Endless War category archive
War and Mongers of War 0
At The Guardian, Paul Mason opines that Trump will indeed go there. A snippet:
Been nice knowin’ ya.
Afterthought:
It’s truly disturbing that we have reached a point of hoping that Kim Jong-Un is the sane one.
Also, I think Donald Trump and his dupes, symps, and fellow travelers grossly over-estimate China’s influence over Kim Jong-Un.
The Return of Swampwater 0
A rumor has been floated that Donald Trump is considering outsourcing Afghanistan to Erik Prince and Blackwater (which has since been renamed several times I forget its current alias because it did such a good job the first time).
A snippet:
War and Mongers of War 0
Lee Camp argues that Donald Trump is following precedent to lie us into lies. (The relevant portion is approximately the first half of the show.)
Warning: Language.
47 Years Ago . . . 0
. . . American soldiers turned their guns on American citizens exercising their First Amendment rights to protest one of America’s wars for a lie–not for the first nor for the last time.
I learned about it when one of my friends came into the Campus Center (aka Student Union) at my college and said, “They’re killing us.”
War and Mongers of War 0
Josh Marshall considers the news from Asia (emphasis added):
He goes on to consider the logic of a “preemptive” strike against North Korea and concludes that, in this case at least, there is no such thing.
It resolves to a simple point: the logic of a “preemptive strike” is that you can solve or mostly solve the problem at issue by striking hard and first. But that doesn’t seem to be the case here. So a “preemptive strike” really just means starting a war, which we couldn’t necessarily control in scope or duration once we started it.
Follow the link for the full article.
The Peace Train 0
Francis J. Gavin, writing in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, considers Americans self-image as a peace-loving people and finds it somewhere between wishful-thinking and delusion.
I don’t agree with everything he says, but I think the article is worth the few minutes it will take you to read it. Here’s a bit:
It is easy to understand why Americans embrace these views. If the U.S. and its citizens and values are associated with peace and stability, then actions that might typically be understood through the narrow lens of self-interest can instead be translated into selfless policies that benefit mankind.
(snip)
Or so the story goes. But an honest portrayal of our own history, and that of world politics over the past few centuries, casts doubt on all three assumptions.
