Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

America Loves Peace? Odd, Since We're Always at War

By David Michael Green, AlterNet. Posted February 28, 2008.


We've been in conflict for about half the period between World War II and the present but consider ourselves a "peace-loving" nation.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
What Can the Morass of the 1970s Tell Us About the Current Economic Crisis?
Alejandro Reuss

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Does the House Bill's Public Option Kill Off the Senate's?
Booman

Immigration:
Recent Democratic Victories May Grease the Wheels for Immigration Reform in Congress
Marcelo Balive

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
4 Ways the Stupak Amendment Deprives Women of Access to Abortion
Jessica Arons

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
How the Stupak Amendment Radically Undermines Women's Rights
Rachel Morris

Rights and Liberties:
"Women Are Being Killed All Over the World": One Reporter's Fight Against So-Called "Honor Killings"
Robert S. Eshelman

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
Egyptian Marine: Soldiers Often 'Racialize' the Enemy to Cope With Stress
Aaron Glantz

More stories by David Michael Green

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Americans love to think that we're a peaceful people and that we fight wars only when we must.

Unfortunately, you can count in nanoseconds how long those assertions hold up when exposed to such insidious commie dirty tricks as the application of logic or the examination of empirical history.

Sure, any war can be spun as some necessity against some Very Bad Person, preferably of brown skin, slanted eyes and/or differing deity. Not only can any war be so spun, probably every war there ever was has been, at least since the days when governments had to start offering some justification or another for their little foreign adventures.

But pick your barometer -- any one will work -- and you'll quickly see who the militant folks on the planet really are. For America, it turns out -- gulp -- to be that bloated, frightened meth-addict staring back at us in the mirror, not some overseas evil emperor du jour.

For example, suppose you wanted to measure comparative national warlike tendencies by simply counting wars. Since World War II, the United States has messed around, in ways big and small, in Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador, Lebanon, Grenada, Iraq, Panama, Colombia, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Haiti, Afghanistan again, and Iraq again. No country in the world can begin to match this record in the last half-century. And I'm not even listing here the covert operations (almost everywhere), including the ones that toppled democratically elected governments (Iran, Guatemala, Chile, etc.), the long-term occupations of Latin American countries by the U.S. military, the gunboat diplomacy of the American Navy around the world, the aiding and abetting of other killers (Saddam invading Iran, for example, apartheid South Africa or the Israeli occupation of Palestine), the militarization of the oceans and of space, or the myriad other ways in which the United States leads the planet in aggressive tendencies. (For a whole century's worth of overseas fun -- not even counting the big stuff -- Stephen Kinzer's Overthrow is highly recommended reading.)

Who has China been invading lately? Russia? Fidel? Those perfidious (and perfumed) French? Heck, even Saddam couldn't touch this record for aggression, especially once you account for the fact that the U.S. government assisted his foreign soiree into Iran (complete with the chemical weapons, of course) and likely green-lighted the one into Kuwait as well. And let's even grant that one or two of those American adventures had some measure of altruism associated with them, as perhaps the Balkan or Somalian affairs might have (I'd like to know the full story before making that judgment). Isn't the sheer volume of them -- especially relative to the number of wars other countries have fought -- a bit problematic for maintaining the pretense of America's pacific intent? My conservative (in both senses of the word) list above goes to nearly 20. Isn't that a bit much for a peace-loving country?

But scratch that measure if you must (perhaps it cuts too close to the bone). Maybe we can detect America's dislike for war in another metric, say military spending. Oops. Turns out that's going to be a bit problematic, too. I guess it won't be a huge surprise to anybody that the United States spends more on "defense" than any other country in the world. But here's the truly scary part: The United States not only outspends every other country in the world on military goodies, it outspends ALL other countries of the world. Combined. That's right. Take all 190-plus countries out there and add together their defense budgets and you still won't equal America's alone. What's more, that doesn't even include the $100 billion or so that we're dropping each year in Iraq and Afghanistan, nor the additional costs in veterans' (so-called) care, munitions replacement and economic losses we have been hemorrhaging for those wars, which will continue, for decades to come, estimated to run up toward 2 trillion bucks total. (Oh, and did I mention that one-sixth of our population doesn't have healthcare coverage? Never mind. I'm sure those are completely unrelated facts.) Anyhow, does that sound like a peace-loving country to you? And think about this for a second: How absolutely disastrous does your diplomacy have to get so that you need to be able to fight off every other country of the world, all at once?!

OK, OK, so that one didn't work out so well either. The good news is that at least we don't make the world an uglier place by continually inventing new and more vicious weaponry. Not us peace-loving Americans! You know, like atom bombs, napalm, bunker-busters, cluster bombs, neutron bombs, space lasers, phosphorous bombs and stuff like that! Who would build such things? What kind of depraved mind would harness so much of its scientific and industrial establishment to such ends? Who would … er … um … Hey, wait a minute! What do you mean that we invented and manufactured all those things?!?! I thought we were the peace-loving people! Meanwhile, can I interest you in some depleted uranium at a very, very attractive price?

