Forgive me truthseekers, for it has been a long long time since I have blogged. I used to give explanations for that, but my wife has clued me into "Blogging Without Guilt", which is blogging without getting all anxious and guilt-ridden during those periods of not blogging. I'll try... but I still feel like I have somehow failed to meet my obligations by not blogging night and day. Argh!
In the time I've been away, I have continued to accumulate links to the extent that, laid end-to-end, they would reach to the recently-discovered Earth-like planet and back again 78 times. I'll bet there are bloggers on that planet with the same problem.
So, I am sliding back into the fray by looking at the general topics of the day, as it were (I maintain my nerd status by using the phrase "as it were" wherever possible). The big topics at the moment are the war and the 2008 presidential elections (global warming is on the back burner for now, so to speak).
Today, I'll start with the war:
One thing that bothers me to no end about the war is that the press is absolutely silent on the real reason for it. The Democrats never mention this either, nor do anti-war pundits for the most part. Occasionally it is briefly referenced, but not often enough or emphatically enough, even though it is possibly the most important aspect of the war(s).
The purpose of the war is the war. It was never about terrorism, or WMDs, or Saddam Hussein, or Osama Bin Laden, or Al Qaida, or the Taliban, or about "spreading democracy". Oil is a part of it, but it is secondary to the overall purpose. Oil is, if you'll pardon the metaphor, gravy. The purpose of the war is to wage war, permanently.
We know the Bush administration neocon tactic of engaging in warfare to manipulate American society and facilitate the success for their agenda, both foreign and domestic. Ordinarily, approval ratings skyrocket for world leaders who wage war, and that rule held fast for this president for quite a while. But that aside, the Bush/Cheney/Neocons are the military-industrial complex, and they need to maintain a permanent presence in the middle east to maintain their power here. They never, never intended to do any of the noble (or ignoble) things they claimed, like establishing peace, rebuilding, or any of that. Those poor people in the middle east are lambs to the slaughter, as far as this presidential administration is concerned. It's goal is to remain there permanently and perpetuate bloody warfare forever, or at least for as long as they live (they couldn't care less about future generations). It's their business. They are the Halliban, they are the Carlyle group, they are the Project for the New American Century, they are in the business of waging war to enrich themselves with money and power.
Until the press addresses that issue powerfully enough to capture the interest of the mainstream public, the situation will not change.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
One more completley terrifying, nauseating and apalling piece of the puzzle falls into place as I read this book:
Blackwater by Jeremy Scahill
I'd rag on you for slacking, but my sabbatical lasted much longer.
Your entry reminds me of a quote from the fantastic (highly-recommended by me) documentary Why We Fight:
“We know we did not have an exit strategy in the invasion of Iraq because we didn’t intend to leave. We are in the process right now of building fourteen permanent bases in Iraq.”—Chalmers Johnson, CIA, 1967-1973
Could this be why, as recently reported by Anderson Cooper of CNN, 7 of the 8 U.S. "projects" intended to "better" the lives of Iraqis are considered failures? When we build straw houses, we don't expect they'll stand up to the wind.
Worried, I can't find the addy... mine is in my profile, though, so email me there. Thanks! 8^)
Post a Comment