Showing posts with label Endless War. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Endless War. Show all posts

Monday, February 24, 2014

Monday Monday....

El Nino incoming and what it will do to us.

We have to intervene!

Guns.  Guns will keep you safe... (just not the other guy.)

The world's 'poorest' president.

Everything you know about the Ukraine is wrong.

Makes me want to go out and plant more trees.

Music was her life blood and kept her alive.

What parents do to a baby's brain and what happens when they are not there in the development stage.

Oldest piece of rock in the world.

Daring to be a woman on the internet.

Thank you, Moon.


Thursday, December 08, 2011

War presented by those who have no idea what the reality is

Photobucket

 And war presented by those who know full well what it means:

   Photobucket
An Afghan woman cries out among the dead and injured in Kabul after a suicide bomber hidden among worshipers at a Shiite Muslim shrine exploded a device, killing 55 people and injuring 134 others. It was one of two deadly bomb attacks on Shiites in Afghanistan on a religious holiday. (Massoud Hossaini, AFP/Getty Images / December 7, 2011)

Monday, November 28, 2011

Monday, June 28, 2010

We really are in the Era of Stupid, aren't we?

Started about 2000 and is building up steam ...

24 percent of Americans believe Obama was born outside the U.S.

Josh Marshall on the Supreme Court ruling:
....Thursday's Supreme Court decision that could have a big effect on future public corruption cases and will quite likely end up letting a good number of convicted public officials out of prison
Starbucksgate: CREW Calls for Investigation of White House
The allegations suggest that the Obama administration may be flouting the same recordkeeping laws that the Bush administration did: the federal and presidential records acts (FRA and PRA). Both laws require that White House staff retain records—including emails—related to their daily work. By using private email accounts to schedule coffee shop meetings with lobbyists (an apparent attempt to prevent these sessions from appearing in White House visitor logs), Obama officials can bypass normal email archiving procedures and "avoid the creation of any record that would memorialize those meetings." Since emails scheduling meetings with lobbyists would almost certainly be the type of emails that the FRA and PRA require White House officials to preserve, the Obama team is "in violation" of the FRA and the PRA, CREW writes.
Krugman:
We are now, I fear, in the early stages of a third depression. It will probably look more like the Long Depression than the much more severe Great Depression. But the cost — to the world economy and, above all, to the millions of lives blighted by the absence of jobs — will nonetheless be immense.

And this third depression will be primarily a failure of policy. Around the world — most recently at last weekend’s deeply discouraging G-20 meeting — governments are obsessing about inflation when the real threat is deflation, preaching the need for belt-tightening when the real problem is inadequate spending.
The G20 as Naomi Klein sees it:
As thousands protested in the streets of Toronto, inside the G20 summit world leaders agreed to a controversial goal of cutting government deficits in half by 2013. We speak with journalist Naomi Klein. "What actually happened at the summit is that the global elites just stuck the bill for their drunken binge with the world’s poor, with the people that are most vulnerable," Klein says.
Endless war, a recipe for four-star arrogance


Lifestyles of the Rich and Fossil Fueled

The Onion: 8-Year-Old Accidentally Exercises Second Amendment Rights

All this doesn't matter though. We're all doomed anyway.

Sunday, May 23, 2010

Thursday, January 07, 2010

The Pictures of War You Aren’t Supposed to See

Chris Hedges:
Look beyond the nationalist cant used to justify war. Look beyond the seduction of the weapons and the pornography of violence. Look beyond Barack Obama’s ridiculous rhetoric about finishing the job or fighting terror. Focus on the evil of war. War begins by calling for the annihilation of the others but ends ultimately in self-annihilation. It corrupts souls and mutilates bodies. It destroys homes and villages and murders children on their way to school. It grinds into the dirt all that is tender and beautiful and sacred. It empowers human deformities—warlords, Shiite death squads, Sunni insurgents, the Taliban, al-Qaida and our own killers—who can speak only in the despicable language of force. War is a scourge. It is a plague. It is industrial murder. And before you support war, especially the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, look into the hollow eyes of the men, women and children who know it.
The picture they used for this article is just heartbreaking.

Monday, December 07, 2009

Blog sprinkles

Photobucket

Twenty years ago the slaughter of female engineering students in Canada:

For me, that’s been the experience of living a normal life. Too many women in different times and places have been prevented from living anything I’d consider resembling a normal life, and 14 women engineering students in 1989 were prevented from living their lives at all. It’s not ideological to observe that it was due to a young man’s anger and frustration at feminism (plus the easy availability of an automatic weapon) that women were slaughtered on December 6, 1989. It’s not the fault of feminist “ideology” that other women have pointed out that violence against women is almost uniquely carried out by angry and frustrated men; it’s not ideological to draw incredibly obvious parallels between December 6 and violence against women in homes and around the world.

