Imagine . . .
Well, frumps, I guess that “special election” in Massachusetts yesterday tells a tale. A few months ago, I would have become quite exercised over such a thing but, I have moved onto a new stage of acceptance in my “death of Hope” bereavement. It took me years to get over the disillusionment and accompanying political apathy of growing up in the Vietnam era. Now, I’m sorry to say that on the opposite end of my life I was gullible enough to fall for the whole “Change You Can Believe In” patter – hook, line and sinker.
Now I have a colossal headache and a breaking heart but I’m older and wiser, and instead of letting lies and broken promises depress me, I get hopping mad instead. Right now, since “connecting dots” is all the rage, I’ve been connecting a few, myself and I’m pretty well disgusted with the picture that emerges.
Some of the perks of getting older come from accepting that “time is no longer on one’s side.” Sharpened perceptions compensate, I suppose, for slower physical movement – it’s only fair that if one can no longer outwit or outrun the saber tooth tiger, one will see it coming a lot sooner.
Nothing Politic About Politics Anymore
Recently, I’ve sensed that politicians have become a lot bolder and less politic than I remembered. Bush, Jr. and Co., for example, didn’t seem overly concerned that any of us would discover that they were unapologetic, self-serving, world-class scoundrels. And, unfortunately, 2009 ushered in no magical transformation which was a bitter pill given that we had been promised such a different “bill of goods.”
We were supposed to have been delivered into more moral and high-minded, liberal hands. We now know that was merely campaign rhetoric because most of the egregiously despicable excesses of the Bush administration have not only been continued but advanced and refined by the new administration.
A year into it, I think it’s depressingly safe to assume that the Obama administration is what it is by design, rather than an aberration caused by caution to make a “smooth transition” or minority obstructionism. Perhaps our government is too far gone for even the best of intentions to right it and set it back on course.
We have some very big problems on our hands that mostly fall into two categories: economic collapse and credibility collapse both, to some degree, due to our not-so-adept attempts at world conquest.
I’m just going to indulge in a little stream-of-consciousness free association, in my never-ending quest to “connect the dots,” (which may make me feel temporarily better, but could make you frumps feel temporarily worse). There – you’re warned. I think I’ll call this exercise my “List of US Policies Guaranteed To Make the World A Perpetually Terrifying Place to Live.”
Now as I said, this is stream-of-consciousness. There will be nothing structured, cohesive or overtly instructive about the following riff (all the better to reflect the state of the world we find ourselves in).
Anyone Up for a Game of Whack-a-Mole?
The War on Terror: we don’t call it that anymore because it was a dumb name to begin with. Any freshman Philosophy student can tell you that it’s a fool’s errand to try to wage war on an idea. It’s like trying “not to think about a pink elephant.” I guess, in the end, the idea is that if we stop calling these wars something stupid the wars themselves will be less stupid or that maybe they’ll morph into really smart, justifiable wars worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize. Who knew?
Maybe we could call them “Information Wars” in which the real objective is to go poking around in any country with a sizable Muslim population, locate flamboyant US-haters and spirit them away in the hope of finding someone who knows where the Al Qaeda secret clubhouse is.
Or maybe we could call them the “Wars on High Gas Prices” in which we offer to establish some good old awe-inspiring American boots-on-the-ground high-tech military presence near those precious oil wells.
Or maybe we could call them the “Wars on Unemployment.” After all, Defense Secretary Gates just reinstated a couple billion dollars worth of defense contracts with the likes of Boeing and Grumman, along with their school of “pilot fish,” and promised that they should count on healthy increases in contracts for the next decade or so. I’m sure they were mighty grateful for that, too, because it was only eight months ago that, in a fit of “audacity of reform,” Gates had told the same gang to tighten their belts because he saw less war-making on the horizon.
Here’s how Gates the Reformer took a hard line with the defense fat cats back in April:
“In a Washington, D.C. press conference today, Gates said the budget proposal was “crafted to reshape the priorities of America’s defense establishment” and “will profoundly reform how this department does business.”
“He expressed a determination to “stop programs that significantly exceed their budget or which spend limited tax dollars to buy more capability than the nation needs.”
“My decisions act on this principle by terminating a number of programs where the requirements were truly in the ‘exquisite’ category,” Gates said.”
But that was then, and this is now and, evidently, perma-war is back in the program since Obama has asked already asked us to pony up an additional $33 billion in “emergency funds” on top of the record-breaking (and bank-breaking) $708 billion already appropriated for 2010. That, of course was the “incredible ballooning Defense budget” that was to put an end to requests for “emergency funds.”
Unlike Gates widely publicized “tough love” statements about cutting defense spending, back in April, his about-face on some of those cuts was barely noticed (by the mainstream media) this month. Here’s how Bloomberg covered it:
“U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates directed the Air Force to return to its proposed budget three major programs the service offered to cancel, including one by Boeing Co. to build and install upgraded software in the cockpits of C-130 transports, according to a budget document.”
“Gates ordered restoration of $285 million in 2011 and $1.843 billion overall through 2015 on the C-130 program.”
“He also told the Air Force to restore $2.4 billion for an Internet-like radio that Lockheed Martin Corp. is building for aircraft and vessels.”
“In addition, he instructed the service to add $280 million to continue installing upgraded Pratt & Whitney engines on the Northrop Grumman Corp. Jstars surveillance plane.”
What the . . . ?
