President Bush often argues that history will vindicate him. So he can't be pleased with an informal survey of 109 professional historians conducted by the History News Network. It found that 98 percent of them believe that Bush's presidency has been a failure, while only about 2 percent see it as a success. Not only that, more than 61 percent of the historians say the current presidency is the worst in American history.
- The pro-active aggressions, of our military occupation have now begun to equal what the Israeli's have been doing to the Palestinians for over fifty years. In Sadr City we are bombing and strafing the civilian population indiscriminately, murdering innocent women and children alike, with impunity: in the name of protecting our soldiers that have made war upon that war-torn area many times before. This is not war; it is the arrogant and unjustified murder by the military not for military purposes, but for the crooked politicians and corporations that support our every excess.
- If this were war: these actions would be war-crimes, instead these actions have become simple and routine events to be carried out against the same people we supposedly are there to liberate. If we were there to liberate the population, then we would not need the long term military bases, nor would we be demanding absolute control over the oil and water of that country. If this was a war of liberation we would never have settled for an Iraqi government that is corrupt in every department, and in nearly every official capacity.
But we are not "at war," instead we are trying to perfect the formula for maintaining continuing chaos in the name of ever- greater profits for the criminal-elite, worldwide!
Jim Kirwan
http://www.rense.com/general81/weare.htm
4-15-8
*********************************
The fate of America swings on the hinges of what doors are opened by a new American president, and what good things that new American president can do.
The new president comes after an ARROGANT George W. Bush WHO ignored the world---and then unleashed his unnecessary PRE-EMPTIVE WAR upon Iraq.
George W. Bush damned the Iraqi people.
George W. Bush damned the world.
George W. Bush has out-butchered the Butcher of Iraq.
George W. Bush’s war has killed 1,000,000 Iraqis, and forced millions to become refugees.
George W. Bush’s war has produced the deaths of 4,036 American soldiers.
George W. Bush’s war has crippled thousands and thousands and thousands of American soldiers.
George W. Bush’s policies accelerated Global Warming.
George W. Bush’s policies have liquidated the American Treasury.
George W. Bush has almost ruined our nation.
George W. Bush IS the worst president in American history.
History will never be able to rewrite these facts.
Mad Plato
IT’S THE OIL STUPID!
**************************
From
Petraeus Sets Up Iran
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
April 14, 2008
http://counterpunch.com/roberts04142008.html
With Iran, Russia, China, and North Korea threatened by American belligerence, it is not difficult to imagine a scenario that would terminate all pretense of American power: For example, instead of waiting to be attacked, Iran uses its Chinese and Russian anti-ship missiles, against which the US reportedly has poor means of defense, and sinks every ship in the American carrier strike forces that have been foolishly massed in the Persian Gulf, simultaneously taking out the Saudi oil fields and the Green Zone in Baghdad, the headquarters of the US occupation. Shi'ite militias break the US supply lines from Kuwait, and Iranian troops destroy the dispersed US forces in Iraq before they can be concentrated to battle strength.
Simultaneously, North Korea crosses the demilitarized zone and takes South Korea, China seizes Taiwan and dumps a trillion dollars of US Treasury bonds on the market. Russia goes on full nuclear alert and cuts off all natural gas to Europe.
What would the Bush regime do? Wet its pants? Push the button and end the world?
If America really had dangerous enemies, surely the enemies would collude to take advantage of a dramatically over-extended delusional regime that, blinded by its own arrogance and hubris, issues gratuitous threats and lives by Mao's doctrine that power comes out of the barrel of a gun.
There are other less dramatic scenarios. Why does the US assume that only it can initiate aggression, boycotts, freezes on financial assets of other countries and bans on foreign banks from participation in the international banking system? If the rest of the world were to tire of American aggression or to develop a moral conscience, it would be easy to organize a boycott of America and to ban US banks from participating in the international banking system. Such a boycott would be especially effective at the present time with the balance sheets of US banks impaired by subprime derivatives and the US government dependent on foreign loans in order to finance its day-to-day activities.
Sooner or later it will occur to other countries that putting up with America is a habit that they don't need to continue.
Does America really need more political leadership that leads in such unpromising directions?
George W. Bush damned the Iraqi people.
George W. Bush damned the world.
George W. Bush has out-butchered the Butcher of Iraq.
George W. Bush’s war has killed 1,000,000 Iraqis, and forced millions to become refugees.
George W. Bush’s war has produced the deaths of 4,036 American soldiers.
George W. Bush’s war has crippled thousands and thousands and thousands of American soldiers.
George W. Bush’s policies accelerated Global Warming.
George W. Bush’s policies have liquidated the American Treasury.
George W. Bush has almost ruined our nation.
George W. Bush IS the worst president in American history.
History will never be able to rewrite these facts.
Mad Plato
IT’S THE OIL STUPID!
**************************
From
Petraeus Sets Up Iran
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
April 14, 2008
http://counterpunch.com/roberts04142008.html
With Iran, Russia, China, and North Korea threatened by American belligerence, it is not difficult to imagine a scenario that would terminate all pretense of American power: For example, instead of waiting to be attacked, Iran uses its Chinese and Russian anti-ship missiles, against which the US reportedly has poor means of defense, and sinks every ship in the American carrier strike forces that have been foolishly massed in the Persian Gulf, simultaneously taking out the Saudi oil fields and the Green Zone in Baghdad, the headquarters of the US occupation. Shi'ite militias break the US supply lines from Kuwait, and Iranian troops destroy the dispersed US forces in Iraq before they can be concentrated to battle strength.
Simultaneously, North Korea crosses the demilitarized zone and takes South Korea, China seizes Taiwan and dumps a trillion dollars of US Treasury bonds on the market. Russia goes on full nuclear alert and cuts off all natural gas to Europe.
What would the Bush regime do? Wet its pants? Push the button and end the world?
If America really had dangerous enemies, surely the enemies would collude to take advantage of a dramatically over-extended delusional regime that, blinded by its own arrogance and hubris, issues gratuitous threats and lives by Mao's doctrine that power comes out of the barrel of a gun.
There are other less dramatic scenarios. Why does the US assume that only it can initiate aggression, boycotts, freezes on financial assets of other countries and bans on foreign banks from participation in the international banking system? If the rest of the world were to tire of American aggression or to develop a moral conscience, it would be easy to organize a boycott of America and to ban US banks from participating in the international banking system. Such a boycott would be especially effective at the present time with the balance sheets of US banks impaired by subprime derivatives and the US government dependent on foreign loans in order to finance its day-to-day activities.
Sooner or later it will occur to other countries that putting up with America is a habit that they don't need to continue.
Does America really need more political leadership that leads in such unpromising directions?
No comments:
Post a Comment