Home | About | Donate

Give War A Chance


#1

Give War A Chance

John C. O’Day

On August 5, US President Barack Obama compared the rhetoric employed by opponents of the P5+1/Iran nuclear negotiations to that used by the Bush administration during the run-up to America’s catastrophic war in Iraq, noting (Washington Post, 8/5/15) that “many of the same people who argued for the war in Iraq are now making the case against the Iran nuclear deal.”


#2

For the oligarchy, peace is not as profitable as war.


#3

The fact is the USA has been in a state of war for all of ots existence. This not a everything changed on. 9/11 thing.

It is and has been a militaristic hyper aggressive nation state since it was founded , much like any other Empire.


#4

With memories of that ponderously dreadful scene in the Legend of Billy Jack, where everyone starts singing "Give Peace a Chance", I envision Boehner, McCain (the original anti-Billy Jack), the odious Mitch McConnell, Jeff Sessions, Lindsay Graham, and a cast of empty suited ideologues from all the neocon think tanks, alternately chanting "nobamma" and singing, "Give War a Chance", as they protest in front of the White House.
I got as giggle out of it anyway and if nothing else, that justified the article by John O'Day.


#5

The Amerikan Empire has been in the war business since the revolutionary war, which despite what you have been told in your school books, was primarily a war instigated by the slave holding, banking oligarchs of that time.


#6

According to the author, "peace is almost always an alternative." Perhaps this is true in some other universe, where Reason and Morality have a say in matters. But down here in Hell (also known as planet earth) war is the one true god, because human societies tend to be organized along the lines of warring ant colonies, where mindless destructive force is the decisive force. The Empire has no interest in peace, because war is its lifeblood. The author naively asserts that the American Monster (as Jose Marti called it) has only become ultra-violent and uncompromising since 9/11. This is manifestly untrue. The USA has been warring nearly all of its existence. The war was first about territorial conquest (Manifest Destiny, as they say), but now it's about global domination. They call it "the war on terror," but it's easy to see that it's really the war to rule the world. This vainglorious project is bound to fail. The world is too complex to be brought under the control of a single government.

One bone to pick with the author. He says that there was no real war with Cuba. Untrue. The US has blockaded and sanctioned Cuba; it has sponsored acts of terrorism; it has done a great deal of harm to the fabric of Cuban society and to the health of the Cuban economy. All of these policies are tantamount to acts of war. The fact that the United States did not suffer any consequences from its brutal bullying of Cuba does not mean that it was not a war. The Cubans always knew that they were in a war, and they were not wrong. American coverage of the recent renewal of diplomatic relations with Cuba is characteristically bizarre and myopic. The media acts as though Cuba has done bad things to the United States. You would never know that, prior to the revolution, Cuba was a de facto US colony, run for the benefit of American businesses, crime syndicates and the Cuban plantocracy, with its deep roots in slavery. There is never any mention of what the US has done to Cuba. Sigh...


#7

“Our results revealed that Iranian students who experienced the Iran/Iraq War had more negative general attitudes toward war,” they explained, and “the cross-national comparison showed that American college students had more positive attitudes toward war than Iranian college students.”

Iran conscripts, the U. S. doesn't.


#8

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#10

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#11

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#12

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#14

You are no canadian. I know who you are. You used to post the same nonsense under another screename. smile

You best get another screename.

Oh and just a by the way. One of the major sources of Income for the "Good citizens of Boston" was the slave trade.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article41086.htm

This a timeline of US wars since it was founded as a nation.

http://slavenorth.com/profits.htm

Article on the role played by Boston and new England merchants in the slave trade. Many of the most prominent members of that region were slave traders,


#15

My op. ed. on the matter is Cheney: corncobs, both ends.


#16

No; the British did not invent slavery.


#18

Yet they were certainly involved in it and were one of the main players in the Atlantic Slave trade. Many of current British leaders can trace their family firtunes to slave traders including one David Cameron.

I also read an article that argued that the British Industrial Revolution was fueled and financed by the tremendous profits made off slavery and the slave trade to the Americas. The modern Corporatists running things in the Western World are well aware of the profits to be made if they can somehow repackage slavery , which is what they have been doing for the past decades through their control of the money supply and the issuance of debt.

That all said for someone to suggest that the American Colonists and especially those leaders of the Revolution like Washington and Jefferson found the practice abhorrent and had it forced upon them is about the most puerile argument I have read. They fully embraced it and were afraid the British were going to ban the practice in their Empire and this would cut into their profits.


#19

This is how mass media mind control massaging for Mars' rules occurs:

"The specter of war in American foreign policy discourse has thus produced a rather troubling framework: Advocates of diplomacy with Iran cite war as the inevitable alternative, while critics of diplomacy cite war as its inevitable outcome. No matter which side you choose, it seems, you are choosing war."


#20

Assuming that the wheel need not be rediscovered as novel to every culture and/or ethnicity, Goebbels figured this out a long time ago.

He explained that surely everyday people did not want war; but could be made to accept war IF they were convinced that they were under threat. Nothing like a False Flag to get that Fear Factor into optimum motion.

From the article:

"A pair of psychologists from Iowa State University, Nicholas Carnagey and Craig A. Anderson, published a study in 2007 titled Changes in Attitudes Towards War and Violence After September 11, 2001, demonstrating that positive attitudes towards war in the United States increased markedly after the 9/11 attacks."


#21

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#22

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#23

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.