"Greatest Nation " Rhetoric Roars Back

[daveman]

I did not chicken out, but I have no pride in what I did. Other than trying to keep myself and my boys alive.
I still have some great shame in what I did. Killing women and children under orders is not a good thing.
Colateral damage my ass.

Who ordered you to kill women and children?

The US army.

I got busted/stockade once for refusing to call in a Napalm strike on a village. Nothing but women and children there. I had been watching it for days. They burned it to hell anyway. I saw it all and no one left before it was napalmed. Not one combat age male or weapon in the charred ruins. The official report did not say that though.

And that was not the only time things like this happened.

What a clusterfuck that "war was".

I'll agree with you there. But that's what happens when D.C. makes tactical decisions instead of setting strategic goals.

 

[georgephillip]

What Muslims See

"The Muslim world does not see us as we see ourselves.

"Muslims are aware, while we are not, that we have murdered tens of thousands of Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. We have terrorized families, villages and nations.

"We enable and defend the Israeli war crimes carried out against Palestinians and the Lebanese—indeed we give the Israelis the weapons and military aid to carry out the slaughter.

"We dismiss the thousands of dead as 'collateral damage.' And when those who are fighting against occupation kill us or Israelis we condemn them, regardless of context, as terrorists.

"Our hypocrisy is recognized on the Arab street.

"Most Arabs see bloody and disturbing images every day from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, images that are censored on our television screens.

"They have grown sick of us.

"They have grown sick of the Arab regimes that pay lip service to the suffering of Palestinians but do nothing to intervene. They have grown sick of being ruled by tyrants who are funded and supported by Washington.

"Arabs understand that we, like the Israelis, primarily speak to the Muslim world in the crude language of power and violence. And because of our entrancement with our own power and ability to project force, we are woefully out of touch.

"Israeli and American intelligence services did not foresee the popular uprising in Tunisia or Egypt. Gen. Aviv Kochavi, Israel’s new intelligence chief, told Knesset members last Tuesday that 'there is no concern at the moment about the stability of the Egyptian government.'

"Tuesday, it turned out, was the day hundreds of thousands of Egyptians poured into the streets to begin their nationwide protests."

Chris Hedges

 

[uscitizen]

Who ordered you to kill women and children?

The US army.

I got busted/stockade once for refusing to call in a Napalm strike on a village. Nothing but women and children there. I had been watching it for days. They burned it to hell anyway. I saw it all and no one left before it was napalmed. Not one combat age male or weapon in the charred ruins. The official report did not say that though.

And that was not the only time things like this happened.

What a clusterfuck that "war was".

I'll agree with you there. But that's what happens when D.C. makes tactical decisions instead of setting strategic goals.

We should never have been over there in the first place.

 

[daveman]

The US army.

I got busted/stockade once for refusing to call in a Napalm strike on a village. Nothing but women and children there. I had been watching it for days. They burned it to hell anyway. I saw it all and no one left before it was napalmed. Not one combat age male or weapon in the charred ruins. The official report did not say that though.

And that was not the only time things like this happened.

What a clusterfuck that "war was".

I'll agree with you there. But that's what happens when D.C. makes tactical decisions instead of setting strategic goals.

We should never have been over there in the first place.

Perhaps. But since we went, we should have been allowed to fulfill the mission.

 

[georgephillip]

Killing how many more children and women for how much more money?

 

[daveman]

Killing how many more children and women for how much more money?

That's right, Red George, you just keep repeating the Chomsky programming and insist that the Communists were perfect angels.

Dumbass.

 

[uscitizen]

I'll agree with you there. But that's what happens when D.C. makes tactical decisions instead of setting strategic goals.

We should never have been over there in the first place.

Perhaps. But since we went, we should have been allowed to fulfill the mission.

Nope. We can still realize the mistake and withdraw.
The mission was the problem.

 

[georgephillip]

Killing how many more children and women for how much more money?

That's right, Red George, you just keep repeating the Chomsky programming and insist that the Communists were perfect angels.

Dumbass.

The communists weren't invading this country and killing US civilians, were they?

 

[georgephillip]

"The failure of the United States to halt the slow-motion ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by Israel has consequences.

"The failure to acknowledge the collective humiliation and anger felt by most Arabs because of the presence of U.S. troops on Muslim soil, not only in Iraq and Afghanistan but in the staging bases set up in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, has consequences.

"The failure to denounce the repression, including the widespread use of torture, censorship and rigged elections, wielded by our allies against their citizens in the Middle East has consequences.

"We are soaked with the stench of these regimes.

"Mubarak, who reportedly is suffering from cancer, is seen as our puppet, a man who betrayed his own people and the Palestinians for money and power."

Chris Hedges

 

[georgephillip]

Robert Jensen takes exception to a recent column by the National Review's Rich Lowry:

"Yes, the Greatest Country Ever
"Our greatness is simply a fact.

"When the likes of Marco Rubio, the new Republican senator from Florida, say this is the greatest country ever, sophisticated opinion-makers cluck and roll their eyes. What a noxious tea-party nostrum. How chauvinistic. What hubris..."

Jensen counters by saying "...any claim to being the greatest nation is depraved and dangerous, especially when made in the empire"

"Sign of pathology

Imagine your child, let's call him Joe, made the declaration, 'I am the greatest 10-year-old on earth.'

