Subscribe

Popularise CC

Join News Letter

Read CC In Your
Own Language

Editor's Picks

Mumbai Terror

Financial Crisis

Iraq

AfPak War

Peak Oil

Alternative Energy

Climate Change

US Imperialism

US Elections

Palestine

Latin America

Communalism

Gender/Feminism

Dalit

Globalisation

Humanrights

Economy

India-pakistan

Kashmir

Environment

Book Review

Gujarat Pogrom

WSF

Arts/Culture

India Elections

Archives

Links

Submission Policy

About CC

Disclaimer

Fair Use Notice

Contact Us

Subscribe To Our
News Letter

Name: E-mail:

Printer Friendly Version

The Art Of Unnecessary Warfare

By Case Wagenvoord

11 January, 2010
Countercurrents.org

It’s not easy running an unnecessary war. Our leaders really have to be fast on their feet to pull it off. The more unnecessary a war is, the greater the change is that peace will break out, especially if the aggressor is bankrupt with an impoverished public starting to wonder why their enlightened leaders are dropping cool trillion on two wars that won’t accomplish squat.

Things are looking grim in Afghanistan where peace is trying to raise its ugly head now that the Taliban have offered a pledge that they will not allow the country to be used for an attack on another country if NATO (read the United States) agrees to pull out. The Taliban have also agreed not to recognize al Qaeda if, admittedly a minor concession since there are currently no more than 100 al Qaeda in the country.

What the Taliban fail to realize is that peace is anathema to our Corporate-Military Infrastructure. Hell, how would it reap all those profits if it didn’t have a war to fight? What would it do with all that military hardware?

There are two requirements for the execution of an unnecessary war. The first is a public whose memory can be measured in nanoseconds. The second is spokes-hacks facile in the spinning of creative truths. Both of these have come into play in dealing with the Taliban offer.

Huffed one State Department spoke-hack: “This is the same group that refused to give up bin Laden, even though it could have saved their country from war. They wouldn’t break with the terrorists then, so why would we take them seriously now?”

The truth is that the Taliban offered three times to surrender bin Laden. The first two times they asked for evidence that he was involved in 9/11, standard procedure in extradition proceedings. Twice we refused, citing “state secrets.” The third time, after the invasion began, they waived the evidence requirement. We still said, “Thanks, but no thanks!”

Then Bobby Gates chimed in by saying that we had to grind them into the ground before they would negotiate on our terms, our terms being a permanent military presence there so we could protect the pipeline we wanted to build.

The first rule of unnecessary warfare is that when you have a goose that is laying golden eggs you keep it off the dinner menu. It is imperative that you keep it fat and healthy, no matter what the costs. The priority in such a war is not a healthy army, it’s healthy defense contractors, and if you have to hollow out your army to keep them healthy you do so.

After all, military “prowess” is simply a glorified form of self destruction.

Case Wagenvoord blogs at http://belacquajones.blogspot.com and welcomes comments at [email protected].

 


Leave A Comment
&
Share Your Insights

Comment Policy

Fair Use Notice


 

Share This Article



Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands of people more. You just share it on your favourite social networking site. You can also email the article from here.



Disclaimer

 

Subscribe

Feed Burner

Twitter

Face Book

CC on Mobile

Editor's Picks

 

Search Our Archive

 



Our Site

Web