Before Uncle Sam starts a new war…

This is the title of an article by Bill Keller, a New York Times columnist, appearing in the Today paper. Though he admitted, in his view, that America was wrong in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, his approach is that it is America’s right to start wars under whatever assumptions or false assumptions. Starting wars to the Americans is like having a basketball game. They called it military ventures, regime change or whatever, but not killings, murders or genocide. And he quoted with a bit or regret, the cost of the wars to the Americans, US$3 trillion at least, and the thousands of Americans killed or disabled and the stress on the American soldiers. Not a hint of regrets or sadness on the destruction of countries and the hundreds of thousands of foreign civilian casualties. The foreign deaths maimed don’t matter. They are not Americans or not even humans.

And what were the reasons for the Americans to start wars to kill innocent people? The first justification, 911, was a good reason if they knew who did it, and a righteous shoot. But what other reasons? An obligation to defend an ally, right or wrong. Fighting for economic reasons. This one is very dangerous like accusing countries for blocking sea routes when nothing of sort actually happened. Start wars in the name of American values, promoting American doctrine, freedom and way of life which are alien and have nothing to do with the invaded countries.

Helping rebels to topple govts. This one is just as dangerous as every country will have a small group of dissidents and rebels that opposed the legitimate govt. The ‘freedom agenda,’ overthrowing of dictators, or opposing countries that are hostile or unfriendly to America. The latter can mean anything. A country that refuses to trade or support American agenda can be hostile to American interests. Actually anything under the sky can be a good reason for the Empire to start a war and invade the country. And the Empire is accusing other countries of being aggressive, expansionist and trouble maker, cannot be trusted, irresponsible, and even having their own technology for rocketry and military weapons are reasons to be attacked.

And America can do that, talk like an asshole, a big gangster, because it carries the big stick and can hit at the small countries knowing that they are unable to hit back. The safest thing that small countries can do to avoid being attacked or invaded is to develop the nuclear capability. But this is risky as any attempt to do so would lead to a pre emptive strike by the most responsible and friendly nation on earth. Ha ha ha.

But what else can the smaller countries do? Send hit squad to kill Americans in all corners of the globe as long as they are Americans and conduct a brutal borderless war on all Americans any where, any time? The only way to deal with the Empire is the ability to hit back, to strike back where it hurts. Appeasement and weak defense capability will be seen as weaknesses and inviting for more attacks. The Empire will be trigger happy knowing that it can hit anyone who cannot hit back.


Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...

The belief is that one big dog policing the globe brings law and order to the planet.

We do live in the most peaceful time in human history. And America is the dominant and remaining super power.

Could there be a correlation? Personally I don't think so. But those who support US Foreign Policy and American Exceptionalism certainly think so.

Anonymous said...

Intentionally or by commonsense; You have provided the BEST WAY to deal with the SELF-Appointed International Policeman.
that is; get at them at their own homes in and out of the United States Of America.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

They have started it yesterday, in France, in Indonesia and soon will be everywhere. The Americans and the Jews think that they can protect their countries and people but could they do it across the world where they go about innocently as if every corner is a safe haven.