The Pentagong Show

The Pentagong Show
United State of Terror: Is Drone War Fair?

Thursday, July 7, 2016

Blair hat immer recht. He Blares, it is a "Fabelhaft Neue Ordnung", weiss Gott WE are Die nummer eins, glauben sie mir, lob und ehre sei Gott!

Fried und freiheit für alle, das ist Blairism!

“We do not agree that hindsight is required. The risks of internal strife in Iraq, active Iranian pursuit of its interests, regional instability, and Al-Qaeda activity in Iraq, were each explicitly identified before the invasion.”

And by none other than Dick Cheney who knew it would be a quagmire (using the word they have since so assiduously avoided because it brings up visions of the lost Vietnam War). But Der Dicke is the perfect incarnation of greed, a creature so swept away by its impulses that reason has no power to check him. Because, although America likes to tart up Greed as a virtue, putting lipstick on its ovine snout to make it look less repulsive in the name of a "Getting Government out of the way of Capitalism",  it is now, as it has ever been, one of the Deadly sins, and in fact, the deadly sin, as all the others are merely greed made more specific, as in lust being greed for sex, gluttony greed for food, etc.

Private or publicly listed firms received at least $138 billion of U.S. taxpayer money for government contracts for services that included providing private security, building infrastructure and feeding the troops. And not always our troops, as pallets loaded with hundred dollar bills were flown in to Iraq, munitions valued in the millions have disappeared in Iraq and Afghanistan, showing up in the hands of Isis, Yemen, and other terrorist organisations. but who cares,? Profits are profits, and the US taxpayer is too benumbed and too afraid of being branded 'compassionate' or 'soft on security' if they object to money flowing out of the DOD like water from a sieve.

“We do not agree that hindsight is required. The risks of internal strife in Iraq, active Iranian pursuit of its interests, regional instability, and Al-Qaeda activity in Iraq, were each explicitly identified before the invasion.”

Chilcot says Blair also overlooked the threat the invasion would pose to Britain. He emphatically did not overlook it, he looked it over and decided it would be highly profitable and career-enhancing. The risk was worth it, he wouldn't be putting his life on the line, just a few soldiers', and that's worth the price of the profits the war would enable him to rake in. War, as it suspends the rule of law, always enhances politicians' power and ability to generate profits via deficit spending ... deficit spending the polity may not approve of without being instilled with the correct amount of Fear. And Blair knew that Victors, and he was assured he would be victorious, always make the rules, they do what they please, and call it justice, but it's mere Anglo-Saxon hypocrisy to camouflage the West's primitive barbarism using all the techniques of modern science.

Only Chalmers Johnson dares to make the connection, via his coining of the term Military Keynesianism, between artificially and unsustainably stimulating the economy via military adventurism and arms production. America has become what every German gunmaker  during the spell of Nazism dreamed of: a country pouring everything into armaments; reducing wages and lengthening the hours of all its workers. And bidding its munitions men to build. Birth control advocates are shut up and abortionists are prosecuted. American and British leaders were warned that the Iraq War would INCREASE Terrorism, but that is what the US military has been doing ever since the second world War, putting US citizens in far more jeopardy by their actions than, as 9/11 should have so exactly demonstrated, it 'protects' them from what General Butler said is the Racket of War (a loud one that we silence by keeping it safely offshore). But, of course, as we now know, that is exactly what they want. The AMG: America's  Military Government, absolutely requires it, and The president, named the Commander-in-Chief of that military government, needs war to adopt the full mantle of power to which he has come to believe he is entitled, and, ensconced in the White House, that he now uses as his own personal Berchtesgaden, he "hat immer recht" (is always right).

