And the endless intrigues they willingly allow themselves to be a part of, now including Russiagate, Putin-whatever, the War on Syria, the US/NATO Takeover of Ukraine, and others.
Jean Bricmont wrote this at Counterpunch in 2012.
Malooga at Moon of Alabama (MofA is soon to be added to my sidebar, along with Counterpunch) wrote eloquently about this in 2013.
And now, in 2018, the same "Our Enemy has WMD's!" hysteria is back, big time.
Caitlin Johnstone calls out our hypocrisy in Syria.
I would only pose a slightly qualified defense for Noam Chomsky's blanket condemnation of Assad, on the weight of his other works, his earlier inquisitions, and that his opening lines are meant as a qualifying brush on what follows, following a particular (folksy) style of argumentation, and being taken out of context. He's right to ultimately focus on the US as the ultimate source of most violence (not Israel, as sone do) for reasons that will beome clear through my argument below. Mostly the folskiness is fine, in this case, it bothers many of us. But, I don't think it's really that big a deal. I'm not throwing out my Chomsky books or ending support of Democracy Now! or The Intercept, despite disagreement with some of the views they have presented. They do always say, you must judge for yourself, and on each point separately.
In the most recent discussion party I hosted, not at my pleasure the topic of Russiagate came up, and I'm afraid I can still lose my cool over that. After a few comments, I was asked if I had given up leftism and become alt right or something.
No, the ethics of it all is quite simple, even if Neitzche condemned "slave morality", putting others equal if not first is the the essence of ethics.
In this case, we should take the log out of our own eye before condemning the speck in all others, and indeed the quantities are like this.
While we spend a trillion a year on international disinformation, sanctions, bombs and DU, Assad has not ventured beyond his internationally recognized borders; it was Britain then US who started financing terrorism against his family decades ago before their often lied about (and fabricated, etc, including by the now debunked White Helmets) responses to it began. Russia has only reclaimed a key tiny piece (Crimea) that was broken away, effectively, by two coups: first, the western orchestrated "Collapse" of the Soviet Union, which in this case broke away the region which was once the heart of Russia, and second the backing of a racist violent coup which constituted the current regime in Ukraine. Even if Russia were not justified in doing as they did, as I think they were (and highly lied about in the west), they were still microscopic compared to our years of heavy bombardment and action in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen--for what???
We've deliberately altered the trajectory of countries in dozens if not hundreds of cases (such as Chile, Guatemala and Iran) and sometimes bragged about it. Often in very tragic ways. Chomsky HAS written about this recently, mostly echoing his friend Edward Hermann who wrote the clearest and best denunciation of Russiagate last year. Robert Parry was doing a most excellent job too, and now Caitlin Johnstone. A friend of mine who takes Russiagate more seriously than I do calls it "Blowback." I've already stated that anytime Russiagate comes up it MUST BE put into context, else one is taking on the role of imperial stooge. But from what we know, it doesn't look like very much blowback at all, if any even.
What should a US Citizen say about Assad? Firstly I don't have a reliable source for information about him, so I don't really know anything, and would certainly never be able to put it in the fullest possible context anyway--no one person can ever do that. Though I have read that as recently as 2012 he was a very popular President in at least the area of the country that voted (most of its population), so he must not have been as evil as alleged around here, and likely still isn't. Second it's a far away country that has not done anything wrongly to Americans, so we shouldn't have ever been involved in any kind of militarism, or even financing terrorists against his regime. Thirdly we've wronged it (as well as the Assads) for decades--so morally and ethically we owe them a lot. Fourth our best way of paying that debt, or at least starting, is to stop increasing it. We should just pull out of Syria, and all foreign countries for that matter. Forget ISIS and all that crap (which we had a leading role in creating). Leave others to solve their own problems rather then endlessly making them impossibly worse. And that includes turning our gaze around and applying our standards to ourselves first.
We really do not have any business putting troups and waging war all over the world. It doesn't make us any safer. We need to focus on making a better country here. We need to reverse the wrong path to a continuation of militarism after WWII. We need to put ourselves to making a better country, not a greater one.
Everything else is apologia for empire, and is not compatible with leftism, or any committment to moral and ethical justice.
Only when we have no ongoing wars or aggressive designs of any kind on other countries (including threatening weapons of mass destruction) can we begin to rightfully assess the actual human rights situations under the designs of foreign leaders where our military forces or proxies or threats are directed, and peacefully work for better human rights and human satisfactions of all kinds everywhere, starting at home.