OK, but we must be good neighbors, really, because we're always the ones who are pushing for all sorts of international treaties to limit war, weapons and the worst practices of nasty governments. You know, for example, how we signed on to the United Nations Charter (which we more or less also wrote) and its requirement that states may use militarized aggression only in the case of self-defense or when authorized by the Security Council to do so in a collective security operation. Hey, sometimes we even comply with it! Or maybe you prefer the treaties against land mines, child soldiers or the weaponization of space, which we're pretty much the only folks not signing? The "quaint" and "obsolete" Geneva Conventions against torture and war crimes? How about the International Criminal Court, which John Bolton led the Bush administration into singlehandedly trying to destroy? Hmmm … Wonder why they would have wanted to get rid of that? Gee, I thought genocide and war crimes were bad things! America is the world leader in supporting human rights and seeking peace. So, remember, if you hear someone tell you that we've been abdicating, avoiding, ignoring and destroying all these (and myriad other) treaties that seek to end or prevent war, it's just the liberal America-hating media elites telling lies again, because they want us to lose our wars. (And why would they want that? That's easy! So some other country can march in, take away their enormously profitable media franchises, steal their mansions and yachts, and then hang them for treason and pillaging, of course. Who wouldn't trade their current set-up for that? Trust me, these guys know a good thing when they see it.)

Alright, alright, so it turns out that none of these measures of warlike tendencies turned out so very well. American is winning these contests about as often as is Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail. And with about as much grace, too. But at least the rest of the world thinks of us as nice, peaceful neighbors, right? Well, actually, they sometimes do! Just not now. And just not when we're, uh, engaged in most of our wars, which has been about half the time between World War II and the present. Vietnam wasn't exactly appreciated out there in the global community, and that opinion hasn't changed a whole lot, even after we've established a lovely little trading relationship with that same communist country that we once argued would be so dangerous if it went … er, well, communist. You know, like China! That's why we don't trade with them now, or -- perish the thought -- make ourselves vulnerable by allowing them to finance our national binge borrowing. No sense aiding and abetting the enemy, eh?

Sorry -- I digress. Despite ourselves, America is in fact sometimes admired in world opinion. But not when we play our war games. They can't stand America's duplicity, hypocrisy and arrogance when it comes to so many aspects of international diplomacy, including the aforementioned treaties we've avoided when we're not trying to destroy them. Yet nothing has so inflamed world opinion as the gross transgression against international law and human morality that is Iraq. International polls show that even our allies believe that "the United States contributes the most to world instability along with Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq and North Korea," and that the U.S. presence in Iraq is considered a greater threat to peace than Iran going nuclear. America's standing in world opinion isn't the only measure of how comparatively warlike we are, but it certainly is a valid one. When everybody else in the neighborhood hates you, or hates something you do, it's a moment for a little reflection and introspection, isn't it? Unless, of course, you're just an asshole. Then, why bother?

I don't want to give the wrong impression. Much as I'd like to be, I'm not a pacifist, because I realize that there are genuinely bad actors out there who can't be tamed by a Dick Cheney charm offensive, or beaten into submission by a Condoleeza Rice piano sonata. I'm glad the U.S. military was there to stomp Hitler. Maybe even Korea, Bosnia and Kosovo could be justified as a response to aggression, though here it gets murkier. But Vietnam? No way. Today's Iraq war? Utterly shameful. The Mexican War? Spanish-American War? Cuba? Nicaragua? Guatemala? Grenada? Be serious. Way too often America's pacific intentions are harder to find than the elusive Higgs Boson particle. Probably you'd need a massive supercollider and a bunch of expensive detection equipment to do it, too.

And god knows I'm not blaming the troops for this. Indeed, too often they're the second victims (the truth being the first) of policymakers like Lyndon Johnson, George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton, for whom war is a game and people are pawns. When Bush says things like "This generation is rising to the challenge. We're looking at history, we understand our values, and we're laying that foundation of peace for generations to come," smart countries run like hell. Others just laugh and cut mineral rights deals.

Because of these monsters and the record they've created, Americans have to face an ugly and unfortunate fact. Despite what your sixth-grade civics teacher told you, we're not the white hats of the world. Or at least not often enough. We just like to think we are.

But thinking and being are, alas, two different things, as we found out going into Iraq -- thinking we'd be greeted with chocolates and flowers.

We may get them yet, however. Perhaps they'll be handed to us at the exit ramp, as the next president extricates a sobered United States from the disaster of its latest example of bringing love, American-style, to the world.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: militarism, propaganda, empire, public opinion, pax americana

David Michael Green is a professor of political science at Hofstra University. He is delighted to receive readers' reactions to his articles (dmg@regressiveantidote.net), but regrets that time constraints do not always allow him to respond. More of his work can be found at www.regressiveantidote.net.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
It is what we do
Posted by: primalscream on Feb 28, 2008 12:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think it was Chalmers Johnson who put it best. War is America's number one product. It is our biggest export. It is what we do.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It is what we do Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: It is what we do Posted by: audiodef
» RE: It is what we do Posted by: abbadon2007
» RE: It is what we do Posted by: abbadon2007
» RE: It is what we do Posted by: nochicagoboys
» It is what they do! Posted by: williameon
» RE: It is what they do! Posted by: HoboHomo
» and it's a capitalist plan Posted by: nigelbest
» RE: It is what we do Posted by: Vik
» RE: It is what we do Posted by: Vik
» RE: It is what we do Posted by: arjurg
Just business...
Posted by: ahmlco on Feb 28, 2008 1:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Actually, I believe you miss the point, in that most Americans don't like war, don't like going to war, and don't like having friends and sons and daughters killed and maimed in wars.

The real problem is that American warfare is a business, and one that, by-and-large, is controlled and influenced not by government, but by business.