Here’s Bloomberg’s evaluation of all this:
“Gates’s directive means “either the service’s budget priorities are out of sync with those of the defense secretary or that that the proposed cancellations were advanced knowing there was little likelihood they’d be accepted,” said Loren Thompson, a defense analyst for the Lexington Institute, an Arlington, Virginia-based defense research organization.
“Gates, in a move that benefits the Air Force and aircraft makers such as B-2 bomber contractor Northrop Grumman, told the service to add a total of $1.6 billion to its budget through 2015 to support industry efforts for a new bomber program that would begin in 2013.”
Followed by the big finale:
“defense spending since fiscal 2000, adjusted for inflation, has grown about 43 percent. When war costs are included, the number increases to 72 percent. Gates has called for modest growth going forward, with emphasis on improving the security of nuclear weapons, building capabilities to conduct irregular warfare, cyber defense and long-range strikes.”
No Wonder We’re Terrified
The crux of the whole terrorism problem is, of course, that Americans basically buy into a notion that they are, if not universally “loved,” at least universally respected or, better yet, feared. So why would anyone hate us enough to fly banzai missions into our office buildings? Here, at least, some clarity is available because the commando who ordered those missions has told us why he and his army hate us in no uncertain terms. Here’s Osama bin Laden’s fairly straightforward explanation issued to the London Telegraph in 2004:
“O American people, I am speaking to tell you about the ideal way to avoid another Manhattan, about war and its causes and results. Security is an important foundation of human life and free people do not squander their security, contrary to Bush’s claims that we hate freedom. Let him tell us why we did not attack Sweden for example.”
“It is known that those who hate freedom do not possess proud souls like those of the 19, may God rest their souls. We fought you because we are free and because we want freedom for our nation. When you squander our security we squander yours.”
“I’m surprised by you. Despite entering the fourth year after September 11, Bush is still deceiving you and hiding the truth from you and therefore the reasons are still there to repeat what happened.”
“God knows it did not cross our minds to attack the towers but after the situation became unbearable and we witnessed the injustice and tyranny of the American-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, I thought about it. And the events that affected me directly were that of 1982 and the events that followed – when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon, helped by the US sixth fleet.”
Nothing particularly enigmatic about that.
The American media, however, took that statement with a grain of salt and didn’t see fit to analyze it because, well . . . we just don’t like to discuss anything that might ruffle our Number One Middle East ally: Israel. Still, it’s a little peculiar that the US, which has set itself up as the global arbiter of human rights, can’t grasp the fact that some of the world’s Muslims have turned murderous after watching their children die in their arms. The justifiable anger of such people is naturally aimed at the foreigners who meddle in their culture, play havoc with their values and who don’t really care a fig about anything other than the oceans of oil that the Middle East rides on – like Americans.
Very few American taxpayers appreciate (or even know about) the very special personal relationship that they have with the state of Israel. Here are a few facts just to bring you up to date:
No matter how bad things get with our failing economy, no matter how many Americans are unemployed or bankrupt from medical bills, no matter how many small businesses fail and no matter how much we all have to do without, one special earmark that will never be cut, or cut back, is the annual $3 billion foreign aid handout that we give (that’s right, it’s a grant not a loan) to Israel.
We are so certain that Israel will always need that “aid” that we sign up for ten-year periods. The most recent memorandum of understanding runs from 2007 – 2016. There is only one condition on this cash handout and that is that 74% of it must be spent on US-made weapons and other military paraphernalia. Basically, it is a scheme to recycle federal money back into the military-industrial complex.
State of the Art Israeli Air Force (Made in the USA)
This amount that we give to Israel every year, for the last 20 years, is roughly 33% of the U.S. annual global foreign aid amount. In other words, .001% of the world’s population receives 33% of U.S. foreign aid. Since 1949, American taxpayers have forked over $101 billion dollars to Israel; more than half of that was military aid to create one of the most militarized and technically advanced countries on the planet.
In the midst of the financial meltdown that is affecting all of us, one has to question the prudence of this commitment (and many others like it) when we have effectively talked ourselves out of health care reform because “we can’t afford it.” Do we really want to make arms sales through Israel a sacred priority right now?
And that’s just the financial side of the issue. A probe into the legalities of the of our relationship is even scarier especially if you are one of those who asks “why terrorism? Why do they hate us so much?
Any funds that the United States gives in foreign aid grants and loans are governed by the U.S. Foreign Assistance Act; according to that law, the US cannot provide aid to countries that engage in violations of international human rights laws.
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have charged Israel with many such violations during the Gaza assault and in past attacks. Israel is also in violation of the our Arms Export Control Act, which stipulates that U.S. weapons must be used only for “internal security.” Bombing Palestinians into submission is pretty clearly a violation of that act.
What's left of Gaza
Which brings us back to folks like bin Laden who just might hate us deeply because when they tune into the evening news to see their kinsmen bombed into oblivion, the weapons being used – from fighter jets to hand grenades proudly and prominently sport their “made in the USA” status. It’s not so hard to imagine how we might feel if the tables were turned.
Top this whole scene off with the absurdity of the periodic ritual of Middle East peace talks in which all parties pretend that the U.S. annual arms endowment to one side of the conflict doesn’t make a material difference.
I’m losing patience with this kind of silliness, how about you?
Technorati Tags: President Obama, Palestinians, Israel, Gaza, Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda, U.S. Foreign Assistance Act, Arms Export Control Act