Syria vs The US
So far, all claims that Syria has used chemical weapons have been debunked, including the latest chlorine gas claims. Rebel-held cities are a perfectly motivated and equipped to smear Assad with false claims, and all US and NATO operators take and possibly encourage such claims. Supposedly independent actors, especially the White Helmets and even legendary Amnesty International are willing to lie in the service of western hegemony.
Assad has never had any need for chemical weapons. He has the advantage in military equipment and firepower and can simply blow things up. And has. And, in absolute terms, of course this is monsterous.
THAT of course is his inhumanity, but the reason this is not emphasized in US Media is precisely because...the west does it too and moreso! We are the biggest monsters of all!
Assad is blowing up rebel held cities because in his view, they are part of his country which in the process of being stolen by US and Saudi and other-middleastern funded rebels. His country has become part of a proxy war between the US and Russia, the US being the instigator just because US don't want Russia to have any client states, just the US.
This is arguably, on his part, just war. Now, it does seem that his use of heavy bombardment is unnecessary and therefore unjust. But we don't know the details. It could be, and after all this war has been pulled along by heavy US and Saudi "investments" for decades and still.
Meanwhile, the US has been fighting warfare in Afghanistan and Iraq for no apparent reason other than to crush independent actors and prove we can make their countries a living hell. This is a very high power of monsterousness; it's a war crime which cannot be justified, and seems to have no other purpose than terrorize the rest of the world by showing our capacity for endless brutality. In Syria, our mission for decades has been destroying the decades old republic that exists, and replacing it with a client state of ours. Another monsterous war criminal act with no possible legal justifyability. Of course, it's sold in the west as saving the women and children, and democracy and all that. Yeah, we're saving them by giving heavy weapons and chemical precursors to jihiadis.
Actors who supposedly inspired these wars, Saddam Hussein, and Osama bin Laden, are long since dead. The Taliban had done nothing to us and offered to turn over Osama bin Laden if we would provide evidence of his involvement. Actually, it is known now, exactly when and where 9/11 was plotted, in Germany, and without Osama bin Laden. He could only be proven to be a spiritual leader of Al Qaeda, and allegedly a very retiring one in poor health.
Saddam had not only never threatened us (he wanted to be our friend...again) he had nothing to do with terrorist attacks on the US in fact precisely the opposite, he was working strenuously to suppress Al Qaeda and their like in Iraq and doing a better job than we have ever since. In fact, since we created the precursor to Al Qaeda (the Mujahadeen, to fight Russia), and have been funding Al Qaeda in Syria through numerous supposedly unconnected organizations, along with the Saudis and others, it looks more like we toppled Saddam precisely because he was blocking Al Qaeda--certainly our guys before and after.
At best, all our wars make no sense in any way except wasting a lot of money and blowing things up. At worst, they are the highest imaginable monsterousness.
Meanwhile, this little guy Assad is only trying to defend his country from being carved up by foreign funded armies. Carved up where the population is thin but the oil wells are dense.
And so it goes. We might be lucky if somehow Russia were able to peacefully subdue the US Deep State, since by far we are the greater evil, and have been since WWII. Though I wouldn't count on that being the luckier path.
It seems to me like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. First Bill seems the greater evil, by destroying all his competitors and then most of his cooperators. We knew, in the end, if Apple got big, it would be an equal evil, and so it is. Though the Apple system has been far superior since OS X, and we owe that switch to Jobs selection, determination, and persuasion (along with the legions of Unix and BSD and Gnu/Linux programmers).
I'm greatly put off by Putin emphasizing and glamorizing his military capabilities. Yeah maybe he's not as nice a guy as our previous President (however, I'd guess he killed far fewer people). But in general he seems more a more responsible person than our current President. In other ways, and partly through decades our influence, Russia has become more anti-socialistic than we are, ,and less LGTBE tolerant, and those are deep faults. But it is ours not to keep making worse, along with ourselves.
It would be ours, first, to do no more harm. And not participate in the foreign monster of the month demonization club of the deep state. Instead, find every way, to keep the focus here, on the monsterous deeds done in our name by the machinery we have some small ability to move over time.
This is true to the point where concern for the greater good compels to act like defense attorney for for the all the alleged foreign monsters presumed by fellows to be the greatest evil, when in absolute sense, they don't deserve any defense, their guilt being so much less than ours, we should always present our prosecutions of ill behavior in the order of the greater guilt first.
