Hermit's Weblog
everything your mother never taught you about how the world really works.

Thu, 18 Jan 2007

I think they are really going to start World War III - they are that insane!

I've been listening to the dialogs on cable since Bush IIs speech about the so-called troop surge. The Daily Show with Jon Stewart recently showed tapes of Bush, Cheney, Rice and others, all using the same talking points - all saying essentially the same thing, which when you analyze it comes down to a couple of simple propositions which are not explicitly stated, but certainly logically necessary.

The first proposition is that the President can and will exercise his power to ignore the will of the People. Whatever motives these mad men believe they are acting upon, they are certainly not being at all rational. This insistence to exercise the power to escalate the War in Iraq, in spite of the clear voice of the People in the recent election, is more than childish, it is a clear sign (on the part of Bush and Cheney) of ego intoxication and megalomania. You watch their faces when they utter their words of defiance, and you can see their belief that they know better.

This leaves us with the questions of whether they are even capable of knowing better, or even whether, under our form of government, they have the right to act upon this belief.

The second proposition is that force of arms can achieve the stated goal of stabilizing Iraq and stopping Iran from developing the bomb. This made by men who have never served in the Armed Services, much less in combat, and who think that foreign policy is something of a game in which there are winners and losers. They don't want to go down in history as losers, and so they are willing to put at risk the rest of the world for their personal ego satisfaction. Again, clear madness considering the consequences and likelihood of their being wrong.

The third proposition is that the consequences of American withdrawal from Iraq and from the region will be more devastating than an escalation of War in that same region. This is so illogical that this thought too must be attributed to madness. First off, there are a lot of other players in the world, and in the region, who are well motivated to damp things down and keep them within limits. If anything, the American presence in Iraq keeps the rational regional Islamic governments from acting in the way that keeps Iran in line, and is true to their nature. Our presence also lets Russia and China sit on the sidelines taking advantage, well all the while we do something they would have to do if we were not there.

This proposition is nothing more than an updated version of the domino theory from the Vietnam War, which assumed that if we let Vietnam become communist, the region would become communist. We lost the war, Vietnam did become communist and the region went its own non-communist way without our help.

Cheney and Bush went into Iraq believing they could control a situation by the application of force of arms, and the last four years have proved beyond any doubt that this egotistical belief was not even close to the truth. Now these same men want to continue to insist that it is possible to escalate the regional war, to perhaps include Syria and Iran, and that this can be controlled as well. This is clearly insane. For these men to publicly assert or imply such an irrational thought shows that the greatest danger to America sits in the White House, and is not out there somewhere else in the world.

Now it is possible there is some other hidden agenda being acted upon, which if brought out in the open might be more rational appearing, but even if we imagine that there is something to be gained for the Oil Powers, the Lords of Finance or even for Israel that justifies Americans continuing to be killed and maimed in Iraq, it is certainly not for our benefit, which makes these two men, if not mad, then completely treasonous, which itself is a kind of insanity.

A final implied proposition is that for Iran to possess nuclear weapons is more dangerous than escalating the War. The History of the Cold War showed us the falsity of this idea. First, the Russians as we now know, and had every reason to know at the time, did not even come near to possessing the military capacities we imagined them having. Second, Iran will not be nuking anyone, as they are surrounded by other nuclear powers and could be driven into a new stone age in an instant. The Iranian President is very clever at making noise, but making noise and carrying out an insane nuclear attack on Israel or any other regional power is beyond their capability. They can't win, they can only lose, so why do our leaders want to act as if the possession, of a couple of nuclear weapons that might not actually work, is justification for widening the War into a regional conflict, whose consequences for America and the rest of the world will be far more devastating. Again, a clear sign of madness.

It seems as if Bush and Cheney, and those who support their views, believe they can force America into a state of War on a scale never before seen. They seem to want us to be tied up in this extended regional war to such an extent that we are made to believe that a draft is necessary, that huge tax increases to pay for this madness are necessary and that our civil liberties (given that by escalating the regional war it will escalate the terrorist attacks within our borders) will have to be curtailed in order to keep us safe. Lets look at this from another angle.

Our choices are to leave the region and let it fend for itself, about which it might well do a better job. Or to get more and more stuck to in the quagmire of conflict, to have more of our children killed and maimed, to have more taxes, to be more subject to terrorist attacks at home and to sacrifice our civil liberties, so the two clearly crazy people can save face.

Does this make any sense to you? It doesn't make any sense to me either.

[07:16] | [] | # | G

Sat, 13 Jan 2007

"The Democrats have no balls."

This was the statement of Whoopi Goldberg, made on the HBO show Real Time with Bill Maher, not too long after the 2004 election, in the context of the wimping out by first Gore and then Kerry with respect to the issues of voter fraud. It applies to the present situation in Congress as we watch the first woman Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, seek to guide the new Democratic Majority into the final two years of the Bush II Administration.

The headline this morning on Drudge was as follows: "Democrats Plan Symbolic Votes Against Iraq Plan." This is a complete failure to use the power of the People's Body, the House of Representative, to rein in Bush IIs plans to add 20,000 more troops in Iraq. They also should be worried about and seeking to stop the behind the scenes considerations about widening the War into Syria, in addition to the Administrations giving signals to Israel that bombing Iran would receive US support.

