Monday, February 24, 2003

Further thoughts on War and Aggression 

I'm guessing that some took offense at my pointing out the missteps and horrible calculations of Clinton in his decision to bomb Belgrade and Baghdad, and the French involvement in Rawanda. So many countries, including our own, by the way, knew what was coming down in Rawanda. Like I said, throw a rock in the air and hit someone guilty. My pointing out the mistakes of the French and Clinton, is by no means meant to deflect from what is happening now. The proposed war against Iraq should be opposed vigorously, by all earth loving peoples. I am merely trying to point out consistencies in actions. Imperialism has been around, well, since the beginning of our country? Since the beginning of the exploration of this land, when it was parcelled out and claimed and sold off? It was a great crap shoot, this new land. The losers were the Indians who didn't play well, and, possibly weren't willing to commit genocide against the settlers, to keep them away. I know there were massacres and attacks, but there was also restraint (by the Indians), little restraint by the settlers, who eventually wiped out almost an entire race of people.

So we had a bloody and violent beginning, with the belief that certain races did not possess souls. Surely there is an ancient mirror there, and our own view now of the Muslims as something less than human, so therefore much easier to kill.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. aaaggghhh...How I always hated that saying.

History, when it is not understood, is oft repeated....aaaggghhh...another one, cliched and used up.

Oh well, it is true, as true can be. There is nothing new about pre-emptive war in this country. Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz did not invent this policy. (Check out this link to Frontline and explore the formation of the push to war with Iraq, from Bush 1 to Bush 2.) We certainly weren't invited into Vietnam, nor were we attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin, as was stated by President Johnson. We were trying to provoke, engaging in CIA directed exercises that involved skimishes onto Vietnam soil. Check out the Pentagon Papers.

Certainly, we were not attacked before we entered the Korean War. Nor were we attacked by Granada or Panama, or Nicauragua, or El Salvador, or Chile, or Colombia, or the Philippines, or whereever else we have had our dirty little dealings. "Preemptive" War"? Why, we're experts!


Not much is being said in the press, or blog pundits, about the expansion of this seemingly endless war on terrorism into the Philippines. I bet you are going to see a severe drop-off in military recruits, and the justifications for the draft. The draft is proposed in Patriot Act 2. Is the Philippines the first sign of increased direct threat of terrorism on our allies, with our threatening Iraq? Doesn't it make fucking sense, excuse my language, that our increased presence militarily right now, anywhere, would lead to an increase in threats of terrorism??? As my 5-yr. old neice would say...Duuhh? (Sorry, that's pretty obnoxious, but hard to resist). Pity poor President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo of the Philippines, asking for our increased assistance with their terrorist problem. Might as well throw gasoline on the problem. Like our increased presence anywhere wouldn't draw increased terrorist attention, what with our constant beating of the war drum.

And...How about the money we are spending in the Phillippines now, with a recent grant of $78 million, $20 million for U.S. weapons and services, and $21 million worth of secondhand arms, as per Ms. Frida Berrigan in the above link. Add this to the estimates of what we may spend in Iraq, upwards of $60 billion plus, when all is said and done. It's no wonder the American pie is experiencing acute shrinkage. (Be my guest to add in costs of this war on terrorism , as my statistics, I'm sure, reflect just a fraction of the piece of pie).