Sometimes it just takes several years of personal and collective experience, while paying attention to history, to accept these hard facts.

As for myself, I finally learned to credit feminism with allowing me to live a normal life. And yes, I am a feminist, for as long as it will take.

(h/t to JJ of Unrepentant Old Hippie)

War is a game... And some say we will play it forever:

As the US discovered in Iraq, it's easier to get into a war than get out – and to a significant degree, Washington, like the hapless Dubs, is now held hostage in Afghanistan. At the same time, the US is here because it wants to be. Believing it will just up and leave any time soon is plain wishful thinking.

Iraq and Afghanistan are America's sudoku wars. Put simply, by occupying blank or vacated spaces, Washington gets a handle on the nextdoor squares. It's a geostrategic numbers game. Thus what follows, in logical sequence, are Pakistan and Iran. In this continuing gambit to "shape the security environment", as US planners say, Afghanistan is an irreplaceable asset.

Pakistan will look after itself, even if that means hanging the US out to dry.

Oops... I was going to buy some on this list. I must be a bad mom because I still will....

Naked mole rats! They will save the world!

Steve Benen tries to untangle Michael Steele's circular logic:

Steele's piece then turns its attention to killing health care reform, which he says would "increase our health care premiums" (the opposite is true), "raise taxes on small businesses and the middle class" (the opposite is true), and would cost too much (in reality, reform lowers the deficit and is arguably the most ambitious cost-cutting bill ever considered by Congress).

The RNC chairman adds, "If our economy is still struggling next year, shouldn't we invest that trillion bucks into creating jobs?"

This is simply baffling. In one paragraph, Steele insists government investment hasn't and can't create jobs. In another paragraph, in the same piece, Steele thinks we can improve the economy by spending $1 trillion on job creation?

Steele goes on to argue that health care reform might be bad for the economy. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming, but to bolster his case, the RNC head points to ... nothing in particular. He just asserts that reform "could be a burden on our economy and put a strain on American job makers."

Got that? There will be a test.

Best review EVER of New Moon and Twilight.

Explaining how to avoid internet scams to your less than savvy friends and relatives.

Tomatoes
thrown at Sarah Palin missed...

Monday, November 10, 2008

Gee... you mean there are Democrats in the military?

And that's not an oxymoron?
President Bush has almost single-handedly ended the GOP’s lock on veteran and military voters through his tragic mismanagement of the war in Iraq. I have seen the change among active duty members of the military firsthand. Our families have been torn apart by the intolerable rate and length of deployments – and even many solidly conservative members of the military will privately question the competence of Republican leaders.

Now, it will be up to a Democratic president to rebuild a military that has been pushed to the breaking point by a Republican. President-elect Obama will rebuild the military for the 21st Century by increasing the size of the Marine Corps and Army; restoring the readiness of the National Guard and Reserves; and fully equipping service members for the missions they face.

Domestically, the party that rushed us into war in Iraq has abandoned the needs of veterans here at home. It was a Democratic senator, Jim Webb of Virginia, who led the successful fight against the Bush Administration for a new GI Bill. It has been Democrats who have fought to expand health benefits for veterans, improve access to health care for reservists, and cut through the red tape at the VA.

The success of Democratic veteran candidates has reinforced this trend. This new generation of leaders is making its mark on the Democratic Party and changing the conventional wisdom on political support among veterans and military voters.

This is not to say that Democrats are inherently more patriotic than Republicans. There are honorable people from all walks of life and political affiliations serving in the military today. But no longer will the party of Harry Truman and John Kennedy sit idly by while Republicans attack our commitment and dedication to our country.
Maybe we'll learn from this that supporting our troops does not mean forcing them back into the war for six or seven tours of duty, that threatening other countries is not as good as diplomacy, that war is not the first option on the table but the last.

Maybe.

Monday, March 10, 2008

Afghanistan

Photobucket

(euphemism) inadvertent casualties and destruction inflicted on civilians in the course of military operations

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

When in doubt

Hire a lobbyist firm... Heck, hire two...three:
Controversial private security firm Blackwater Worldwide “has ramped up its lobbying representation on Capitol Hill” by hiring the law firm Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice to “lobby the government on contracting and other issues.” “Womble Carlyle is the third lobbying firm to be hired by Moyock, N.C.-based Blackwater since October.”
What do mercenary lobbyists lobby for? More wars?

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

The definition of insanity

Is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results -- Benjamin Franklin. Ben, I give you ... Iraq:

Against this backdrop, the U.S. military has been trying in vain to hold the country together. Even with "the surge," we simply do not have enough soldiers and marines to meet the professed goals of clearing areas from insurgent control, holding them securely and building sustainable institutions. Though temporary reinforcing operations in places like Fallujah, An Najaf, Tal Afar, and now Baghdad may brief well on PowerPoint presentations, in practice they just push insurgents to another spot on the map and often strengthen the insurgents' cause by harassing locals to a point of swayed allegiances. Millions of Iraqis correctly recognize these actions for what they are and vote with their feet -- moving within Iraq or leaving the country entirely. Still, our colonels and generals keep holding on to flawed concepts.