Since you mentioned Overthrow, we could start, as an example, with the overthrow of the Hawaiian Queen Liliuokalani from her throne in 1893 as a step toward annexing the islands and ensuring that local American plantation owners could maintain their sugar businesses. Ever heard of a little company named Dole?

Or Guatamala and United Fruit? Or the La Luz and Los Angles Mining Company's operations in Nicaragua? Or Exxon and Iraq?

Too many wars and "regime changes" are started when US-based corporations and businesses face sudden presure or rising discontent in foreign countries. Usually because they're taking out so much of the profit that the locals begin talking about nationalizing resources. And then business turns to their hired lackies in the government, who then turn to us, with often-repeated catchphrases like "national interests" or "national security" or guised as "saving" some countries citizens from "rebels" or "corrupt" governments.

When the only really corrupt government is our own.

The pattern is clear, unmistakeable, and repeated again and again and again. And we, to our shame, fall for it again and again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Just business... Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: Just business... Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: Just business... Posted by: audiodef
» RE: You said it Posted by: donl51
» RE: You said it Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: Just business... Posted by: chaufan
Let's Not Be Pussies...
Posted by: gazooks on Feb 28, 2008 1:43 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... about our lot as the affluent, affable schoolyard bully with the pretty sister who only pummels deserving little brats who ask for it.

Somebody's got to do it, no? Somebody always has, rather domination by a Mao, Napoleon or Ghengis?

Look, even Kirk had to radiate a little photon aggression now and again, and that damned prime directive was often an inconvenience requiring interpretation.

As one who lives in a state utterly dependent on the defense dole for fiscal well being, I say... if the French don't like it, remind them of their own inconvenient historic truth and the fact that they're le pussies.

Let's not be pussies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» you know nothing of french history Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
» RE: Jesuus, Spiff... Posted by: gazooks
» sorry Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
» RE: sorry Posted by: willymack
» RE: Let's Not Be Pussies... Posted by: C the B
» RE: Let's Not Be Pussies... Posted by: gazooks
» *tips beret* Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
Authority And The Individual : The Root Issue
Posted by: skizum on Feb 28, 2008 2:52 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm the sort of person that seeks to not only try to understand an issue at its root causes but I also try to create solutions at the root of the issue. I don't think that it is enough to see a problem and just complain about it.

I'm in the process of reading a great book based on a lecture series by Bertrand Russell called "Authority And The Individual", 1948. What impresses me about this book is how his impressions of why the world is the way it is(was), stand true to the test of time.

The book starts out by describing the nature of conflict and war from early man through WWII and offers a perspective that is as accurately descriptive of the catalysts of conflict which are rooted in our own human nature and nurture. The book starts out by describing examples of man's propensity to have a constant rival and the motivating factors behind this need.

The titles of the chapters in this short volume are:

I. Social Cohesion and Human Nature
II. Social Cohesion and Government
III. The Role of individuality
IV. The Conflict of Technique and Human Nature
V. Control and initiative: their Respective Spheres
VI. Individual and social ethics

The deepest point that I perceived from Russell's volume is that we as individuals, and thus societies, have a strong intuitive nature to dominate [to gain control of resources]. This is not to say that domination is the only strong motivation of human nature but it does yield the highest potential for destruction and death via brute force and lack of compassion. War is a highly effective trump card.

Clearly, there are many other elements of human behavior that combined, in or out of balance, guide the future of our human race and for that matter most life on earth.

The big picture point is that we need to start to identify, understand, assess and balance the elements of our human nature so that we can socially evolve with the goal of creating a sustainably humane world.

This is, in fact, the strategy of my efforts with a project called The Universal Humane Needs Assessment. I believe that if we can learn, as individuals, how to balance our shared (perhaps universal) needs then we will put ourselves onto a path where we can find much more constructive ways to fulfill our basic needs including our need to dominate using the tools of war. Check out the project description and the current preliminary list of humane needs.

I understand that there is a ton of research out there ranging across many fields of study but we really need to bring it all together around a flexible framework in which we all can find a shared compassion to dominate our shared enemy, survival of the human race.

In any case, it's always a good idea to continue to raise your 'voice' and be heard regarding the opposition to war and so many other symptoms of the need to dominate...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» look at your own logic Posted by: skizum
America's mission: Combine "Chicago Boys" economic policy with government militarism
Posted by: nochicagoboys on Feb 28, 2008 4:05 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The United States is the largest manufacturer of weaponry and military equipment in the world. In the short span of fifty years the United States has gone from a manufacturer of products and a builder of infrastructure, for use by society and the good of humankind, to a manufacturer of war products for the sole purpose of destroying infrastructure and killing humankind.

When you produce a product, you need to find markets for it. With continual war not setting very well with the American people, coupled with the devalued dollar, countries around the world will now be able to buy American "weapons of destruction" for even less than before. Sounds like a recipe for perpetual war and mayhem, whether or not we're conducting it, to me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

USA: at war from its creation as an independent state
Posted by: Don Pablo on Feb 28, 2008 4:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With due respect, if a European may make a comment: the US has been in conflict from its very creation. Please refer to A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn. Will its attitude ever change?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» pfft! "mankind is your business!" Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
» exactly Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
Support the troops?
Posted by: mkdelta69 on Feb 28, 2008 4:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
LEO TOLSTOY

Author of the great novel War and Peace, Tolstoy is considered one of histories greatest thinkers on the issue of World Peace. He wrote many articles on the subject of peace--some involve actual letters from soldiers seeking advice. His message to soldiers still rings true: "You are a soldier...you have been brought to 'pacify'...it has been instilled in you that you are not responsible for the consequences of your shots. But you know that the man who falls bleeding from your shot is killed by you and by no one else..."

