Sunday, October 24, 2010
Thursday, October 21, 2010
The Obama Administration foreign policy is virtually indistinguishable from that of George W. Bush, whose heavy handed form of internationalism combined with regime change has brought calamity to the United States. Presumably Obama and Rice were able to congratulate each other on their ability to unite Republicans and Democrats in supporting a seamless vision of the world as it might be if only those poor heathen devils out there would learn to behave. Andrew Bacevich has described the foreign policy consensus that has ruled the United States since the Second World War as a sacred trinity consisting of global military presence, a military capable of projecting power worldwide, and a willingness to intervene anywhere in the world for any reason secure in the belief that Washington is a force for good. These policies have been supported by both major parties and have now led to something approaching war without end as new adversaries are identified and confronted.
Standard stuff for peaceniks and libertarians. As is the call for "Nuremberg" type trials. But it has to be said over and over again til we make it happen. More excerpts from Giraldi.
Those who expect the government to serve the people should be particularly appalled at the revolving door of self-serving statists who proliferate throughout the system, men and women who have never had a genuine job in their lives but who scurry off to their law firms, lobbying offices, think tanks, and universities before returning at a higher level to the government bringing ruin with them.
Seven years ago a major war crime was committed when Iraq was attacked yet no one has been punished, nor has anyone even been seriously challenged on the steps taken that led up to war. The United States bombed and then invaded a country that posed no threat and that had no ability in any event to strike against Americans or American targets. In 1946, the judges at the Nuremberg Trials called the initiation of a war of aggression the ultimate war crime because it inevitably unleashed so many other evils. Ten leading Nazis were executed at Nuremberg and ninety-three Japanese officials at similar trials staged in Asia. In spite of the fact that a majority of Republicans now considers the Iraq war to have been a "mistake," a view certainly shared by most Democrats and the public, no American government official was even fired as a consequence.
If one were to ask who were the potential war criminals in the Bush Administration the list would certainly include Rice. Giraldi also lists and describes the crimes and comfy rewards for the crimes of: CIA Director George Tenet, Vice President Dick Cheney, his colleague Scooter Libby, Bush Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and his chief deputy at the Pentagon- Doug Feith,
No one is punished or even tarnished by his or her role. On the contrary, all are, in fact, richly rewarded for their presumed dedication to their country. One can well presume that the old saw about every good deed being rewarded has been turned on its head in the US government, with only those guilty of crimes against humanity being considered for promotion. Can there be any wonder why ambitious people who are ethically challenged flock to start wars and torture for Uncle Sam? They know they will never be held accountable for anything they do and will reap the financial rewards that they think they deserve. Until that culture is eradicated by something like a Nuremberg trial demonstrating that no one is above the law the United States will continue to be a place that the rest of the world quite rightly regards as preaching respect for rules and values while rewarding just the opposite.
Thursday, October 07, 2010
Saturday, October 02, 2010
Is it just the fact that the United States government - an organization using "legalized violence" - has permitted the stray psychopath to have this much power? Or have "Americans" (citizens of the United States particularly) really adopted such Supremacist beliefs about their own moral and political righteousness, that they can justify killing even those who cower before it? Even those whose governments actively cooperate with it, as in Afghanistan and Pakistan?
After all, American children still assume they are the best academically in the world - even though they rank academically even after some "second world" nations. "We're number one and we'll kick your butt to prove it!" - as long as China and the Saudi princes keep lending us the money to do it? (And let's not forget the millions of defacto white christian supremacists, many of whom see joining the world's greatest military as their god-commanded patriotic duty.)
A couple interesting Antiwar.com articles on the above in the last couple days.
In "Tea Party vs. War Party?" Pat Buchanan writes:
The neocons are nervous the Tea Party may not sign up to soldier on for the empire. Writing in the Washington Post, Danielle Pletka and Thomas Donnelly of AEI have sniffed out the unmistakable scent of "isolationism" among Tea Party favorites.
They are warning that the old right and Tea Party might unite in a "combination of Ebenezer Scrooge and George McGovern, withdrawing from the world to a countinghouse America."
Sorry, but the old neocon name-calling won’t cut it this time.
After Iraq and Afghanistan, the American people are not going to give the establishment and War Party a free hand in foreign policy. Every patriot will do what is necessary and pay what is needed to defend his country. But national security is one thing, empire security another.
And Antiwar.com links to a British article "Be very afraid – we are being fleeced by purveyors of fear" which makes the excellent point:
In the mid-1970s, the Provisional IRA staged some 50 explosions in London, subjecting the city to far greater mayhem than today. Somehow we survived without the gargantuan counter-terror apparatus in place today. The bombing campaign came nowhere near toppling the British government or infringing the liberty of the state. The chief threat to that freedom today comes not from terrorists but from the government's response to them.
Britain doesn't have as big a military to fleece as the United States, so their military-industrial elite has to make due with selling Britain the most surveillance cameras per capita on the planet. In this country, of course, these fleecers screaming "terrorism" have managed to gouge a couple trillion dollars out of taxpayers - in addition to money spent on the actual wars - since the September 11 attacks. (Now remind who it was who planted the bombs in the Twin Towers to make sure they fell after pissed off Arabs rammed planes into them? Why pass up an opportunity to make a couple billion in insurance money from a hot tip from an old friend who's buddies with explosive experts.)
This is the Domestic War Party that is very happy to cooperate with the Foreign War Party (neoconservatives, Israel Firsters and actual Israelis) who have so much power throughout the government and the media. (When Obama's Zionist chief of staff resigns, he immediately replaces him with another one; but I guess you have to do what you have to do to keep Israel from destroying America with its Samson Option.)
At least the brouhaha about the "9/11 Mosque" has subsided somewhat. Maybe someone has realized that provoking Americans to hate one minority for its religion could spill over to re-awakening old hatreds against those who alleged "killed Christ," especially should Israel pre-emptively attack Iran, drive up the price of gasoline to $10 a gallon and lead to 30% unemployment.
I could go on and on, but the bottom line is: supremacism and violence are bad. Being smart enough to know which corporate state bastards are fleecing you by encouraging you to engage in them is good. I hope the Tea Party (and those "libertarians" who seem to like war) are listening.