The Administration, and its neo-con philosophical allies, as well as the Arms Industry - all would like the widen the War. Bush II wants to vindicate his flawed decisions, which he keeps refusing to recognize were wrong. The neo-cons have the same basic character flaw as Bush II, the one that caused so much horror in Vietnam - the vanity of a belief that if we just apply more arms and bodies on the sacrificial altar of the War, we can prove ourselves to have been right.

The Arms Industry is mostly about money (and power), for if its voracious appetites are not feed from the taxes on the American People, it dies.

All four, the Democratic Party, the Bush II Administration, the neo-con architects of American Imperialism, and the Arms Industry care not a whit for the American People, or the Iraqi People, whose lives will bear the terror and suffering this escalation of the War will continue. They are all mostly concerned with self interest, and this includes the Democratic Party, which has its eye on the White House in 2008, and will do nothing that puts at risk that opportunity for power.

Meanwhile, the American People clearly do not want a widening of the War. They want the troops to come home. They have no taste for foreign adventures, and while they may not know the ill-logic of the arguments used to continue the War, in their hearts they know the course being taken is wrong.

Before showing what the Democrat Majority could do if it exercised is power, lets deal with one of the main arguments for continuing the War, which essentially takes this basic direction, albeit in a number of different forms. The first proposition of this argument is that the errors and lies that led to the War are now irrelevant. The second is parallel and basically says that having the broken the social stability of Iraq it is now our duty to fix it. Every argument in favor of continuing the War has to use these two propositions, whether stated explicitly or implicitly.

Both propositions fail to recognize a fundamental fact of the American political scene, which is that the holders of government power have seized that power through fraud and artifice, and an abuse of the trust of the American People. For details on this, see my essay Uncommon Sense*: the Degeneration, and the Redemption, of Political Life in America. You can also go to lulu.com and buy a copy.

This means that the America People are entitled to disavow the actions of those that have stolen power and abused trust. We are entitled to demand a change of direction, and are not to be held responsible for the acts of a few, who stole elections to gain power, who lied to sell the war, and who continue to think only of their own advantage.

Neither Party, and certainly not the Bush II Administration, actually represent the American People, a condition which is true in the vast majority of Nation States all over the world. There has long been a disconnect between the heart of any People and its sitting government, which generally has risen to power through violence or other insidious means. It is far past time for ordinary People to begin to assert that the power games played by elites of finance and political power are not our responsibility.

In a way this is not unlike the tough love that is required of those who live with alcoholics and others of like addictions. Power and wealth are addictions - the psychology of excessive and unrestrained desire is the same. No one - No One - needs as much wealth and power that is vainly pursued by so few, who want to abuse so many in the process of such extreme self indulgence. The rich and the powerful are moral children, who are abusing the moral adults of the world, and it is time to no longer consent.

You want someone to clean up the mess? You think the families of alcoholics and drug addicts need to clean up their messes? Do you think not holding such moral children responsible for their actions helps? I don't. I think its time to lead the world into refusing any longer to tolerate or accept in any fashion, the decisions of the elites of wealth and power as binding upon the relevant Peoples. Its time to stop playing their game, and make up one of our own. But that dear friends is a whole other subject (see the forthcoming book: the Way of the Citizen). If the Democrats had "balls", this is what they could do using the power they possess for the benefit of the American People and the world as well.

The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, in the company of a half dozen new committee chairman (or women), go to the White House and sit down with the Administration, and speak in the following way:

"Here is the People's agenda, and we as the House of the People expect the executive Branch to carry out this agenda. We understand that the Administration needs to save face, and if your cooperation is careful and your decisions just, we will support you. Even so, you must draw back from certain previously made decisions and confess that in the present they are no longer wise, although (in order to save face) you may claim that in the moment they were first made, they were wise.

"This agenda is as follows: 1) immediate disengagement from Iraq and Afghanistan; 2) support for new legislation to take back the abuses of the personal liberties contained in the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and the policies regarding wiretapping; 3) a review of legislation regarding medical and pharmaceutical needs. 4) a rethinking of the whole idea of the War on Terror. 5) a reinstatement of appropriate taxes on wealth; 6) a revision of policies on interrogation and the civil rights of prisoners of war; [- I think the reader will get the point here. The Democratic Majority can create an agenda that serves the People's real needs. Do I expect them to? No. But here we are not dealing with that question, but rather whether they have the power to force the Bush II administration to act, so lets continue the speech at the White House...]

"If the Administration refuses to support this agenda immediately, within one week's time, the heads of each of these committees will, with the support of the Speaker, begin to investigate every potential malfeasance of this Administration, down into every detail. Subpoenas will be issued to individuals, documents demanded of officials and every other act of investigative power the Peoples Branch has in it tool box will be applied to bringing this Administration before the bar of justice, and to a complete halt if necessary.

"This is is about power, and the Legislative Branch has more power than the Executive Branch, as indicated by the fact that it was the first Branch whose powers were laid out in the Constitution; and, between our investigative powers, and our ability to stop the funding of Administrative actions, we will be uncompromising. You have one week to get on your game face, and make your peace with this, and define what you need to save face, but you will no longer be allowed to run this Ship of State for the benefit of the few, or for your own self serving agendas. This Country belongs to the America People, and we are their true representatives!"

[01:21] | [] | # | G

< January 2007 >
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 910111213

Joel Wendt


Shapes in the Fire
some thoughts on the nature of public life
Celebration and Theater: a People's Art of Statecraft

Web Sites