Tolstoy believed that "Armies will only be diminished and abolished when people cease to trust governments, and themselves seek salvation from the miseries that oppress them, and seek safety, not by the complicated and delicate [efforts] of diplomats, but in the simple fulfillment of that law binding upon every man, inscribed in all religious teachings, and present in every heart, not to do to others what you wish them not to do to you-above all not to slay your neighbors." (1896)


I don't see how you can protect and honor the soldier when even a moron can see that we were wrong in every way with the illegal invasion of Iraq and the fact that it may last for at least 8 more years if McCain is elected.

What is different about German troops fighting for Hitler or Japanese fighting for Tojo? WW 2 was fought for Empire. US won and now has to maintain it's "GRAND AREA". Using Project Paper Clip NAZIs to emulate the brutal tactics of NAZIs and the Japanese to conquer people that resisted.

Only problem is that with the knowledge of how that Empire is maintained. John Perkins "Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man" people in our Grand Area are wising up to our methods of Empire. Corruption, using World Bank and IMF to undermine soverenty by creating debt and leveraging that to sweetheart deals on resources or submission to US strategic goals. Kind of reminds me of a movie I love "Patton". Patton's first victory over Rommel, "you magnificent bastard, I read your book," during his ambush at Kaserine pass. Chaves is using Noam Chomsky against us.
Chavez and others in Latin America,google (Grand Area) are cutting the shackles with their own banking systems and trading pacts. They will soon replace the dollar with the euro further eroding the control of the Evil Empire.

Evolve or die

We must devise win win social and economic models not elite win middle class and poor loose.

Or the elite will fall and it will be long hard and brutal.

HOW CAN YOU HONOR THE TROOPS AND END THE WAR? ESPECIALLY IF THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX HAS INSULATED ITSELF FROM THE RULE OF LAW?

WILL IT TAKE ANOTHER COUNTRY LIKE RUSSIA OR CHINA? THE PEOPLE OPPOSED WERE NOT ABLE TO STOP HITLER OR TOJO.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Support the troops? Posted by: Captainmagic
» RE: Support the troops? Posted by: mkdelta69
45 year war followed by 17 and counting
Posted by: whealeydj on Feb 28, 2008 4:31 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Cold War lasted circa 45 years and was immediately followed by the 1st Iraq war (Gulf War), armistice with bombing, 2nd Iraq war and occupation with no end in sight, especially if McCain is elected. Militarism has deep roots and a vote for McCain is a vote for militarism. Obama is the only hope to move back toward sanity in foreign interventionism. Even if he is elected, militarism is entrenched and he is not Dennis Kucinich with pacifist leanings.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Peace only happens when one side stops fighting
Posted by: xbj on Feb 28, 2008 4:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A simple truth in Christ's day, in Gandhi's, and even more so today.

Like my parents taught me when I fought with my brother, it takes two to fight.

When one side stops fighting because it's been decimated, it doesn't end the fight; it only postpones it. Payback (blowback) is a bitch. The British Empire understood this, until they were blackmailed (Mad Cow biowarfare and US-sponsored terrorism) and co-opted by the fascist US back into Imperialism.

One side has to be choose to be TRULY greater than the other; and the path to true greatness is not through victory, but surrender when you have the overwhelming advantage.

When one side stops fighting because it no longer wishes to conquer, but chooses instead to share, then, and only then, can TRUE peace happen.

The US isn't there yet; it probably will never get there. There is simply too much wealth to be generated off the spilling of innocent blood for those amoral enough to partake. Which is why Amerika's fate will be that of every other World Empire before it; utter annihilation at the combined hands of everyone else on the planet.

Payback (blowback) is a bitch. The single-most important lesson in all of human history.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stop the madness
Posted by: Patti on Feb 28, 2008 4:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We must stop the madness. Demand an end to American aggression in the name of "democracy" and "peace". We must take back our government and reclaim this nation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Stop the madness Posted by: yale
ONLY NUMBERS
Posted by: Abe on Feb 28, 2008 5:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Two hundred, twenty-eight years
That, we have been going to war
Eleven times we said, “For freedom!”
Was, what we were fighting for.

We’ve spent two, point, six trillion
But that was just a petty cost
Compared to all of the spent lives
Of those loved ones, who were lost.

Thirty-two hundred plus, a month
For more than thirty-two years
The total time fighting our enemies
And more time, shedding our tears.

One and one quarter million dead
That’s more than fifteen every day
Since we went to war, “For freedom!”
In our Revolutionary way.

One and one half million wounded
For this Country of the Free
Although some of these losses
Were the Union’s and Confederacy.

But, all of them are Veterans
Who fought for what they believed
In their own way, doing battle
For those Freedoms, they perceived.

As of late, a Veteran’s definition
Has come from a different kind of War
For which we all, are conscripted
To help guard, our Freedom’s door.

Let’s Honor, each and every one
And though we may not know each name
They were so much more than numbers
In every Wartime’s deadly “game”.

And, each November eleventh
In the years, that come to be
Let’s hope someday, all People
Live in a land, where they are Free.

