Some of it. Stripping away the sensationalism of a lefty writer, it is in fact what has been concerning a lot of US citizens as well.
Chris Floyd is pointing out the careful morphing of civilian law to martial law, from "suspected terrorist" to "terrorist." Then beyond martial law is no law, where you create rhetoric and secrecy to justify anything up to and including mini-nukes, without debate or citizen input.
That is disturbing stuff, outside the bounds of "we're just planning the war, folks, don't worry".
The Bush Senior Old Guard is sentimental for the WWII days when Truman gave orders that ruled the world and stopped a monarchy. But it isn't a monarchy, it's anarchy, and the plan won't work unless you can find every single cell, and they can't even find OBL, after a CIA agent met him in Paris last year. Greater violence clears out Afghanistan, but what does it do to fuel plans for violence around the world.
To use a comparison in a venture capital campaign, failure is guaranteed when you create an unachievable "exit strategy".
Here, the US "exit strategy" is to rule every neighborhood in the world directly and by proxies.
"Ashcroft grabbed three dozen Somali-Americans from their homes, classrooms and businesses and deported them -- without charges, without hearings, "not shriving time allowed" -- to Mogadishu, the London Times reports"
A question there is if any of these were citizens, not just pretend hyphenated citizens.
The primary question is openness and accountability.
Without that, you get what Floyd says:
"That's the world the "defenders of civilization" have given us. They strut out in their thousand-dollar suits and preach to us about "civilized values" and "enduring freedom" while they pay their murderers and wave their cattle prods and "expand their nuclear attack options," plotting the death of millions. They're teaching every budding terrorist, every aspiring dictator, every mafia goon that violence, death and dominance are the truest human values, the way to wealth and glory."
If it is simply a General LeMay type contest to see who can kill the most, remember he said if the US lost he'd probably be tried as a war criminal. That doesn't work in a technological future with unlimited WMD possibilities where moral leadership is as important as military leadership, because two kids in a basement can cook up a WMD.
That's why I keep asking these armchair warriors what they think "winning" means.
They have no answer.
Apparently, it's un-American to ask that question. |
