they were given the full support of the American establishment. Without America, there wouldn't be a UN- the entire organisation depends on the USA for nearly a quarter of its budget.

Without those contributions, the United Abominations will have to find some other nation to leech off of. Maybe they can find sympathetic hosts in Sweden; after all, the Swedes don't seem to be terribly interested in self-preservation at the moment.

And just think of all of that lovely overpriced real estate in midtown Manhattan that would suddenly drop in value if the UN were to go away. Living in Manhattan- which in my opinion you'd have to be a few cards short of a full deck to want to do- might actually become tolerable.

As far as I'm concerned, this is a no-lose strategy. Right, that's it- President Trump, give the order, let the Imperial Fists march upon Turtle Bay, take it over, and throw out the UN!

*I don't count Stalin, who was actually worse, because he was Russian- technically, Georgian- and therefore not exactly European.


  1. I wouldn't pull out of the UN; it's easier to destroy something from the inside than the outside. I would keep the UNSC P5 in existence, because that's the only part of the sewer worth keeping.

    1. But, sir, just THINK of all of the liberal nappy-soiling that would result from simply bulldozing the entire UN building straight into the East River! Folks like us would be salt-mining for years as a result!!!

      And if the UNSC P5 want a meeting place, surely that could be done in a neutral spot like, oh, say, Bermuda, where the weather is nice and the women are beautiful and there is no such thing as "winter"?


Post a comment

Contact the Didact:

Popular Posts