Let’s make Veteran’s Day a memory
And a part of days gone past
Learn to live with our Fellowman
In a Free World at Peace, at last.

Del “Abe” Jones
10-24-2003

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Uh writer dude
Posted by: g50 on Feb 28, 2008 5:26 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who has Russia been messing around with? China? Really - NOBODY? Tell that to Tibetans, tell that to the people in the Caucuses, you think France doesn't play the military game, check Saddam's weapons receipts, yea militarism is some kind of an anomaly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Uh commenter dude Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Uh commenter dude Posted by: g50
» RE: Uh commenter dude Posted by: tommy_slothrop
» RE: Uh commenter dude Posted by: g50
» RE: Uh commenter dude Posted by: g50
» RE: Uh commenter dude Posted by: tommy_slothrop
» RE: Uh commenter dude Posted by: g50
» RE: Uh commenter dude Posted by: tommy_slothrop
» RE: Uh commenter dude Posted by: g50
» RE: Uh commenter dude Posted by: tommy_slothrop
» RE: Uh commenter dude Posted by: xvictor
» RE: Uh commenter dude Posted by: g50
Waging War For Peace...
Posted by: johnjmccarthy on Feb 28, 2008 5:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Waging War For Peace makes as much sense as Screwing For Virginity.

There is no excuse for aggressive, preemptive war. None! We hanged people for just that after WWII.

The War on Terror is The War on Truth. Self flaggellation and mutual masterbation are far less destructive. The reason for masturbation is hormonal. The reason for Terror is foreign policy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

War is 4Ever!!
Posted by: xvictor on Feb 28, 2008 6:01 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dwindling resources and the urge to meet the bottom line will ensure membership into the perpetual wars club. America has been invited.... (America accepts!!!)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: War is 4Ever!! Posted by: holojojo
This has been going on long before WWII
Posted by: maxpayne on Feb 28, 2008 6:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America has been credited with and built on VIOLENCE starting with the genocide against Native Americans. Sometimes I wonder if the Natives cursed us of living in total unrest for generations to come. Sadly, neither party is anything close to being pro-peace and all 3rd parties are squashed because of their being anti-war and pro-peace.

P.S.: Throw out both parties and replace them with pro-people INDEPENDENTS !! America has been stuck with the two-party duopoly for decades already. That said, the pols are free to ABUSE their power and as long as we all are going to shoot ourselves out and vote for one evil or the other, we're all LOSERS ! Let's start voting in pro-people pro-peace pols for a change ! Cindy Sheehan against Pelosi and Ralph Nader against both parties is a great start.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We're Doomed
Posted by: Southern Gal on Feb 28, 2008 6:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is there anyone out there who doesn't undertand that the military industrial complex and the multi national corporations rule the world? How much better can it be? The corporations have their own armies to get and control the resources that they need, all at the taxpayers expense, in money and in lives.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: We're Doomed Posted by: penobscotdziekuje@yahoo.com
Good Christian Hypocrisy
Posted by: JohnJlws on Feb 28, 2008 6:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And we do all this while arguing about whether we should pray in school and while arguing about who is the most Christian of the Christian. Christ!

I've grown weary of the hypocrisy and weary of the arguments for war. I'd like us to put away our guns and start talking with even our perceived enemies. Of course the only candidate who is discussing this radical tactic is Obama and if nominated the right, the Swift Boat Christians for Truth, the McCain campaign will paint him as a muslim, communist, terrorist, homosexual, turbin-wearing pussy and we'll buy into the fear for votes campaign...again...and have another 8 years of the current moronic "leadership."

Let's all pray.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The military industrial complex
Posted by: steven w on Feb 28, 2008 7:11 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
does not give a shit about how much we want peace- they never did.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mister
Posted by: Spock on Feb 28, 2008 7:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The U.S. is always at war because immediately after WW-2, the military industrial complex President Eisenhower warned of in his valedictory to the nation staged a silent coup d'etat. Unwilling to give up the staggering profits they made during the war, they first established the CIA, an agency that by law could (and can) spend as much money as they wanted without giving any accounting. Operation Mockingbird - control of the press and news media - was initiated at the same time. The Korea War, the Cold War, and arms race ensued, then Vietnam, and now Iraq (with other covert wars among them). The current elections are an orchestrated farce - it is thunderously obvious that the public can no longer has a means to reach the people and powers that are actually and in fact in control of the nation. There is no mystery to any of this; anyone who reads history carefully would know.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Terrorist
Posted by: HeKnew on Feb 28, 2008 7:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

President Dwight Eisenhower


Direct Democracy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Difference between warlike and militaristic
Posted by: brunowe on Feb 28, 2008 7:42 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We certainly haven't been a peaceful country. Much of our first 125 years was spent in our national pastime of fighting the Indians, with time out for the occasional foreign war. Afterwards, there were plenty of interventions in Central America and the Caribbean. We hadn't always been a militaristic one. Opposition to a standing army had been one of the major arguments advanced against ratification of the Constitution. Even afterwards, the U.S. hadn't maintained a terribly large army. Most major wars that we fought saw the regular army fleshed out by volunteers who were then demobilized after the fighting was over. The fact that most of our conflicts were on a small scale (vs. Indians, Latin Americans) certainly accentuated that.

