Showing posts with label Intervention. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Intervention. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Celebrating Our Glorious Wars, Plus Are Corporate Leaders Egotistical Psychopaths?

In This Edition:

- Celebrating Our Glorious Wars
----Iraq. Began with big lies. Ending with big lies. Never forget. (William Blum)
----Debacle! (Tom Englehardt)
- Our Innocents Abroad? (Pat Buchanan)
- Are Some Corporate & Government Leaders Egotistical Psychopaths? (A Nation on Meds. YouTube)

_____

(First three articles via Tom Feeley at Information Clearinghouse)

Celebrating Our Glorious Wars

Iraq. Began with big lies. Ending with big lies. Never forget. (William Blum)

"Most people don't understand what they have been part of here," said Command Sgt. Major Ron Kelley as he and other American troops prepared to leave Iraq in mid-December. "We have done a great thing as a nation. We freed a people and gave their country back to them."

"It is pretty exciting," said another young American soldier in Iraq. "We are going down in the history books, you might say." (Washington Post, December 18, 2011)

Ah yes, the history books, the multi-volume leather-bound set of "The Greatest Destructions of One Country by Another." The newest volume can relate, with numerous graphic photos, how the modern, educated, advanced nation of Iraq was reduced to a quasi failed state; how the Americans, beginning in 1991, bombed for 12 years, with one dubious excuse or another; then invaded, then occupied, overthrew the government, tortured without inhibition, killed wantonly, ... how the people of that unhappy land lost everything — their homes, their schools, their electricity, their clean water, their environment, their neighborhoods, their mosques, their archaeology, their jobs, their careers, their professionals, their state-run enterprises, their physical health, their mental health, their health care, their welfare state, their women's rights, their religious tolerance, their safety, their security, their children, their parents, their past, their present, their future, their lives ... More than half the population either dead, wounded, traumatized, in prison, internally displaced, or in foreign exile ... The air, soil, water, blood, and genes drenched with depleted uranium ... the most awful birth defects ... unexploded cluster bombs lying anywhere in wait for children to pick them up ... a river of blood running alongside the Euphrates and Tigris ... through a country that may never be put back together again.


See Iraq. Began with big lies. Ending with big lies. Never forget. (William Blum) for rest of article.
__

Debacle!
How Two Wars in the Greater Middle East Revealed the Weakness of the Global Superpower


By Tom Engelhardt

. . . . In a final flag-lowering ceremony in Baghdad, clearly meant for U.S. domestic consumption and well attended by the American press corps but not by Iraqi officials or the local media, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta spoke glowingly of having achieved “ultimate success.” He assured the departing troops that they had been a “driving force for remarkable progress” and that they could proudly leave the country “secure in knowing that your sacrifice has helped the Iraqi people begin a new chapter in history, free from tyranny and full of hope for prosperity and peace.” Later on his trip to the Middle East, speaking of the human cost of the war, he added, “I think the price has been worth it.”

And then the last of those troops really did “come home” -- if you define “home” broadly enough to include not just bases in the U.S. but also garrisons in Kuwait, elsewhere in the Persian Gulf, and sooner or later in Afghanistan.

On December 14th at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, the president and his wife gave returning war veterans from the 82nd Airborne Division and other units a rousing welcome. With some in picturesque maroon berets, they picturesquely hooahed the man who had once called their war "dumb." Undoubtedly looking toward his 2012 campaign, President Obama, too, now spoke stirringly of “success” in Iraq, of “gains,” of his pride in the troops, of the country’s “gratitude” to them, of the spectacular accomplishments achieved as well as the hard times endured by “the finest fighting force in the history of the world,” and of the sacrifices made by our “wounded warriors” and “fallen heroes.”

He praised “an extraordinary achievement nine years in the making,” framing their departure this way: “Indeed, everything that American troops have done in Iraq -- all the fighting and all the dying, the bleeding and the building, and the training and the partnering -- all of it has led to this moment of success... [W]e’re leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people.”

And these themes -- including the “gains” and the “successes,” as well as the pride and gratitude, which Americans were assumed to feel for the troops -- were picked up by the media and various pundits. At the same time, other news reports were highlighting the possibility that Iraq was descending into a new sectarian hell, fueled by an American-built but largely Shiite military, in a land in which oil revenues barely exceeded the levels of the Saddam Hussein era, in a capital city which still had only a few hours of electricity a day, and that was promptly hit by a string of bombings and suicide attacks from an al-Qaeda affiliated group (nonexistent before the invasion of 2003), even as the influence of Iran grew and Washington quietly fretted. . . .

For rest of article see Tomgram: Engelhardt, Lessons from Lost Wars in 2012
_____

Our Innocents Abroad? (Pat Buchanan)

As Leon Trotsky believed in advancing world communist revolution, neocons and democratists believe we have some inherent right to intervene in nations that fail to share our views and values.