U.S. forces, responsible for too many objectives and too much "battle space," are vulnerable targets. The sad inevitability of a protracted draw-down is further escalation of attacks -- on U.S. troops, civilian leaders and advisory teams. They would also no doubt get caught in the crossfire of the imminent Iraqi civil war.

Iraqi security forces would not be able to salvage the situation. Even if all the Iraqi military and police were properly trained, equipped and truly committed, their 346,000 personnel would be too few. As it is, Iraqi soldiers quit at will. The police are effectively controlled by militias. And, again, corruption is debilitating. U.S. tax dollars enrich self-serving generals and support the very elements that will battle each other after we're gone.

This is Operation Iraqi Freedom and the reality we experienced. This is what we tried to communicate up the chain of command. This is either what did not get passed on to our civilian leadership or what our civilian leaders chose to ignore. While our generals pursue a strategy dependent on peace breaking out, the Iraqis prepare for their war -- and our servicemen and women, and their families, continue to suffer.

There is one way we might be able to succeed in Iraq. To continue an operation of this intensity and duration, we would have to abandon our volunteer military for compulsory service. Short of that, our best option is to leave Iraq immediately. A scaled withdrawal will not prevent a civil war, and it will spend more blood and treasure on a losing proposition.

America, it has been five years. It's time to make a choice.

This column was written by 12 former Army captains: Jason Blindauer served in Babil and Baghdad in 2003 and 2005. Elizabeth Bostwick served in Salah Ad Din and An Najaf in 2004. Jeffrey Bouldin served in Al Anbar, Baghdad and Ninevah in 2006. Jason Bugajski served in Diyala in 2004. Anton Kemps served in Babil and Baghdad in 2003 and 2005. Kristy (Luken) McCormick served in Ninevah in 2003. Luis Carlos Montalván served in Anbar, Baghdad and Nineveh in 2003 and 2005. William Murphy served in Babil and Baghdad in 2003 and 2005. Josh Rizzo served in Baghdad in 2006. William "Jamie" Ruehl served in Nineveh in 2004. Gregg Tharp served in Babil and Baghdad in 2003 and 2005. Gary Williams served in Baghdad in 2003.



Tell us again, Mr. Bush, just why we are fighting in Iraq? Not the first reason nor the 35th because you keep on changing your mind and the mission. 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq.

So just why are we there?

Update: an Iraq Vet responds and thanks the soldiers who wrote this.

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Endless war means endless victories and endless unquestioning cheerleading

Glenn Greenwald notes that it has been Admiral Fallon who has declared there will be no attack on Iran on his watch and the military is saying no to Cheney's desire to bomb Iran:

For obvious reasons, it is not a positive development to have the U.S. military serve as the primary check on the crazed warmongers who have control of our government. In a country that lives under civilian rule, that really is not and should not be the role of the military. Priest's claim that "the military would revolt" if it was ordered to bomb Iran is, at least in one sense, disturbing.

At the same time, the reason this is happening seems clear. Neoconservative extremists want endless war, and they are supported by the most powerful faction in our government, led by Dick Cheney, who has prevailed in every significant conflict over the last six years. And their radicalism has eroded not only the standing and strength of the United States as a country, but is close to shattering our military forces as well. Even with Iraq draining away all of our resources, they are eager, hungry and increasingly impatient for a new war with the much more formidable Iranians.

They crave regime change in Iran, and, sitting safe and protected in the U.S., they do not care at all what the aftermath is, certainly not for the 160,000 American troops sitting in Iraq. There has been a long-simmering conflict of interests between the war-crazy neocons and the U.S. military -- evidenced, by among other things, the intense hostility of Gen. Franks towards Douglas Feith. Eventually, as neocons push their war agenda further and further, that conflict will inevitably grow, since the neocons' ideological obsessions comes at the expense of the military, which serves as pure cannon fodder for their goals. It is the American military that pays the real price for the neocon's pursuit of their endless war agenda.

What is most striking about all of this is that even after all of this time, even after it has become more or less conventional wisdom that the Iraq War is an unparalleled disaster, no real political checks on their extremism exist. The Cheney-led neoconservatives are still the most powerful force, by far, in the American government.

And via Pygalgia, Daniel Ellsberg talks about what an attack on Iran could bring to this country:
I think nothing has higher priority than averting an attack on Iran, which I think will be accompanied by a further change in our way of governing here that in effect will convert us into what I would call a police state.

If there’s another 9/11 under this regime … it means that they switch on full extent all the apparatus of a police state that has been patiently constructed, largely secretly at first but eventually leaked out and known and accepted by the Democratic people in Congress, by the Republicans and so forth.