Now the U.S military is now - again - directly involved in strikes on another nations' sovereign territory after indirect pulling of strings behind the scenes. And- again - it is all part of the war on terror. A label that is so suitable since it is so open-ended and ill-defined. Thererefore it provides a seemingly universally applicable justification for trespasses of sovereignty and meddling with other people's business and expression of free will.
But, we are told we should take the word of those we are told are the leaders that this is right since- they say - they have excluded all better alternatives.
Wonderful, but how did we get here?
What main actions and agents of the near and more distant past converge to form the present situation, and why is that treated as irrelevant?
I presume that information that would distort the message currently desired to bring to the audience - perhaps by adding facts that abruptly would change the alleged "good guys" to less good or maybe even slightly bad - is left out since it is better to get caught omitting than lying.
Now, let me remind you of some documented background facts that might not simplify, but it will most certainly put the presence it into a context of space and time instead of just "moving on". But first a clarification of terminology to prevent confusion and misunderstandings before we go down the rabbit hole.
Terminology: USA Inc.
USA Inc. is a term I use to prevent over-generalization. I know that unless a society is run with perfect consensus democracy, then what is done in the name and with the resources of the people of that society is not the same as the actual will of each individual. The discrepancy between in whose name and with whose money on one hand and according to whose will and desire on the other becomes even greater with majority rule democracy and even more so in a flawed democracy when it is not even the majority of the voting and paying population that is reflected in the acts of the national "whole".
I want to avoid coming off as if I blamed all and everything usually incorporated into the terms "America","Americans", "USA" etc and instead better target the actual puppet masters and interests behind certain actions and decisions.
It is my belief and educated theory that the power generated by having in possession something many others want badly(money, information,opportunities etc), gives those holding such resources and such power a direct and indirect influence over the decision making of our political representatives that goes beyond that given by the "one-person-one-vote". I believe mainly it is monetary interests that shapes the main agenda of what is being done with the money and in the name of the population of most nations. USA is far from the only example, but it is undoubtfully the most powerful puppet to play among the nation-states. The people are the resource-providing "shareholders" of a corporate-like institution which is used to generate ever-increasing profit.
However, as it is not a corporation per se there are no laws and no real demand for the proper distribution of the generated profits. The "shareholders" are not given pay-offs in proportion to what is generated or to the risks they are taking with their "investments". Nor are they given insight or influence as to the decisions and plans of the "board of directors" - in fact, they have no idea of either the total number or the identity of those ultimately pulling the strings at the very top. It is much like Enron - the majority of those investing in without having much insight and control when it came to what their investments was being used for, will find themselves being betrayed, robbed blind and gradually understanding that the major winners won because they had never intended the company to last but instead sought out to suck out all they could before leaving the ship to go down.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
