Okay, students. In what year was this written? 10 Extra Points for naming the author. No Googling allowed.
"Pay attention, because I am going to explain our foreign policy.
At the current time (11:21 a.m.) our biggest foreign-policy problem is Saddam Hussein, the evil and amoral dictator of Iran or Iraq, which may actually be the same foreign country.
You may recall that, way back when George Bush was President and most of the White House sex rumors concerned Millie the dog, we beat Saddam in a war. I mean, we kicked his butt. We dropped bombs all over Iraq (or possibly Iran), thereby insuring that Saddam would never, ever, ever again be a threat to the peoples of the world until maybe seven months later, when suddenly, BAM, there he was again! Despite clearly losing the war! That is how amoral he is.
The word was that Saddam was making chemical and biological weapons, which are a clear violation of international rules, because they kill people. So the Clinton administration (motto: ``No We Are NOT Obsessed With Monica Lewinsky Monica Lewinsky Monica Lewinsky!'') was threatening to send Air Force planes over there to drop MORE bombs (which are allowed under international rules, although they also kill people, but in a legal way) on Iran (or possibly Iraq) again.
Perhaps you are wondering: ``What's the point of dropping more bombs, since that is exactly what did not work the first time? Why not just quietly, without making a big public deal of it, send a couple of experienced guys named Victor over there to quietly arrange for Saddam to have an unfortunate shaving accident that results in the loss of the upper two-thirds of his head?''
I am frankly shocked that you would even suggest such a thing. What you're talking about is assassination, which is a serious violation of international rules. On the other hand, it is perfectly OK to drop large quantities of bombs on a foreign country, as long as you are not specifically trying to drop one on the foreign leader, which of course under the rules would be assassination. (These rules are made by lawyers.)
The rules also state that, when you drop your bombs, you are supposed to try to gain a Consensus of World Opinion, which is legally defined as ``at least four nations that know how to make a decent car, plus, if he is not off somewhere building a house, Jimmy Carter.''
This is where we've been running into trouble. America is currently very unpopular in the world. For example, our allies hate us. Especially the French. They have always hated us, of course, for stealing the concept of french fries, but now they REALLY hate us, because our culture has become so dominant that they're having trouble completing so much as a single sentence without using American words. They're always blurting out statements like: ``Le software de la hardware est un humdinger!'' And then they get so mad that they could spit.
Pretty much the entire membership of the United Nations also hates us, because we haven't been paying our dues, which the member nations desperately need so that they can continue carrying out the vital U.N. mission of parking illegally all over New York. In fact our lone international ally at the moment is a man named ``Tony,'' who has been visiting the White House and who claims to be the prime minister of Great Britain, which I for one do not believe for a second. I don't know much, but I know there is nobody in Great Britain named ``Tony.''
So as I said, the world pretty much hates us, and it's getting worse, because every day more nations are being exposed, via international TV syndication, to Jerry Springer. It is only a matter of time before one of these small irate goat-oriented nations decides to launch a chemical or biological attack on us. That's certainly what I want to do when I watch Jerry Springer, and I live here.
My point is that we are not going to get any international help in dealing with Saddam Hussein. It's totally up to us, and I say it's time we stop pussyfooting around and use the ultimate weapon -- the one weapon that will guarantee that Saddam never bothers us again. Yes, as shocking and heartless as it may sound, I'm proposing that we send an Air Force bomber directly over Baghdad, and drop the most damaging, the most horrible, the most morally repugnant weapon that this nation has ever produced: lawyers. (We could even, if necessary, put parachutes on them.)
Within a matter of hours, all of Iraq (or possibly Iran) would be paralyzed by lawsuits; once word got around of the potential size of the damage awards, everybody living within a 50-mile radius of a suspected chemical or biological weapons facility would be complaining of whiplash. Saddam would be ruined for good, and the whole world would thank us. Even the French. Their exact words would be: ``Merci a bunch!''"