- Every facet of our current political spectrum has opinions,
articles, and essays: Is the USA an empire? Or, with its recent occupation
of Iraqnam, has it begun to extend the one it already has? And just how
successful has it been?
-
- At present, it does not appear to me that the USA is
an empire in the historical tradition of one nation openly and permanently
ruling other nations. Instead, it is disguised as more than 200 'defensive'
military bases in 184 countries, in a war budget that exceeds the next
thirty nations combined, and in its military waging bizarre 'pre-emptive'
wars, at present occuppying two nations far from home, supposedly installing
democracy, as if it were a commodity from the nearest convenience store.
All previous world history tells us these actions are not sustainable,
for much the same reasons as occurred in the later Roman Empire, or for
Nazi Germany after it foolishly invaded the USSR.
-
- During the midst of the Vietnam debacle, President
L B Johnson declared the country could have both guns and butter, so 'Great
Society' programs began, in spite of ever-mounting war expenditures. Because
it was the first election I could vote in, I paid attention to what the
candidates said. Yes, I voted for Johnson, because he promised to wind
the War down, and Goldwater appeared to want an expansion. And I dutifully
appeared for induction in 1963, but was 1-A rejected, due to a chronic
cardiac condition, and reclassified to 1-Y. It was only after this that
I began to really question how the USA got into the mess it created. As
usual, the answers lay in a study of history.
-
- After it conquered as much of North America as it could
prior to 1898, the USA's pursuit of overseas domination began in earnest
with seizure of Spain's previous conquests, Cuba and the Philippines.
In doing this, the US established a new rule: its illegitimacy could replace
another's illegitimacy, a rule followed without hesitation to the present
day, in one form or another: "Two wrongs now make one right!".
But of course there were historical precedents: just as Spain had no legal,
ethical, or moral right to occupy its colonies, nor did Britain have any
in its break-up of the Ottoman Empire after WW1, when it created the fictions
of Iraq, Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. It did so because "divide
and conquer" meant control over those people and their oil resources.
What did the USA learn from these failed empires? Even after the blowback
of the CIA's multiple "regime changes" in the region, the USA
now sends foredoomed troops into the madness of Oil War 2. The self-styled
"Christian" Dubya needs to ask himself: "What does it profit
me to gain this world, and lose my soul?"
-
- Let's do as our Court-appointed, unelected
'leaders' do, and set aside the question of legitimacy: realpolitik demands
expansion that is supportable and desirable. Prior to Vietnam, the USA
preferred as minimal and hidden a military conquest as possible, trusting
its superior military action, followed by rapid economic domination, to
bring Third World countries to heel. These were the politics practised
and perfected by the 'Eastern Establishment,' created by those good old
white boys at the turn of the century, Rockefeller, Mellon, Gould, et.
al., ad infinitum, ad nauseum. After WW2, however, the exponential spread
and penetration of electronic communications made it far more difficult
to perpetuate takeovers out of sight of public scrutiny. Finally, the
can of worms opens, and new rationalizations must be made. This is where
the USA is now, stuck in Iraqnam.
-
- Outside the USA, the world sees the US self-styled
"wars of liberation" as a pretentious cover for military occupation
of the world's most important oil reserves, second only to Saudi Arabia's,
which at present are an assured supply to the USA. If "problems"
arise there, however, the USA's planned new mega-base in Iraqnam will quickly
bomb that "problem" into submission as well. Or will it? Matters
aren't going as swimmingly as projected by the Cabal: it seems the natives
neither welcome occupation or the 'Provisonal Governing Authority' of Overlord
Bremmer and his hastily-created Ruling Council. Perhaps the new legions
are at their Danube, and the limits of empire have been discerned. This
is certainly understood by the Iraqi resistance in its deliberate destruction
of their oil infrastructure: Deprive the enemy of what he came for, as
the USSR did with its "scorched earth" denial of materials to
the German invaders. The reason is simple: it worked then, and it will
again.
-
- Before Che Guevara was executed by commandos
led by officers trained at The School of the Americas (how soon we forget!),
he had stated on several occasions the USA could only be defeated when
it became embroiled in "two, three, many Vietnams." Although
it has taken thirty years to come about, this appears to be exactly what
is happening. With more than 150,000 troops stuck in Iraqnam, more than
50,000 others in South Korea and Afghanistan, plus tens of thousands of
support personnel elsewhere, there are now more than a million people under
command of the US military in voluntary and "private" (i.e.,
mercenary) sectors dispersed over the entire planet, from Pole to Pole.
It's hugely expensive, unsupportable, and worse than not working, it's
counter-productive, the biggest "blowback" ever.
-
- To this already immense financial burden, add the unprecedented
federal debt, now surpassing seven thousand billion dollars (US$ 7,000,000,000,000.00).
Yet the Cabal in Washington, DC repeatedly cuts taxes for the wealthiest
at a time when this money should maintain a credible currency. Is it possible,
however, that a forty percent discount of the dollar was intended, and
this was deemed the most effective, non-Keynesian way to achieve that?
And just how unjust are the tax giveaways? Consider this: the benefit
to Sam 'Wal-Mart' Walton's five adult children is far more than the combined
tax relief to their one million, three hundred thousand employees. It's
difficult to imagine a greater slap in the face to working people, unless
we include previous and newly disabled war veterans, who just had their
medical benefits reduced by the same evil empire.