This changed after WWII. The global reach we assumed led to the maintenance of a large standing army and a subsequently large defense industry. I suspect any image Americans may have of the US being a peaceful country may be confusing that with not having been a very militarized one for much of our history.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I imagine...
Posted by: mjglow on Feb 28, 2008 8:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it is also partly because there hasn't been a war fought on American soil since the Civil War. That's generations and generations of people who don't really know what war is like.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

His true calling
Posted by: willymack on Feb 28, 2008 8:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Think of georgiepoo as a child. He liked to blow up frogs, and who knows what else? His daddy was hardly around, so he had to get his attention and adult guidance from his mama, you know, the one with the beautiful mind whose touching compassion for Katrina victims thrilled us all. Dubya was so obnoxious, he was shipped off to snotty schools where his aberant behavior was tolerated (for a price, of course). Then to a posh prep school, where he excelled as a cheerleader, even though they wouldn't let him wear the short skirt and blouse like some of the others. On to Yale, where as a legacy, lil' george mastered the art of alcoholic and nose candy dissipation. Ethics, morals, and rectitude of conduct were NEVER issues with this gem of a human being, as he had "other Proiriries", much like a future "friend" of his. The TRUE nature of georgiepoo's abilities burst into full flower (like a turdblossom) when he entered the business world, where he managed to screw up not one, but three businesses, despite the support of Poppy and the bin Laden family. Ever true to his nature, dumbya become so much of an embarrassment to his daddy that he was shoved down the throats of the Texas National Guard, ahead of hundreds of better-qualified applicants, where he impersonated a fighter pilot, until he became bored with it and walked away without a second thought. Poppy quickly stashed georgiepoo away in Alabama when, in his own words he said: "He's killing me here (in Houston). Give him something to do". Our future prez employed himself at helping some hack to get elected as a senator. Naturally the bid failed. To make a long story less wearisome, Poppy finally found a way to keep his son in check as guv of Texas, and, now prezdint of these united states. The latter had to be accomplished by fraud and intimidation, since even THIS country doesn't have enough gullible fools to fairly elect a zero like dumbya. Through a combination of criminal activity, greed, arm twisting, and just plain lies, poppy, with his son as a shill, has managed to become wealthy beyond his wildest dreams,and finally put georgiepoo to some gainful use. And they all lived happily ever after.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's always the opposite
Posted by: vangogh69 on Feb 28, 2008 9:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America, or more specifically the US, has a vested interest in maintaining the (fake) innocence, naivitee, and "veil of peace" because the reality is that the US has always been a nation of violence and brutality. One need only turn on the tv to observe the illusion. How else do you explain the "I just don't understand" attitude of news commentators when there another school gun rampage, the news commentators not noting the irony of these events in the context of endless war (a.k.a. "the war on terror").

Say what you will about the UK, but at least they're under few illusions about their history, imperialist desires, and intentions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

War's good business, invest your kids
Posted by: TheDreamer on Feb 28, 2008 9:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I always wondered about that, I have seldom seen ths USA at peace. WHen I was in the military (Vietnam) our CO mentioned that America cannot survive for long without waging war somewhere.

For a tongue in cheek look at the main national pasttime rent or borrow Michael Moore's "Canadian Bacon"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Correction - We have been at war constantly since June 25, 1950
Posted by: DanoM on Feb 28, 2008 9:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We still have an open declaration of war against North Korea, and are only on cease fire terms since 1953. That war has not ended, and the military powers seem quite happy with that scenario. 58 years and running!

Until we can get our old squabbles with places like North Korea settled there will be no peace. We claim to be examples to the world, but won't drop old declarations of war. What kind of a country are we trying to run?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gazette del Popolo
Posted by: Gazette del Popolo on Feb 28, 2008 10:13 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Another excellent book (updated):

"Killing Hope"
US Military and CIA Interventions Since WW2

by, William Blum

2004

(along with scores of others on the conduct of the US in this world)

Just remember how easily we have segued from, "Anti-Communism," to, "Anti-Terrorism."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Peace loving Nation--Not--Never
Posted by: rtihista on Feb 28, 2008 10:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are right on with this article but you only mention the last fifty years. This nation has been at war for most of our history. From the early Indian Wars in the 1600's to the French Indian War in the mid 1700s where George Washington earned his bones as a British soldier fighting the French and Indians. Then more assorted Indian Wars until our Revolution. After that came the War of 1812, then more large scale wars on the Indians in the Pontiac War, the war against the Iriquois Nation, and the wars whose names escape me but put good old Zack Taylor and WH Harrison into the White House. Then the Mexican War. Not long after that the Civil War, then after that catastrophic blood letting the final war of extermination against the Plains Indians. Then the Spanish American War that landed us the Phillipines, Puerto Rico and other assorted Spanish speaking spoils. Then came WWI, assorted incursions into Central America in the 1930s and on and on and on. A far stronger
argument can be made that we are a "War loving nation" or at least our leaders are. Most of the wars beginning with the Spanish American War the majority of the American people opposed. But we seem powerless to do anything about it. Even today. The majority of the Iraqi people want us out as do the majority of the American people, so why are we there? We are there because we may not have the democracy we think we have and Republicans are busily tearing down what little democracy remains.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Seminole War Posted by: ceti
My bad. I stopped reading half way through.
Posted by: Sojourner on Feb 28, 2008 11:31 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article is a rant, pure and simple. Yes, of course, war like every fight is to be blamed on the opponent. So one disregards that.

The information I need is a serious estimate of whether the world needs some world cops (U.S. and Britain). Answering that in the negative is mere babble.