Jean Bricmont wrote this at Counterpunch in 2012.
Malooga at Moon of Alabama (MofA is soon to be added to my sidebar, along with Counterpunch) wrote eloquently about this in 2013.
And now, in 2018, the same "Our Enemy has WMD's!" hysteria is back, big time.
Caitlin Johnstone calls out our hypocrisy in Syria.
I would only pose a slightly qualified defense for Noam Chomsky's blanket condemnation of Assad, on the weight of his other works, his earlier inquisitions, and that his opening lines are meant as a qualifying brush on what follows, following a particular (folksy) style of argumentation, and being taken out of context. He's right to ultimately focus on the US as the ultimate source of most violence (not Israel, as sone do) for reasons that will beome clear through my argument below. Mostly the folskiness is fine, in this case, it bothers many of us. But, I don't think it's really that big a deal. I'm not throwing out my Chomsky books or ending support of Democracy Now! or The Intercept, despite disagreement with some of the views they have presented. They do always say, you must judge for yourself, and on each point separately.
In the most recent discussion party I hosted, not at my pleasure the topic of Russiagate came up, and I'm afraid I can still lose my cool over that. After a few comments, I was asked if I had given up leftism and become alt right or something.
No, the ethics of it all is quite simple, even if Neitzche condemned "slave morality", putting others equal if not first is the the essence of ethics.
In this case, we should take the log out of our own eye before condemning the speck in all others, and indeed the quantities are like this.
While we spend a trillion a year on international disinformation, sanctions, bombs and DU, Assad has not ventured beyond his internationally recognized borders; it was Britain then US who started financing terrorism against his family decades ago before their often lied about (and fabricated, etc, including by the now debunked White Helmets) responses to it began. Russia has only reclaimed a key tiny piece (Crimea) that was broken away, effectively, by two coups: first, the western orchestrated "Collapse" of the Soviet Union, which in this case broke away the region which was once the heart of Russia, and second the backing of a racist violent coup which constituted the current regime in Ukraine. Even if Russia were not justified in doing as they did, as I think they were (and highly lied about in the west), they were still microscopic compared to our years of heavy bombardment and action in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen--for what???
We've deliberately altered the trajectory of countries in dozens if not hundreds of cases (such as Chile, Guatemala and Iran) and sometimes bragged about it. Often in very tragic ways. Chomsky HAS written about this recently, mostly echoing his friend Edward Hermann who wrote the clearest and best denunciation of Russiagate last year. Robert Parry was doing a most excellent job too, and now Caitlin Johnstone. A friend of mine who takes Russiagate more seriously than I do calls it "Blowback." I've already stated that anytime Russiagate comes up it MUST BE put into context, else one is taking on the role of imperial stooge. But from what we know, it doesn't look like very much blowback at all, if any even.
What should a US Citizen say about Assad? Firstly I don't have a reliable source for information about him, so I don't really know anything, and would certainly never be able to put it in the fullest possible context anyway--no one person can ever do that. Though I have read that as recently as 2012 he was a very popular President in at least the area of the country that voted (most of its population), so he must not have been as evil as alleged around here, and likely still isn't. Second it's a far away country that has not done anything wrongly to Americans, so we shouldn't have ever been involved in any kind of militarism, or even financing terrorists against his regime. Thirdly we've wronged it (as well as the Assads) for decades--so morally and ethically we owe them a lot. Fourth our best way of paying that debt, or at least starting, is to stop increasing it. We should just pull out of Syria, and all foreign countries for that matter. Forget ISIS and all that crap (which we had a leading role in creating). Leave others to solve their own problems rather then endlessly making them impossibly worse. And that includes turning our gaze around and applying our standards to ourselves first.
We really do not have any business putting troups and waging war all over the world. It doesn't make us any safer. We need to focus on making a better country here. We need to reverse the wrong path to a continuation of militarism after WWII. We need to put ourselves to making a better country, not a greater one.
Everything else is apologia for empire, and is not compatible with leftism, or any committment to moral and ethical justice.
Only when we have no ongoing wars or aggressive designs of any kind on other countries (including threatening weapons of mass destruction) can we begin to rightfully assess the actual human rights situations under the designs of foreign leaders where our military forces or proxies or threats are directed, and peacefully work for better human rights and human satisfactions of all kinds everywhere, starting at home.
Syria vs The US
So far, all claims that Syria has used chemical weapons have been debunked, including the latest chlorine gas claims. Rebel-held cities are a perfectly motivated and equipped to smear Assad with false claims, and all US and NATO operators take and possibly encourage such claims. Supposedly independent actors, especially the White Helmets and even legendary Amnesty International are willing to lie in the service of western hegemony.
Assad has never had any need for chemical weapons. He has the advantage in military equipment and firepower and can simply blow things up. And has. And, in absolute terms, of course this is monsterous.
THAT of course is his inhumanity, but the reason this is not emphasized in US Media is precisely because...the west does it too and moreso! We are the biggest monsters of all!
Assad is blowing up rebel held cities because in his view, they are part of his country which in the process of being stolen by US and Saudi and other-middleastern funded rebels. His country has become part of a proxy war between the US and Russia, the US being the instigator just because US don't want Russia to have any client states, just the US.
This is arguably, on his part, just war. Now, it does seem that his use of heavy bombardment is unnecessary and therefore unjust. But we don't know the details. It could be, and after all this war has been pulled along by heavy US and Saudi "investments" for decades and still.
Meanwhile, the US has been fighting warfare in Afghanistan and Iraq for no apparent reason other than to crush independent actors and prove we can make their countries a living hell. This is a very high power of monsterousness; it's a war crime which cannot be justified, and seems to have no other purpose than terrorize the rest of the world by showing our capacity for endless brutality. In Syria, our mission for decades has been destroying the decades old republic that exists, and replacing it with a client state of ours. Another monsterous war criminal act with no possible legal justifyability. Of course, it's sold in the west as saving the women and children, and democracy and all that. Yeah, we're saving them by giving heavy weapons and chemical precursors to jihiadis.
Actors who supposedly inspired these wars, Saddam Hussein, and Osama bin Laden, are long since dead. The Taliban had done nothing to us and offered to turn over Osama bin Laden if we would provide evidence of his involvement. Actually, it is known now, exactly when and where 9/11 was plotted, in Germany, and without Osama bin Laden. He could only be proven to be a spiritual leader of Al Qaeda, and allegedly a very retiring one in poor health.
Saddam had not only never threatened us (he wanted to be our friend...again) he had nothing to do with terrorist attacks on the US in fact precisely the opposite, he was working strenuously to suppress Al Qaeda and their like in Iraq and doing a better job than we have ever since. In fact, since we created the precursor to Al Qaeda (the Mujahadeen, to fight Russia), and have been funding Al Qaeda in Syria through numerous supposedly unconnected organizations, along with the Saudis and others, it looks more like we toppled Saddam precisely because he was blocking Al Qaeda--certainly our guys before and after.
At best, all our wars make no sense in any way except wasting a lot of money and blowing things up. At worst, they are the highest imaginable monsterousness.
Meanwhile, this little guy Assad is only trying to defend his country from being carved up by foreign funded armies. Carved up where the population is thin but the oil wells are dense.
And so it goes. We might be lucky if somehow Russia were able to peacefully subdue the US Deep State, since by far we are the greater evil, and have been since WWII. Though I wouldn't count on that being the luckier path.
It seems to me like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. First Bill seems the greater evil, by destroying all his competitors and then most of his cooperators. We knew, in the end, if Apple got big, it would be an equal evil, and so it is. Though the Apple system has been far superior since OS X, and we owe that switch to Jobs selection, determination, and persuasion (along with the legions of Unix and BSD and Gnu/Linux programmers).
I'm greatly put off by Putin emphasizing and glamorizing his military capabilities. Yeah maybe he's not as nice a guy as our previous President (however, I'd guess he killed far fewer people). But in general he seems more a more responsible person than our current President. In other ways, and partly through decades our influence, Russia has become more anti-socialistic than we are, ,and less LGTBE tolerant, and those are deep faults. But it is ours not to keep making worse, along with ourselves.
It would be ours, first, to do no more harm. And not participate in the foreign monster of the month demonization club of the deep state. Instead, find every way, to keep the focus here, on the monsterous deeds done in our name by the machinery we have some small ability to move over time.
This is true to the point where concern for the greater good compels to act like defense attorney for for the all the alleged foreign monsters presumed by fellows to be the greatest evil, when in absolute sense, they don't deserve any defense, their guilt being so much less than ours, we should always present our prosecutions of ill behavior in the order of the greater guilt first.
No comments:
Post a Comment