Trouble is Chris, war in the 21st century ISN’T about stacking up WMD’s anymore. If only things were that simple. It’s much more complicated than that. It’s a war of the control of the minds of the world. And their pockets. It’s about securing workers, goods and markets and making money and fucking lots of it thank you very much. Maybe in the past that WMD argument would hold up but when ‘war’ can be created by some silly sod, dogmatised by ‘religious’ extremism or whatever, strapping some cheap and shit explosives to himself or herself and walking into a MacDonald’s anywhere in the world and detonating it, or simply flying a plane into a building, somehow the threat of WMD’s evaporates somewhat. How do you nuke a ‘terrorist’ ‘state (of mind)’ that doesn’t exist in a country but only in the minds of its perpetrators? Or as a concept or an idea? If that were the case would we not nuke every ‘terrorist’ or ‘non democratic’ country immediately? The threat of WMD (behave or we nuke you / we got em, leave us alone) doesn’t stop, even for one microsecond, so called ‘terrorist’ organisations (financed/created by Hezbollah/hamas, Israel, al Qaeda, china, north Korea, Cuba, breakaway soviet states, Palestinians, USA-CIA, France, UK or who the fuck ever; it doesn’t matter who in the context of the big picture). Iraq and the whole Middle East question is a question of oil oil oil (supplies) and thus power power power (create/expand) and don’t kid yourself it’s anything less. If the US had independent oil supplies they would not give a fuck about the Middle East. It’s not about resurrecting the old Christian/Muslim democracy/dictatorship argument.
No one gives a fuck about the isolationist North Koreans (members of the UN since 1991) except the US and they probably just stick in their throat because they’re old commies and the US lost the war over there (superior fire power does not win ALL the wars); what do they have we could possibly want? What threat are they to us? They are a bunch of repressive communist totalitarian dictators on their last legs financed and propped up by china only because of the possibility they could use it as leverage on the west in their quest for Taiwan and of it’s proximity to South Korea – who it is still at war with - the most technologically advanced nation on earth and incidentally a ‘democracy’ (woo-wee, put the flags up). The ‘old world order’ of communism vs. capitalism is far behind us. China creates ‘capitalist’ ‘zones’ in order to trade with the west and get access to and to sell us goods and technology and to lend us money whilst the same old Maoist/Communist regime still operates behind the metaphoric ‘iron curtain’; shitting over human rights and restricting the freedoms of its citizens to shit/live/work/leave or to vote some twat into power who would probably treat them in exactly the same way anyway.
Democracy or more specifically parliamentary democracy ain’t the answer to all the worlds’ problems the west thinks it is. It’s shit. Yeah, maybe it works as an excuse to exercise aggressive foreign policy initiatives in order to secure goods and markets. That’s all it is; capitalism and the ‘free market’ wrapped up in a sugar coated ‘democratic’ wrapper. If it was about dealing with these regimes because they are ‘good’ for us or because they are repressive, or dictatorships or non democratic then why not just nuke the fuckers now and be done with it? Why? Because the threat of WMD and MAD no longer has the same power to deter it once did. Far better to become like those regimes we so detest and use the threat of ‘war’ or ‘terrorism’ to implement a series of restrictive laws on freedom of movement and speech, restrict human rights and to use identity as a means of repression and then, get this, impose them on the citizenship of their own countries (genius). Let’s restrict freedoms and personal choices, impose ID cards, and let’s shit up the population into scared submissiveness. That way it’s easier to sell them stuff and make shit loads of money. Oh, the by product of all this? Capitalism survives and mutates and takes out the competitors. Job done.
Iraq was attacked because Saddam reneged ‘on the deal’. Not because he did or didn’t have WMD’s. As long as he was doing as he was told, sold us his oil cheap, guaranteed supplies in the long term, attacked Iran (a bonus!) and bought our arms we (i.e. the west) didn’t give a fuck how many of his own citizens he killed. All the world’s ‘dictators’ use fear and hatred of the differences in people and are propped up by one of the superpowers and wouldn’t exist without them; as long as they ‘represent’ certain political ideologies they are far preferable to the alternatives; i.e. socialist/Maoist/fascist/left wing/soviet dictatorships or western style capitalist ‘democracy’. Depends which ‘side’ you’re on as to which is worse. Besides the old ‘ooh, you’ve got/are going to get WMD’s’ is a great and bloody workable excuse to steam in there and destabilise regimes and impose ‘regime change’ and justify extremist foreign policy from the western right wing hawks. Far better anyway to do that and then we can sell them bricks or what ever to rebuild the infrastructure we bombed the fuck out of in the first place. Let’s make some money! And the weapons work and all the dodgy regimes on earth queue up to buy the new weapons and the whole sad sorry carousel spins round again. It’s a win win for capitalism and that’s what’s gonna happen and there’s fuck all you can do about it.
Capitalism, far from failing, is fucking turning round and bitch slapping the fuck out of the world. Iran is/could be next and if taking a speech out of context or blatantly lying about what is said in it then that’s what they need to do to justify whatever they have already planned to do. Sad but true. We need to get the world, OUR WORLD, back from these extremists, Bush/ bin Laden et al, and return to, what?, some middle ground based on peace and equality for all…?
That article you linked to was about what Iran's President said in 2005. You think that was the beginning of the west’s ‘argument’ with them? If it wasn’t for the west putting in the puppet shah (oh, he’ll be alright he ‘supports’ the west!) there wouldn’t have been a fucking revolution in Iran and them religious nutters wouldn’t be in power now. Is an interventionist foreign policy based on regime change and the imposition of democracy justifiable? The problem with giving ‘democracy’ to countries with ‘hard liner’ is that the people just vote the ‘terrorists’ back into power anyway.
They say peak oil is on the way but only because the world’s reserves are not being plundered thoroughly enough. Remember Bush gave the green light to drilling in Alaska recently. And we ain’t even touched Antarctica yet.
They ain’t even started….