Who do you want to be world cops? That's why our military spending is enormous. It's the price we pay for retaining our sovereign right to make war. How long we can manage our current predicament is anybody's guess. But don't just throw the slop back in our faces, because the wind splatters you as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Eagle Dropped Its Olive Branch
Posted by: penobscotdziekuje@yahoo.com on Feb 28, 2008 11:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So there we have it. The USA promotes itself as a "peace"-loving country while spending more on arms than ALL other nations combined, according to the article.
If the USA is serious about wanting peace, then it MUST cease all military expenditures; an eagle cannot fish and build its nest at the same time.
Besides, it's a hypocritical stance we attain to. New Zealand is a symbol of a land at peace. They have no nuclear weapons and hardly any enemies. New Zealand doesn't have an extensive network of bases all over the globe; we do.
Does Russia have air force bases in Japan? Germany? Saudi Arabia? Have they dropped cluster bombs in Serbia? Iraq? Did they establish a "no-fly zone" over a sovereign nation? The Eagle did. And somewhere during the course of flight he dropped his olive branch but held on to his arrows. And where the arrows fell chaos and bitterness ensued, and our relationship with those afflicted countries crumbled like an inexpensive bag of cookies.
No country can be for peace without a valid rationale to fight for it; ergo war is not an instrument for peace. To say we are a peace loving folk shouldn't have led us into so many disastrous fights since WWII. Since then peace remains an elusive goal of U.S. foreign policy. We don't have one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Really?
Posted by: radiomorning on Feb 28, 2008 2:47 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I always thought the old 'peace-loving nation' bit was tongue-in-cheek. Americans don't really think that do they? That they are peaceful folk?

America began with a holocaust, was built on the backs of slaves, and has been perpetuated at the cost of millions of lives and many great ideas. Come to terms with the barbarianism of America and you no longer have to be a slave to patriotism.

'Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.' - Oscar Wilde

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dubya is America's Friend!
Posted by: Cathyc on Feb 28, 2008 3:40 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only reason why GWB is the 'Leader of America' is because he represents what the vast majority of American citizens who are: refugees from their own parents!

Yikes! Lemme outta here!

If you want to be truly free, you've got to face your own personal demons.

The personal is the collective...

There's nothing worse than being forced to eat a Diet of Worms. Study your REAL history!

PS. The trouble with America is that it is a country of full of people full of who are running away from from their own personal history, i.e., their own roots.

ROOTS! ROOTS! ROOTS!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

“war on terror” = organized corporate crime on the public nickel
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps on Feb 28, 2008 5:13 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And that is simply Fascist Amerika sold as a "capitalist" democracy that does not exist.

"Much as I'd like to be, I'm not a pacifist, because I realize that there are genuinely bad actors out there...I'm glad the U.S. military was there to stomp Hitler."

Some analysis.

The worst of "bad actors" is America under corporate crime rule.

And who was it that bankrolled Hitler's war machine to power? Try American and British ruling class parasites. Big mistake but one founded and run on greed. American Fascists including Getty, Rockefeller and Bush funded Hitler almost to the end of WW2.

Got security?

Significant wars are always fought over public blood money for private power. Always. That's mass murder for profit. No global war has been fought over any other core motive. (minus the American Revolution, the same holds true for most "revolutions" usually financed and rigged by Fascist corporate money power)

That record includes the utter shams of WW1, WW2, Vietnam, Gulf War I, "war on terror", "war on drugs" and the 20 or so democracies the U.S. has overthrown since WW2.

Then – of course – there's 9/11 cover-up and its equally phony "war on terror".

Shall I go on?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Failure After Failure for the USA as World Cops
Posted by: sofla100 on Feb 28, 2008 6:42 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The USA has long maintained its hubris regards believing it has a right, and a duty, to be the policemen of the world. The USA sacrifices the legitimate needs of her citizens, depriving them of needed health care and jobs, to pour trillions of dollars into the rat holes of wars like Iraq and aid to oppressive governments from Israel to Indonesia. Just how successful has it been? Well, Iraq is going to cost over $1 trillion US dollars, and the country will certainly be no safer nor secure then before the US invasion. In fact, it will probably continue to be unstable for decades to come. The billions spent for Israel, what have they netted the USA? Just the enormous distrust and hatred of the Arab world, pushing up oil prices sky high and making enemies out of a billion Muslims. The USA expanding NATO's boundaries into the former Russian Republics and recognizing Kosovo? It's only caused a powerful and sustained resurgence of nationalism in Russia and the start of a new arms race. Bottom line, to be the world's cop has not worked for the USA. It's only destroyed her economy, sacrificed the legitmate needs of millions of her citizens, and made the world a less safer and more dangerous place. So, why does it continue? One can only guess the vested interests, the companies and concerns making money, and of course, the politicians who think they can improve things and "advance American interests," a project that thus far, has only resulted in failure after failure.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

War
Posted by: pizzmoe on Feb 28, 2008 10:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is the lie that we are a peaceful nation that makes it so easy for us to start wars (we are the good guys! yippee!). We are in no way a nation that wants peace. Our so called leaders can say without a hint of irony that we have to go to war to make peace.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

America was founded on a series of lies.
Posted by: wisegalah on Feb 29, 2008 3:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And theft, and mass murder and sanctimony, oh yes! the sanctimony that is personified in the smirking psychopath of a president you now have.

