August 26, 2007
August 24, 2007
Clinton’s measured act of war against Osama bin Laden was documented in news media all over the world at the time as an attempt to get Osama bin Laden and a distraction from his legal problems.
One can not believe much of the ridiculously partisan and utter non-objective “Fox News” broadcasts as anything less than partisan propaganda.
The interview on Fox by Chris Wallace with Clinton was remarkable in that it shows how Fox operates. Not only do they attempt to trick and deceive an ex President into a false premise for interview but they drive Right Wing thinking. Fox appears to spread delusion. Now they are trying to curry up favor for a more insane war against Iran.
Perhaps the CIA report is also politicized. President HW Bush and President Regan also set the CIA on corrupt tasks like the Iran Contra debacle not to mention arming Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. But it is history, like the Cold War, like the Vietnam war – we can learn from it, but can do nothing much about it. But if we tell each other lies about it, and base our democratic choices based on emotions spirited up by Fox propaganda, then our future is defined.
We are fooling ourselves. Blaming Bill Clinton is just plain silly.
Reading the full Bush commentary rather than just sound bites – makes one appreciate how good his speech writers are to be able to frame American war involvement only against the “end game” risk factors.
It is revealing that the Bush logic is based on a novel. America walked into Iraq and created havoc. Why? The Democrats can not answer for that, but they do expect to be able to take over the end game. How?
The Republicans will blame them for folding early. But the Bush policy to wipe out the insurgency requires killing every insurgent or removing their motivation.
Withdrawal is not the best solution. The current strategy is even worse. Polling public opinion does not inform, but restricts.
August 21, 2007
August 20, 2007
MAD only worked because the Government of foreign entities are leaders of people who live and work together and identify under the banner of nationality. The language of the day before MAD – the decade of denial – the 1950s, when the US Government went to work on its people – brainwashing perhaps – or just the politics of denial. The US Government had stepped into the destructive WWII and won in Japan by dropping two small nuclear bombs. This act of surgery on a scale was more cruel, evil, brutal and decisive than any justification or demonisation of the Japanese that followed. No matter the reasoning – this was an act of a terrible god.
The “detente” and the Cold War it followed were a period of radical arming up by the USSR and America that defies belief. Why the world’s wealth is squandered on war? Is our leadership irrational? They point to their opposition and say – we should threaten their holy sites and wonder why they want nuclear weapons as well? Compare the Bush doctrine at work with North Korea vs Iraq. Why invade one without pretext and give aid to the other who’s “crazy” leaders invested in WMD when the brutal Saddam did not?
Because “time” changes everything. More to the point – the longer that you lie to the population, the larger the group of people who believe you.
The linked article is the danger. It reflects the end game belief in the Bush administration. The trouble is that the American military machine is in the hands of one man who could go off the rails and target the list of cities in the linked article.
The idea that the Muslim world – 20 or so countries like Indonesia – have just cause to arm themselves against a demonstrably unwise and agressive USA is the problem. The Bush-Cheney crimes against humanity so far may pale on what is to follow. This is the reason for impeachment – remove the insanity before large parts of the Middle East look like Iraq. Politically, America can now afford to not so much rely upon the body bag equation.
It is that Cheney wants to project to the Arab world that it must reform because America has the opportunity and ability to destroy the Arab world? The flexing of this muscle is only going to inspire support for a belligerent leadership.
It is the generalisation of death – the underlying threat of mass extermination that is the common concern. Is this evidence of George Bush manufacturing hatred so Americans feel compelled to direct hatred at “enemy” population centres due to the actions of this one evil organisation? That would be a war crime of such a scale it is not worth arguing about.
Consider also, America is doing what the linked article suggests – by trying to control the wealth generated by oil – they stand over the well being of a billion “others”. Muslims assumed this stand after 9/11. America has not learned that it is not possible to fight a politically sustainable war – unless the purpose of it is nebulous. They have learned that to retain the power the bomb is rather necessary.
Bush started the the war in Iraq. He does not know how to stop it. This just not justify using an atom bomb, but an election. Impeach him before he does it.
August 16, 2007
As predicted when George Bush lowered taxes on the most wealthy and thus effectively increased the effect of tax and indirect tax on the average American; the share market is now diving to the levels its was at five years ago – when the Dow dips below 11,000 – it means that the confidence in the Bush presidency is not just low in the polls, but in the minds of investors. The economy is not growing, but the debts of the average American is out of control while investment in American industry and wealth creation falters.
Sad, but a real effect of betting on Texas snake oil.
August 15, 2007
August 9, 2007
The most severe criminal act is destroying the world, the current leadership seem to think its the end of the world so why not burn everything up…
Real faith is shown by those who take the long term view. The one where their grandchildren have some air to breath, clean rivers and streams, abundant fish in the sea.
The film The 11th Hour by Leonardo Dicaprio addresses these issues. It looks inspiring and full of the kind of hope that drives people to do something positive.
