RANGER AGAINST WAR: Unbridled Aggression <

Thursday, November 05, 2009

Unbridled Aggression


We need take no more note of it than of a war

between two African kingdoms in the fourteenth century,
a war that altered nothing in the destiny of the world,
even if a hundred thousand blacks perished
in excruciating torment

--The Unbearable Lightness of Being,

Milan Kundera


And I don't know how you do it

Making love out of nothing at all

--Out of Nothing at All
,
Air Supply

_______________

While our Bill of Rights applies to our citizens, the U.S. is also a signatory to the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) which applies to citizens in the rest of the world. As a ratified treaty, it is every bit the rule of law as our our own Constitution. Or so the story goes.
Along comes the events of 9-11, and here's the ball game so far, 11-06-09:
  • NATO, which was and is a defensive alliance to counter the Warsaw Pact threat has now become a strike force to implement U.S. policy. This policy is that of aggressive invasions which lack a clearly-defined or evident defensive purpose.
  • US/NATO forces are arresting, detaining and interrogating prisoners that they have no right to arrest, detain or interrogate.

U.S. military and intelligence agencies are employing drones and Hellfire missiles to kill, interdict and intimidate citizens of AFPAK, and are killing people based upon intelligence indicators and reports rather than upon legal decisions. However, belonging to the Taliban and/or being an insurgent is not a death offense.


Any nation has the legal right to oppose and foreign invasion with any power within their means. Unfortunately, that means the Afghan resistance fighters have every right to bear arms against any foreign invader. This is the same right accorded to U.S. citizens were the tables turned.


It makes no difference how the war ends in Afghanistan. Whatever the result, the people will be exploited and downtrodden whether it be by a U.S.-backed lapdog or an anti-coalition amalgam.
Afghanistan will not become a beacon of democracy and continuing the war will not contribute to the destruction of al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda is not bound by national borders.

The same short-sightedness and muddled thinking that motivates U.S. banking and corporate life is the same feature that defines the Phony War on Terror (
PWOT ©): You simply cannot make something out of nothing. You cannot make a democracy out of an antrenched clannish tribal hierarchy, and you can't win hearts and minds by dropping Hellfire missiles into mud huts.

The waste of this war is indefensible at every level -- philosophically, militarily, economically and morally. We have lost hold on rational thought, our actions based upon emotion and twisted logic.


It is obvious that Mr. Obama is not going to soon end the wars and bring the troops home, pledging as he did in the elections to trudge on in the
Good War. But this is neither war, nor is it counterinsurgency. It is unbridled aggression, and as such, rife with ignorance and inhumanity.

This is something a good soldier has a hard time getting behind.

Labels: , , ,

15 Comments:

Anonymous tw said...

"It is unbridled aggression"

That's it in a nutshell ! Great post.

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 1:37:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

TW,
Remember-kill for peace or kill a commie for christ? It's still in effect, just change commie to whatever, just fill in the blank.
I find it hard to even consider COIN and hearts and minds when we call our main weapon a HELLFIRE.Just imagine the incongruity of this one little sentence and it sums up the entire goat screw that we call the PWOT.
Always nice to hear from you. I bet it's cold up there.
jim

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 7:27:00 AM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When has a win EVER been possible Afghanistan? Maybe there's a reason they call it "Graveyard of Empires"

Median
Persian
Alexander the Great
Seleucids
Indo-Greeks
Turks
Mongols
Britain
Russia
USA

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 8:25:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

on,
Even if a win were possible then what would we win? They'll never be a ally or contribute anything worthwhile to our nation.
Why do we as a nation allow our leaders to start and to continue such follies and then call them war?
jim

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 9:00:00 AM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The only "WIN" possible in Afghanistan exists in the imagination of the demented individuals that got us there
in the first place.

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 10:14:00 AM GMT-5  
Anonymous Oarwell said...

We await a new Robert Jackson to, ehrm, clarify the US position.

There can be no other end than that which confronted the nazi war criminals at Nuremburg.

At least in Italy reason still seems to hold sway, even if Berlusconi tried to thwart the prosecution.

Excellent writing. The Air Supply quote is like a zen koan.

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 12:27:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Ael said...

The claim that NATO was founded to counter the Warsaw Pact is undermined by the fact that NATO precedes the Warsaw Pact by several years.

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 1:34:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous barcalounger said...

"The waste of this war is indefensible at every level -- philosophically, militarily, economically and morally."

I just looked up the projected total cost for our Long War in Iraq and Afghanistan. Depending on whose figures you use it will run anywhere from $2 trillion to $4.5 trillion. Those are staggering numbers. If that money was invested domestically, we could end unemployment and pull out of this economic downturn. I guess it's more important to create jobs for the boys at the Pentagon and buy them more toys.

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 3:55:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

barca,
Do the figures quoted include the estimates for disability and medical costs for veterans benefits?
I'll bet not since this is a topic that politicians care not to discuss.
jim

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 4:26:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

AEL,
I put that in there to see if anybody is really reading.
OK, I stand corrected but in good faith was always taught that NATO was defensive to protect from Warsaw Pact aggression.
My point is that NATO is acting a tad bit aggressive these days. Imagine panzergrenadiers in Bosnia and AFGH. So much for the defensive use of the Bundeswehr. But it's ok since they are defending Europa from Terrorism.WOW didn't Hitler make the same claim in the East?
I appreciate your comments.
jim

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 4:32:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...

oarwell,

I'm glad someone appreciates what I see :)

We'll address the Italian verdicts soon.

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 5:00:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger FDChief said...

Ael: C'mon. NATO was crafted to pull Europe together to counter the Soviet occupation of the east. Quibble about dates if you will, but it was, and served as, the counterweight to the Pact. Our ETO threat briefings (always one of the funnest parts of going on DRF1) always emphasized that.

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 6:02:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous barcalounger said...

"Do the figures quoted include the estimates for disability and medical costs for veterans benefits?"

Yes they do. One was done by Joseph Stiglitz with Linda Bilmes, the other by the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress.

Friday, November 6, 2009 at 6:36:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Publius said...

Ael: Warsaw Pact dates from 1955; NATO from 1949. You're right.

So is it your position that the Warsaw Pact was formed to protect eastern Europe and the Soviet Union from NATO aggression? Having spent some time on the NATO side, that's not how I remember it, but I'm willing to be educated.

I also don't recall any war plans detailing how the U.S., Britain, France, et al, were going to pose a threat to the peace loving people of eastern Europe, but I may be wrong. The war plans I recall were kind of the other way.

Inquiring minds want to know why you believed this important.

Saturday, November 7, 2009 at 1:12:00 AM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Range,I still don't know how you can have a war on terror when war IS terror. Oh well, I have to run--am going to call the cops, as my pet boa constrictor is acting rambunctious. I told the police dispatcher to have the cops bring leg shackles and handcuffs for him.....

Thursday, November 12, 2009 at 9:51:00 PM GMT-5  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home