And now you expect it to operate on the basis of truth/honesty/respect for the rights of others?

I admire your faith but .... fear that your hopes will be dashed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Missing the Point
Posted by: rusey22 on Feb 29, 2008 9:01 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Someone a few comments ago said that this article misses the point. I would have to agree with that. The fact is that everybody hates war. Thats conservatives and liberals alike. The difference is who we would rather see hurt. Would you rather some insane religious people run planes into our building, killing thousands of people, or would you rather kill them before they had a chance to do anything to us? I would prefer that latter. Don't get me wrong. If violence can be avoided it should be. But it is the governments job (its only job) to protect the people. And thats what they have tried to do in this war. Yes, it may have been contorted in some way, but as a whole, if we had not I don't want to think about what would have happened to our country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

brian boru
Posted by: brian boru on Feb 29, 2008 2:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I came to the US in the late 70's as a teen and realized early on that America is almost constantly at war. At first I tried to convince myself that some were justified in some ways but now being older and wiser I understand that none are. All of these wars are started by the USA for its own material gain. Its a sad reality that when I visit Europe now people are more tired of dealing with this country as they all seem to understand that the US is an extremely violent place run by hyper aggressive bullies. They are less interested in it and only hope that the next administration is just less warlike.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm glad the U.S. military was there to stomp Hitler.
Posted by: radicalchic on Mar 1, 2008 3:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
as you must know america empowered hitler for years and could have employed many other tactics besides war to un-empower him but as usual we needed another war to rake in the massive profits.fdr deliberately ignored warnings of an attack on pearl harbor imposing an oil embargo on japan to ensure the attack. $$$$$ smedly butler was right on the money.and without the help of IBM the holocaust could never have happened. war is a racket nothing else.the neocons knew another pearl harbor was necessary not only to engage in an unending middle east war but to once and for all destroy the last remnants of democracy and install the hitlerian
totalitarianism we have now.america is the evil empire.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Americans Do Like War
Posted by: sayward2 on Mar 4, 2008 6:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Americans do like war they enshrine the military, wax nostalgic over the great WWII, Revel in our superiority of race, our god given right to control the world. Our way is best, our religion is best, everything about America is better then the next 20 countries. We support- with out question military machine spending, boondoggle, croneyism. WWII was the only thing that got us out of the depression so fast, and by not having any damage to our country after the WWII gave us a head start to excessive wealth and a thirst for power. We elect crap for our leaders because they talk like us! We are war mongers, only we are in denial. Most Americans I know say nuke 'em until they glow and bomb 'em back to the stone age- and I don't hang with bubbas! Any one who believes America is a peace loving country/people are fooling themselves.
www.pakistannewtimes.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Arachnoid
Posted by: Urban Myth #3 on Mar 4, 2008 6:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's called the Vietnam 'War' now - but did war ever get declared? I seem to think not, though one could hardly call it the Vietnam 'thingy' or experience.
Did they ever pay those Agent Orange victims (the US ones I mean) ?
Also Dave, why leave the Covert Operations out?
After all the one whose name has been emblazoned on the Bullet - along with all of those who received bullets addressed "To Whom It May Concern" will hardly care much which Representative of which US Govt. Department has fired it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

technocrat
Posted by: technocrat on Mar 4, 2008 6:51 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now here this! THE PROBLEM IS MONEY AND THE BANKERS WHO CONTROL IT! War is simply a very-easily-made-acceptable (just play up the fear factor) way of cementing and continue their control over populations. The bankers know all too well that if a people can be made to feel threatened they will indebt themselves to remove the threat (Hermann Goering stated this best). Couple this (or treble it) with 1) the fact that Americans have been conditioned to compete and HATE TO LOSE; 2) lots and lots of Americans depend on warfare in some form or another for their daily bread; 3) world resources to support corporate-induced gluttony are becoming harder and harder to come by; and you have a NO WIN situation of permanent conflict (at least until the resources give out, never mind the funding, the Money Powers will just loan us more, the debt to be heaped upon many generations to come.)

There is only ONE way to end the heinous cycle of permanent death and destruction to support a debt-structured dominance by the major banking houses: ERASE THE DEBT. INVALIDATE THE MONEY SYSTEM THAT GIVES THEM THEIR POWER OVER WORLD AFFAIRS. Technology runs the world, and THEY control the technology. Dethrone the bankers by adopting a distribution system based on MEASUREMENT, not an exchange system based on highly corruptible finance. Take an inventory of the physical wealth of North America and allot to each citizen an irrevocable RIGHT to an equal share of physical production, as outlined by the Technocracy organization over seventy years ago.

Remove the blight of money gone worse than useless from our social structure and see how quickly the vast majority of our social and environmental problems will vanish (don't forget, many nations of the world are now trashing their environments to satisfy the insatiable maw of finance).

How much more free time could we have if we employed our technology efficiently and for the benefit of all, without debt to anyone? How much of our time is spent chasing that debt? We could all be working sixteen hour weeks or less, with an INCREASE in our standard of living: no money-related crime, no bills, no money-driven political corruption, NO WARS FOR PROFIT AND TO ENRICH THE BANKERS, no more lousy throwaway goods produced simply for sales turnover.

Check it out. www.technocracy.org. A not for profit, non-sectarian, non-political educational organization with a DESIGN, NOT JUST A HOPE for America's future.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» LOVE of money... Posted by: henderson
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement