||Posted: May 04 2003,15:21
Re: A New Century of Colonial War?
The great worry is what we don’t know by design; the subtexts. Trying to discern what has really happened, what is planned and why, is an exercise at which the media and the great unwashed spend infinite hours and energy because we’re all pretty sure there’s something behind political actions (say a war) that is being carefully concealed from us; we would be shocked if we knew what.
I’m reminded of the twenty-year hiatus between WWI and WWII when the leaders of Britain, France and Italy were well aware of the direction in which Germany was going. They did nothing about it because they wanted revenge for WWI and waited for the opportune moment, casus belli, to declare war.
It’s about the loathsome propaganda.
Nazi leader Hermann Goering in an interview by Gustave Gilbert during the Easter recess of the Nuremberg trials, 1946 April 18.
Goering: "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."
Gilbert: "There is one difference. In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."
Goering: "Voice or no voice, 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 in any country."
As quoted in Gilbert's book Nuremberg Diary (From PEC, Feb 2003)
Hasn’t colonization been going on for years? Those countries—most are obviously aggressive states—that are financed, supplied with arsenals and tied to trade agreements by the US, are beholden to do its bidding. Countries that refuse to "cooperate" (say Canada) are subject to trade threats among other things and even the demise of the UN. England held sway over the New England settlers with those tools hundreds of years ago. And there’s a rumour afoot that space is being colonized by the US.
If the Bush administration makes another preemptive strike—in a bid to colonize—we can be sure of incredible arms-building, and, of course, of nuclear arms. Whatever is in Iraq, if indeed there is anything, will be a molehill compared to this potential.
The volatility of other cultures and religions in highly militant countries are but waiting for the right moment, a casus belli, to vent their anger and take revenge for whatever might have happened now or generations ago. And Bush has certainly invited the most likely players to his psychosis-of-war club.
What he seems to be missing is the aftermath. A very sloppy colonizer, he’s starting his messianic (Daniel Shorr says more messy than messianic).bids for freedom in one place, and like a bird dog with a broken tail, excitedly running off to another leaving utter chaos behind. And he seems to be deaf to such as your information coming out of countries that are becoming militant as they assume a need to defend. The developing undertow could take us back to the dark ages when war was all the rage.
And about the pillaged museums while the Marines were on watch. Where is the market for these items, one that other musems would recognize or even an underground market?