Endless Chatter

We hear endless chatter about “exit strategy” called by some devious personalities as “precipitous withdrawal.” But no one has the courage to ask why we are building huge military bases in four different locations of Iraq if we are planning to leave? Well, we are told they are not permanent rather they are “enduring bases.” The truth, of course, is we are not really leaving. Bush and Cheney have no intention of leaving. We cannot give up our authority over Iraq and lose control over the 2nd largest oil deposit in the world. That’s it in a nutshell. We are not there to bring liberal democracy to the Middle East. That’s window dressing. We are there for one reason only—the oil. And we “ain’t” leaving. Probably never—ever. Talking exit strategy is plain unadulterated B.S. Oh, we might take a few troops out but we will leave at least 50,000 or more and they will live in there “self-contained” military bases with more amenities and conveniences than at home.

In order to move any troops at all requires that the client state be stable and does what it is told. A free election alone is not democracy. But real popular democracy is too dangerous. Once the occupier has control then withdrawal of some sort is possible but the fully manned military bases remain.

Further, in order to gain stability, we need to restore Iraqi civil society and reconstruct the economy. We need to stop privatization for the benefit of outside investors. The Iraqi Oil Law which gives control of oil and royalties to foreign oil companies must not be implemented. The General Assembly of the UN is the body that might be able to apply these principles along with the Iraqis participating in the reconstruction.

Since the odds are very long indeed for our pulling out, we don’t need to worry about a blood bath. Nevertheless, the Iraqis maintain there is already a blood bath and if it worsened, they intend to handle it. 80% of the Iraqis want us out and they are going to do everything possible to achieve that goal however long it takes.

Reference:

Znet

The Paradigm of Democracy

As we all know WWI was the death knell of the antediluvian monarchies of Europe. And in the case of Germany out of its defeat came a golden experiment in democracy. There were, of course, many problems in the beginning. The Weimar Republic was a socialist democracy that the left wing communists wanted to destroy. There were bloody battles on the streets of Berlin. The onerous reparations placed on Germany by the Treaty of Versailles almost destroyed the economy. We all know about the hyperinflation. Paper money was worthless and was used to burn in home stoves for warmth. Eventually the left wing leaders were assassinated and the reparations were reduced to a level that Germany could handle. Chancellor Stresseman who took over the leadership was able to develop a functioning economy and government that became known as the golden age of the Weimar Republic (1924-1929).There are Jewish historians still alive today who recall that period as closely comparable to the Italian Renaissance. The extraordinary production in the fields of science, philosophy, psychology, painting and architecture happened no where else in Europe.

So what in the world happened? Why did the grand experiment plunge into barbarism?

By 1930 Hitler and his Nazi thugs had arrived on the scene and introduced their propaganda techniques to win support for their political party. Goebbels, Hitler’s propaganda minister, crowed that he would use American advertising techniques to sell National Socialism to the people of Germany in the same way that American business sold toothpaste, candy and drugs. Symbols and political slogans repeated over and over whether true or not will sell products or ideology. It worked in Germany and it is working in the US. It destroyed the Weimar Republic and the Bush administration is very effectively destroying our American democracy. If Bush and Cheney are not stopped before the end of 2008, the American Constitution will be a shambles.

Unfortunately, so far I do not see any evidence of articles of impeachment for Bush and Cheney.

Reference: Chomsky, Noam. Failed States. 2006.

The Circus Is Back

The circus is back in town but the clowns haven’t changed. The other night on Jon Stewart’s show a 3 month old tape of Tony Snow, the administration press secretary, was viewed in which he stated emphatically that the lawyers in the justice department had been fired for incompetence. At a recent press conference a reporter asked a question regarding those lawyers and prefaced it with Tony Snow’s statement that they had been fired for incompetence. Snow immediately interrupted and said that we had never said that those lawyers were fired for incompetence. Jon Stewart then ran the two tapes side by side. Who are you going to believe? Tony Snow or Tony Snow? Which one is lying?

Now let’s look at a sad viewer of an unfunny circus. A retired NYC cop lost a son in 9/11. He was told at the time by his President that the Iraqis were responsible for the disaster. Being old fashioned (as he says) the cop accepted everything his President told him because he (the cop) believed that his President “walked on water.” So if the Iraqis destroyed those buildings and killed thousands of people and his son then, let’s go get them. Then another thought occurred to him. He would like to have his son’s name put on one of the “smart bombs” that our Air Force was dropping on Iraq. After much hassle he managed to get it done and the Defense Department sent him a picture of the bomb with his son’s name on it with the date that it was dropped.

Despite that it wasn’t true over half the country believed that it was the Iraqis who destroyed the towers. All the soldiers fighting in Iraq believed it. Sometime afterward the President is shown on a video tape saying that he never said that Iraqis were responsible for 9/11.When the cop heard this, he went into shock. He could not believe it. When the realization that his President had lied, hit him, he was dumfounded. When asked if he was sorry that his son’s name was on a bomb, he was unable to reply. He was just bewildered.

During the invasion of Iraq some 50 or more “smart bombs” were dropped none of which hit their military targets. They did destroy homes and people but no soldiers. The mainstream press did not report this. Rumsfeld and the Defense Department steadily maintained that the “smart bomb” does not cause “collateral” damage. As an American that’s all you need to know.