-
- Eric Margolis, Contributing Foreign Editor
of The Toronto Sun, in his article "America: the Danger Lies Within"
at rense.com, writes that "Éfor those Americans whose primary
loyalty was to their country, rather than to religious cultism, foreign
nations, or financial profit, the rapid emergence of the U. S. as an imperial
power waging two hugely expensive colonial wars in Asia was a disaster,
both for America's democratic system and for the rest of the world."
-
- Has this oily empire brought the USA the peace,
security, and contentment it so desperately craves? Again, from Eric Margolis:
"Though the mighty United States, with only 5% of world population,
accounts for nearly 50% of total global military spending, the continuing
Orwellian message from Washington was of fear and vulnerability. Vague
threats of terrorist attack and menacing Muslims were used to curtail American
civil liberties, and expand the government's powers of repression and intrusion.
The public barely noticed this sinister, proto-totalitarian campaign."
-
- Not only is the nation as unsettled as never
before, but these actions cause deep financial damage to critical operations
such as air travel, transportation in general (which is 15% of the GDP,
by the bye), and international intercourse, as well as domestic, threatening
to erode what little remains of others' regard for this beleaguered giant.
"US intelligence may possibly have wind of further terrorist attacks
on air traffic. The measures taken are so financially damaging to the airlines
that the existence of serious threats can by no means be ruled out. At
the same time, the refusal of the US government to give the public any
information about the alleged threats tends, if anything, to undermine
the credibility of its claims, while militating against effective measures
to protect the flying public and the population as a whole." This,
from David Walsh in his article, "Black Hawks Over Las Vegas",
at rense.com, 05 Jan. 2004. Kind of a counter-productive fear and trembling,
isn't it?
-
- I'll close with a question: What has been the
single best investment since the first crash (the second one is nearly
here) of the stock markets in January 2000? Gold mining stocks and physical
gold. Some junior gold mines' share price are up 1,000 percent or more
(not a misprint!). Now, guess who was greatly rewarded by Barrick Goldstrike,
the fabulous creature assembled with a little help from friends in federal
bureaucracies, which essentially gave away the mineral rights to his cronies.
-
-
- Here's the answer, in Jock Gill's expose at Democrats.com,
"Bush the Elder's Scheme to Sell Pardons and Get a Payoff--Where is
the Outrage Over a 10 Billion Dollar Taxpayer Ripoff?" http://www.penfield-gill.com/presentations/bush_the_elder.htm
-
- "In his last days as President, Bush Sr. sold U.S.
government asset worth $10 billion to a friend for a mere $10 thousand
dollars, pardoned his business colleagues, and then went on the company's
payroll for seven years.
-
- "At the very end of his Presidency Papa Bush gave
a sweetheart deal to the Canadian company Barrick Goldstrike. They got
the rights to US land worth $10 billion in return for a nominal payment
to the treasury of $10,000. But that does not seem to be all they got,
or all they paid for either.
-
- "The money behind Barrick is from Saudi arms dealer
and Bush family friend Adnan Khashoggi, who was identified as conduit in
the Iran-Contra conspiracy. In 1986 he was arrested and charged with fraud
but failed to be convicted. In one of his last acts as president Bush
pardoned Khashoggi's alleged co-conspirators, who were key members of Bush's
own cabinet. As a result, no case could be made against Khashoggi Ð
or against Bush himself.
-
- "To express its gratitude for these favors, Barrick
Goldstrike hired Papa right after he left office and donated $148,000 to
the Republican Party, at least that is the amount that can be traced. As
reported by Gregory Palast, this is hugely more consequential for justice
than any presidential pardon before or since, so slowly once again let's
connect the dots:
-
- 1] Iran Contra blows up--Special Prosecutor Lawrence
Walsh makes good progress at revealing the players and their deeds.
-
- 2] Saudi arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi's role at the center
of it all is at risk of being exposed.
-
- 3] Bush "sells" $10B in gold rights for $10K
to foreigners! Why would a president accept such a bad deal for his country?
This should be dramatic red flag! This incredible amount makes the sellout
of the U.S. by some of our spies look like chump change.
-
- 4] Bush pardons key players as part of a cover up--protecting
Adnan Khashoggi and others. The obvious question is: what was the quid
pro quo?
-
- 5] Adnan Khashoggi arranges for his puppet, Peter Munk,
founder of Barrick Goldstrike, to repay the favor with a lucrative "job"
for George Bush.
-
- "So Khashoggi gets his cover up, Barrick gets its
gold mine, Bush gets a high paying no show job, the Republican Party gets
a huge contribution from a foreign company and we the taxpayers and law
abiding citizens get the shaft. How much of this 'deal' was all pre-arranged,
scripted and 'in the bag' before the selling of the gold rights and the
pardons?" (I emboldened a few lines for emphasis. JEF)
-
- At age sixty-one, it seems clear to this writer
that Iraqnam, our most recent imperial floundering about in the Middle
East, is a horrible mirroring of crony capitalism at its lowest and worstÑjust
as in Bush 41's contrived deals outlined aboveÑplanned for long
in advance, and meant to enrich the lead players and their cronies, no
matter the cost to the life and death of the United States. After all,
"Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in
foreign policy," said Henry Kissinger (quoted in Kiss the Boys Goodbye:
Stevenson & Stevenson, p. 97: Futura Press, 1990). "Yet none
dare call it treasonÉ."
-
- As Pogo reminded us fifty years ago, "We
have met the enemy, and he is us." Okay, maybe not us, but it's certainly
Them.
|