For those of you who weren't around during the triumphalist nineties after the destruction of the Soviet Union, there were many soul-searching editorials, including a cover piece in Time Magazine, that bewailed, "Who can be our enemy Now?", as they sought ways, led by the Iron Guard known as AIPAC, the Jews for Jihad, for ways to justify not only "defense" spending at then-current levels, but keeping the escalation of defense spending, specifically, US defense spending that AIPAC feels the rest of the country needs to maintain, not for the defense of the USA, but for he Defense of another, sovereign State. If the Semites calling for such robbery from their fellow citizens were Muslim instead of Jewish, they would be branded, have now  been branded by Trump, as traitors. But vanity has become the glory of this new Master Race, determined to subject all others to its will, and it has no compunctions against using the military force of the US, putting all of its citizens in jeopardy for the sake of a dogmatic religious State, that, despite Lewis Black's comedy routines telling Christians that the Bible, or at least that part of it called the Old Testament, is their book, so Christians shouldn't be interpreting Noah's flood, for example, as history, yet the Jewish state, by using it as title deed to a land they have no claim to otherwise, are indeed responsible for the rise of Theocratic states in the middle east. 

Remember, there never was a War where right was all on one side, And remember that in every war both sides lie like hell! Truth is whatever you can get believed. The average army officer looks up to the Big Business crowd. the execs, those who have good manners and the right sort of homes to invite him to: the same sort of people who put the Neocons Blair kowtowed to in power and who'd bring them back tomorrow if they could, The most elegant and perfectly legal forms of bribery exist wherever business touches government or government touches business, and the military is nothing if not the interplay of Big Government with Big Business. And in the US that means it is never called to explain its expenditures in any real way. Which is why DC's crawling with lobbyists and lawyers representing every form of wholesale greed.  Never before in the history of mankind have private interests collected such sums of money from public bodies. Every member of the MSM knows what's going on, but simply get in line to be embedded and collect their cut. 

And speaking of cuts, here's Upton Sinclair quoting the British: ...."what good would be the dreams about liberty, democracy, or other sorts of ideals, if we failed to get our share of a product for which there was no substitute?" All over the world the British were grabbing the territories in which there was any chance of oil; they were holding these as reserves and buying our American supply for immediate use - it was a deliberate policy of Blut und Eisen (Blood and iron) for oil. Blair merely wanted to upgrade this strategy to the 21'st century by using the US version of the Wehrmacht to further his ambitions, after all, geschaft ist geschaft: business is business, and business is Capitalism  and Capitalism is War, and what it calls peace is merely time to get ready for the next conflagration, and Washington, like Goring, will have no "dishwater internationalism" in the Fatherland, unless it's to form a coalition of the drilling, whether men for battle or rigs for oil.

But even Washington cannot go on piling up public debt indefinitely; and when you have to stop, there'll be a smash-up, and that'll be their chance. The very freedom we're so proud of is their assurance of success; we're made impotent by it, and can't imagine taking action against those who use their freedom to destroy ours, so we let them use it to destroy others'.

Even before the Soviet Union's collapse, Gorbachev had opened it up so much that no one was more sharply interrogated than Defense Minister Dmitri Yazov, who Soviet viewers saw subjected to an unrelenting parliamentary inquisition during a five-hour debate on National television, who admitted, "In the end you have so many weapons, mountains of weapons, and you can become a prisoner of those weapons", just as Upton Sinclair warned, "but we must perceive combat readiness not in an abstract way but in comparison with other states and blocs."

One of these states, the only one really, is the United States, where there is only one party: the War Party. And that party has never seen a weapon system it didn't like. We  pile them up higher and higher until they threaten to crush us under both their weight and costs, such that a US Secretary of State, sounding more like a war mandarin, can wonder aloud with nary an objection raised, "What's the point of this superb military you're always talking about if we can't deploy it to project our power across the globe over those who don't take all their citizen's money in order to develop 'smart' bombs so dumb they bomb the Chinese embassy 'by mistake'?" (that's not even close to the exact quote, but I thought I'd make her meaning more explicit).

Millions of men and women and even children have been convinced (not a difficult job, actually) that they were superior to the rest of the world, and that it is their destiny to remake that world, and that anyone who opposes them is a scoundrel, a criminal, or a fiend out of hell. And this is the mentality Blair got right on board with, and that's why he remains unrepentant. Because militarism is the new Religion, same as the old religion, and it is used for the same purpose: subjugation of a willing populace that has convinced itself that its position of entitlement is sacrosanct, come the hounds of hell or high water. Or, as is becoming increasingly clear, even unto Thermonuclear War.

Post a Comment