I have been raving on about climate change for years here on disturbingtrends.org and agree – it is late in the game to be making a change to the way we behave – but act we must – and the sooner the easier – we must act politically and change the underlying philosophy. The philosophy must be revised because it is exactly our need to compete to survive that is the fire underlying our outstanding success in dominating all life on Earth.
Humans have quickly evolved intellect in order to see how we can reduce our impact. It requires less greedy and criminal motives. It requires a different motive for competitive behavior. We should moderate our population growth.
If we could reduce our footprint with technology it also requires us to retreat somewhat and let nature recover. Or we will bring another Great Flood upon ourselves, this time it will be for very clear scientific reasons.
From an article about Mikhail Gorbachev
GORBACHEV | All of us, but particularly in America, consume too much for the planet’s well being. Americans are less than 5 percent of the world population, but use 30 percent of all the energy. Gradually, we need to abandon the model of consumer society. If we continue with this model, we will surely undermine nature. And that, in turn, will undermine the stability of our societies.
August 4, 2007
The war on terror and the 77,000 unrepaired bridges across the USA are coming from the same basic problem. Infrastructure maintenance in the case of the bridges, and attention to detail with diplomacy both require strategic forward planning that was immature but advancing in the Clinton years and stopped without reason during the early Bush years.
In this article, Bush vetoes Democrat efforts to spend an additional $US631 million on road maintenance due to several hundred billion being spent on an expensive wasteful war in Iraq. It seems evident that maintenance has been inadequate and not budgetting for the maintenance of infrastructure could only be explained by considering this man genuinely belives the end is neigh – at least it appears to underlie and drive the blind directionless war logic. I think I compared Bush to Nero some years back. Bush is burning Iraq while fiddling the budget? I see a book called American Nero – the name is copyrighted right here.
It is not a good situation (unless you are a bridge builder or consultant engineer).
Harry Reid, the Democratic leader in the Senate, said that domestic programmes, such as replacing ageing infrastructure, had been short-changed because of the billions being spent on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
“Since 9/11 we have taken our eye off the ball,” he said.
The Democrats had proposed spending $631m (£309m) more on federal highway safety than Mr Bush budgeted for but he had threatened to veto the proposal.
William Wilkins, of Trip, a transport thinktank, estimated that $65bn would be needed to replace the ageing bridges.
Economic sustainability does not require endless growth of humanity. Should we continue to accept that greed as prime motivator of capitalistic instincts is actually “civilising”?
Locking up the rich and famous into gated virtual worlds makes a lot of sense. If they can not win the hearts and minds of the unrewarded/uncivilised – then the wealthy can at least hide from them.
The reason housing estates became ghettos is the lack of any economic rationale to improve them. The 21st century mega tower must be self contained as that provides an internal economy. Add solar panels and we are seeing a model of energy sustainability.
Upward expansion is also limited but the ability to control environmental impact with an economic impetus to maintain it makes a whole lot of sense. A housing estate that could maintain its own medical facility, other common facilities, common security and agreed rules is a small village.
If we stop growing, towering communities becomes a logical way to withdraw our footprint on nature.
August 3, 2007Al Gore may be right that ultimately it is up to every individual to believe that change is possible, in order that politically we choose leaders who advance progress in priority to growth. On the 07/07/2007 we all swung away from unrestrained capitalism as the only panacea necessary to allow us to thrive in harmony most successfully. It is really only the political consideration that matters, for, ultimately we may care how many plastic bags make poisonous pits out of landfills but that does not stop the factory down the road from making the local river murky and lifeless. It has only been political change that has allowed us to control our impact upon the environment. And for America this provides an alternative impetus for progress. What is progress? It is invention, finding a better way to do it. And these days cleaner and environmentally friendly is going to become something as important and enforceable as any other law. US Industry is growing at 1% per annum. It is already a substantial contributor to global warming because it requires so much energy. If we draw the energy from burning coal, as seems “politically realistic” it will be with advantages in air filtration and clean burning technologies that do not emit excessive CO2 or other gases that poison the environment. Understanding the problem is hard enough for the scientific community so one can not expect political change unless the addiction to growth is not curbed. Political change needs to encompass stronger motivations for choosing to advance the case for free power generation using large batteries of wind farms. Taking the energy from the air seems logical as a counter measure to climate change. Scientific analysis of this effect may well prove important if the religion of growth is continued. Our climate is like the Earth’s circulatory system. We got to learn to stop screwing with it to get our energy. Free passive energy can obtained with solar cells. If every rooftop in America was covered with power generating solar cells, power would be free. If the environmental cost was assessed and taxed to every business in the world, we could make progress to ensure our safety. It is political for the same reason that it would be very hard to stop someone competing in a race, for example, after they had prepared for it. You would have to have a very good reason. The most convincing commercial argument to prevent climate change is that there is rather a lot of money to be made.