Endless War category archive
It’s the Testosterone, Stupid 0
In The Sacramento Bee, Marcos Breton tries to make sense of Donald Trump’s positions on Syria and of the press’s reaction to his raining robotic death from the Syrian sky. A snippet:
Instead of criticizing Trump for attacking Syria on humanitarian grounds after seeking to block Syrian refugees, CNN commentator Fareed Zakaria praised Trump’s Syria bombing as “the moment he became the President of the United States.” MSNBC anchor Brian Williams marveled at the “beauty” of the bombs dropped on Syria as the cameras rolled. This soft media coverage evoked the lack skepticism at the start of an Iraq War in 2002 that ultimately was waged on the false pretense of Iraq harboring “weapons of mass destruction.” We can’t make that mistake again. We can’t pretend that Trump is suddenly strong for dropping 59 bombs on Syria after he and others painted Obama as weak, despite the fact that Obama dropped 12,192 bombs on Syria in 2016, according to the McClatchy Washington Bureau.
I fear that any attempt to make sense of what Donald Trump does will fail. There is no ore in that mine.
In a related piece, Steven M. tries to understand why the U. S. press seems to like war so much (at least when it’s not their children in harm’s way), despite the history of America’s failure to achieve its goals in almost every aggressive military endeavor* since World War II (in which, remember, the United States and its allies were the attacked, not the attackers).
______________________
*Just for a few examples, Korea (a stalemate at best), the Bay of Pigs, Viet Nam and Southeast Asia, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq. I’m going to a concert this afternoon, so I don’t have time to link them all up, but you can do the research easily enough.
The significant positive outcomes for the U. S. and the West during the last six decades–notably the fall of the Berlin Wall and the raising of the Iron Curtain–were achieved thankfully short of war.
Surgical Strike 0
Afterthought:
You do realize that the phrase, “surgical strike,” is an oxymoron credible only to the other kind of morons.
Clouds of Witless 0
Afterthought:
It is certainly difficult to find sympathy for Assad.
Nevertheless, I doubt that raining robotic death from the skies in a fit of pique will make a difference.
I use the term “fit of pique” quite intentionally. Here’s a bit of commentary from Josh Marshall (full article at the link):
The United States has a history of over-estimating its ability to change by force what’s happening in other countries. If you don’t remember the war in Viet Nam, I do. More recently, we have ventured into Afghanistan and Iraq. Viet Nam was a failure wrapped in lies; Iraq and Afghanistan have become quagmires and will likely end in failure, if they have not already achieved that status–I think they have–if one defines “failure” as “not achieving stated goals” (as good a definition of failure as there is); no goals have been achieved and they go on and on, bloody soap operas of death.
Last night I was reluctantly discussing politics with an acquaintance of mine. Almost my last statement in that discussion was, “How long till a war?”
Guess I got my answer.
Image via The Bob Cesca Show blog.
Billions for Bullets 0
At the Boston Review, takes a look at arguments for increasing defense spending not just wanting, but spectacularly specious. He makes some points that are commonly absent from the discussion and deserve consideration. Here’s a snippet:
A larger flaw in McCain’s argument, however, is that, by historical standards, not much is actually burning. And, more importantly, the United States does not need to go looking for fires to extinguish. The world remains far more peaceful by various measures than at almost any other point, and the United States still enjoys a privileged position: militarily powerful and distant from trouble. U.S. enemies are historically few and weak; U.S. defense spending is more than double what Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea collectively spend on their militaries; and U.S. forces remain vastly superior. North Korea and Iran are troublesome, but incapable of posing much direct threat to their neighbors, let alone the United States, especially considering nuclear deterrence. Russia threatens its neighbors, but with an oil-dependent economy now about the size of Italy’s, it poses little danger to more economically stable nations further west.
All Guns, No Ifs, Ands, or Butter 0
Will Bunch considers Donald Trump’s budget proposal. He does not like what it portends. Here’s a bit (emphasis added):
Because war is just what authoritarians do. So is this budget — a tinhorn dictator budget, the budget of an immature boy-king who’s in love with the cold steel of tanks but has zero empathy for America’s humanity, let alone the National Endowment for the Humanities.
War and Mongers of War 0
I hope Farron is overstating things. I fear not.
Welcome to pariah patriotism.
Trumpling the Bomb 0
I remember sitting on the side porch in the 1950s and feeling relief that, in the event of World War III, we were within the radius of the nuclear attack that would most certainly be delivered to Norfolk Naval Base, so I would not be around for the aftermath.
If Trump wins, I can comfort myself with that same thought.
Via TPM.
ISIS, Origins Issue 0
Thom explains how ISIS arose from the Neoliberal paradise resulting from President George the Worst’s Great and Glorious Patriotic War for a Lie in Iraq.
Cannon Fodderers 2
Bob Chernow, Milwaukee businessman and veteran, is fed up with the chicken hawks, those politicians and lobbyists willing to send the children of others to die for the sake of short-term domestic political and personal gain (which leads to as good a definition of “unjust war” as I am likely to hear). A snippet:
But I do take issue with chicken hawks who dodged the draft or shirked their duty during war but advocated that others fight and perhaps die in war. This lack of character is prominent among many elected officials.
Read the rest.