“Why, of course, the people don’t want war, why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.”
“The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”- Herman Goering
It's getting a bit clearer why the US exited Afghanistan recently. It was becoming obvious that we were never going to "win". As with all of our recent military misadventures, the conditions that constituted a "win" were never explained to anyone. While the 20 year-long war accomplished virtually nothing regarding Exporting Freedom (TM) or enhancing US security, it provided a handful of US military contractors with a steady income stream for a couple of decades.
Apparently though, it's now time to start another conflict, in order that the income stream can resume. This new conflict carries the additional risk of being on the doorstep of a major nuclear power - one that has been invaded by several other countries over the centuries. This nuclear-armed country is justifiably paranoid about a replay, this time with backing from the US.
I'm not the smartest guy on the planet (Brandon is, and he also has a very deep bunker), but starting a conflict on the border of a major nuclear power does not seem wise. I must be stupid, because it's not clear at all what there is to be gained by risking World War 3 over this basket case of a country.
I don't see any vital US interests threatened in Ukraine, even if it were to be completely gobbled up by Russia. The Ukrainians might not like that happening, but this my problem how, exactly?
And yet the news is heavily invested in, and greatly amplifying the conflict narrative. Bloomberg actually posted a headline that Russia had invaded. The headline was pre-written for an event that hadn't even happened. Weird, and yet not so shocking - because they are trying to incite a war that some poor slob on the farm doesn't want.
Below is a screen grab of a headline trying to bring the LGBT community onboard with the idea of war. This is so obviously unsubtle and dorkishly phony, it's actually pretty funny.
News organizations - which at this point are little better than propaganda outlets of the government - are inciting this war. War will be good for revenue, in addition to whatever the CIA pays them to write these war-mongering stories.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news for frat boys and sorority girls that wound up with careers in the media, but here goes. The bubble of your upper middle-class neighborhood and career is not going to protect you from a one megaton nuke detonating above your coastal city. If you don't have a gut-level dread of nuclear war, you are a f*cking idiot.
Right now, these media folks beating the drums of war don't seem to be aware that this conflict could easily expand to engulf them personally. This might not be limited to some poor slob on the farm bleeding to death on foreign soil. Perhaps when the blast wave has flattened their home, when their hair is falling out, when their children are shivering from radiation sickness and burns, maybe at that point they will see what they've wrought.
Anyhow, if the point of encouraging war is to Export Freedom (TM), we should probably invade Canada first, seeing how they are under martial law to manage a peaceful protest. Those freedom-hating tyrants are on our very doorstep, so US economic interests are most certainly at stake.
Actually, I don't think we should invade anyone.
Politicians need to stop behaving as stage performers for the news cycle, and start behaving as statesmen and women. Diplomacy should come first and foremost. We should be trading with nations instead of villainizing them and enacting sanctions. At one point we (for the most part) treated other nations with good faith and respect. A step back from the brink of thermonuclear war would be reasonable behavior.
I'm not a great fan of Russell Brand, but he has one of the more thoughtful podcasts on the situation. Very insightful.
Lastly, I honestly have to wonder why any young man (our "deplorable" slob on the farm) - demonized in his own country as the source of all its problems - would even consider giving his life for people who openly despise him.
NOTE: 10 points were deducted from the user's social credit score for this post.
Edit: 2-25-22 - This post didn't age well at all, but I'm leaving it up. The US was involved in overthrowing the elected government of Ukraine in 2014, and so my thought was that this was more of the same. It was not.
No comments:
Post a Comment