But where did we acquire this right?

And if we are intervening in Egypt to bring about the defeat of the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis, and the Islamists win as they are winning today, what do we expect the blowback to be? Would we want foreigners funneling hundreds of millions of dollars into our election of 2012?

How would Andrew Jackson have reacted if he caught British agents doing here what we do all over the world?


See Our Innocents Abroad? (Pat Buchanan) for rest of article.
_____

Are Some Corporate & Government Leaders Egotistical Psychopaths? (A Nation on Meds--Snakes In Suits)
"I Am Fishead" Are Corporate Leaders Egotistical Psychopaths ?‬ (Long)

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Chomsky on Libya--Now & 20 years ago. (Videos)

A friend recently told me to post more often, even daily. Anything, I guess. I can stay pretty busy for a retired person, and I sometimes will gather so much information on a subject that I soon don't know where to begin--especially for a daily post. I told him that my plan was supposed to be to post more national and international news to my Facebook page, and to use the blog for more local issues. Fat chance I guess. Today was one of those days where I immersed myself in all that is Libya. Must have accumulated a bizillion links on western investments in Libya and the countries and corporations in Europe and the U.S. that are most heavily invested, and/or are dependent on Libyan oil. You know, the countries and corporations who either use or need the Libyan resources, or make a bunch of money off them, and are now deciding just how "humanitarian" they want to be. In essence, the picture that emerges is one of Western nations and corporations totally willing to do business with Gadaffi, without regard to the Libyan people, and who are now hoping for a more compliant "rebel" partner under the control of Western oil corporations and the idea of "democracy", American global capitalism style. Seems like all that info will have to wait for another day, or two, or three, but some of that is on my Facebook page.

What is informative, not to mention easy to post, are three YouTube videos from Noam Chomsky, who is now 82 years old and full of history and wisdom.

The first two (Noam Chomsky and Jeremy Paxman's BBC interview) are very recent interviews of Noam Chomsky concerning the situation in Libya and the Middle East. If you watch them, pay particular to the beginning of the first and the end of the second.

The third ("Libya has been a punching bag for 10 years" (1991)), is a Q&A given by Chomsky 20 years ago (1991) about Libya and Israel. Interesting context for those that don't remember. Chomsky is quite frank about Israeli motives, motives that are more than salient today, not that you have been paying attention.

At the end of the post I've thrown in a few articles for those of you trying to kick the intervention habit.
__________

Noam Chomsky and Jeremy Paxman's BBC interview in full Part 1


Noam Chomsky and Jeremy Paxman's BBC interview in full Part 2.wmv

_____

Noam Chomsky: "Libya has been a punching bag for 10 years" (1991)


__

Kicking the intervention habit
Should talks of intervention in Libya turn into action, it would be illegal, immoral and hypocritical.
Richard Falk Last Modified: 10 Mar 2011 12:54 GMT
__

Pack Journalism Promotes War on Libya

By Stephen Lendman

March 10, 2011 "Information Clearing House" -- America's major media never met an imperial war it didn't love and promote, never mind how lawless, mindless, destructive and counterproductive.
__

WikiLeaks: FRENCH TOTAL-LED CONSORTIUMS ACCEPT LOWER PRODUCTION SHARES IN LIBYA

Summary: Libya's National Oil Corporation (NOC) renegotiated the terms of its production sharing agreements with France's Total and its partners in Libya (Germany's Wintershall and Norway's StatoilHydro), adjusting the existing stand-alone contracts to bring them into compliance with the Exploration and Production Sharing Agreement (EPSA) rubric. The renegotiation of Total's contract is of a piece with the NOC's effort to renegotiate existing contracts to increase the Libya's share of crude oil production.

__

How The So-Called Guardians Of Free Speech Are Silencing The Messenger

By John Pilger

March 10, 2011

As the United States and Britain look for an excuse to invade another oil-rich Arab country, the hypocrisy is familiar. Colonel Gaddafi is “delusional” and “blood-drenched” while the authors of an invasion that killed a million Iraqis, who have kidnapped and tortured in our name, are entirely sane, never blood-drenched and once again the arbiters of “stability”.

But something has changed. Reality is no longer what the powerful say it is. Of all the spectacular revolts across the world, the most exciting is the insurrection of knowledge sparked by WikiLeaks. This is not a new idea. In 1792, the revolutionary Tom Paine warned his readers in England that their government believed that “people must be hoodwinked and held in superstitious ignorance by some bugbear or other”. Paine’s The Rights of Man was considered such a threat to elite control that a secret grand jury was ordered to charge him with “a dangerous and treasonable conspiracy”. Wisely, he sought refuge in France.