"If you were a loving parent, interested in helping your child develop into a decent person, what would you say? Let's assume you believe Joe to be a perfectly lovely boy, maybe even gifted in many ways.

"Would you indulge him in that fantasy? Most of us would not...

"Now, if Joe makes it to adulthood and continues to claim he is the greatest, we would come to one of two conclusions (assuming he's not saying it just to hype the sales of his book or sell tickets to some event): Either he is mentally unstable or he's an asshole..."

In his article, Jensen links to a pair of chapters in his book, "Citizens of the Empire: The Struggle to Claim Our Humanity."

In order to bolster his analysis of claims to US national greatness that celebrate our history of coercion and violence:

"Such claims ignore the complexity of societies and life within them. Even societies that do great things can have serious problems.

"We are all aware that a person with admirable qualities in one realm can have quite tragic flaws in another. The same is true of nations.

"Constant claims to being the greatest reveal a pathology in the national character.

"Crucially, that pathology is most dangerous in nations with great economic or military power (which tend to be the ones that most consistently make such claims).

"That is, the nations that claim to be great are usually the ones that can enforce their greatness through coercion and violence."

I got news for you buddy. Every leader in every nation around the Earth says the same shit.

What is so wrong with it lol.

Ever notice how all governments lie?
Is that wrong?
lol.

 

[daveman]

Killing how many more children and women for how much more money?

That's right, Red George, you just keep repeating the Chomsky programming and insist that the Communists were perfect angels.

Dumbass.

The communists weren't invading this country and killing US civilians, were they?

They were killing little yellow people...so you don't give a shit. Right?

 

[georgephillip]

They were killing French people.

When France lost, we stepped in and killed roughly four million "little yellow people" with our for-profit warfare.

Right?

 

[georgephillip]

"In May 1983, a remarkable event took place in Moscow. A courageous newscaster, Vladimir Danchev, denounced the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in five successive radio broadcasts extending over five days, calling upon the rebels to resist. This aroused great admiration in the West.

"The New York Times (8/6/83) commented accurately that this was a departure from the official Soviet propaganda line, that Danchev had 'revolted against the standards of doublethink and newspeak.'

"Danchev was taken off the air and sent to a psychiatric hospital.

"When he was returned to his position several months later, a Russian official was quoted as saying that 'he was not punished, because a sick man cannot be punished...

"Implicit in the coverage of the Danchev affair in the West was a note of self-congratulation: It couldn't happen here -- no U.S. newscaster has been sent to a psychiatric hospital for calling a U.S. invasion 'an invasion' or for calling on the victims to resist.

"We might, however, inquire further into just why this has never happened.

"One possibility is that the question has never arisen because no mainstream U.S. journalist has ever mimicked Danchev's courage, or could even perceive that a U.S. invasion of the Afghan type is in fact an invasion."

A US invasion of Afghanistan?

Orwell (and Chomsky) understand.

Invasion Newspeak:

 

[georgephillip]

"Consider the following facts.

"In 1962, the United States attacked South Vietnam. In that year, President John F. Kennedy sent the U.S. Air Force to attack rural South Vietnam, where more than 80 percent of the population lived.

"This was part of a program intended to drive several million people into concentration camps (called 'strategic hamlets') where they would be surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards.

"This would 'protect' these people from the guerrillas whom, we conceded, they were largely supporting.

"The direct U.S. attack against South Vietnam followed our support for the French attempt to reconquer their former colony, our disruption of the 1954 'peace process,' and a terrorist war against the South Vietnamese population.

"This terror had already left some 75,000 dead while evoking domestic resistance, supported from the northern half of the country after 1959, that threatened to bring down the regime that the U.S. had established.

"In the following years, the U.S. continued to resist every attempt at peaceful settlement, and in 1964 began to plan the ground invasion of South Vietnam.

"The land assault took place in early 1965, accompanied by the bombing of North Vietnam and an intensification of the bombing of the south, at triple the level of the more publicized bombing of the north.

"The U.S. also extended the war to Laos and Cambodia."

Invasion Newspeak

 

[daveman]

They were killing French people.

When France lost, we stepped in and killed roughly four million "little yellow people" with our for-profit warfare.

Right?

Four million? The numbers I've seen do not agree. Link, please. And no Chomsky -- he lies.

 

[editec]

They were killing French people.

When France lost, we stepped in and killed roughly four million "little yellow people" with our for-profit warfare.

Right?

Four million? The numbers I've seen do not agree. Link, please. And no Chomsky -- he lies.

You so don't know anything about anything what Chomsky reports on. I'll wager you've never read anything he's written, too

Those lies you claim he makes?

Let me tell ya', Kid, he documents everything he says because he gets it either off the MSM or the offical government reports.

And if you read as much as he obviously does, you would actually know that instead of spewing ad hominen attacks on one of this nations greatest scholars.

So if what he says is not true?

Then the offical media and government reports he is quoting are likewise not true. And those FYI are the only sources any of us have to work with, lad.

Perhaps you ought to take some time to actually read Chomsky, before spouting off another load of ignorant rightwing faith-based* nonsense, eh?

*Faith based not as it pertains to religion, but as in you've taken a position about Chomsky based on your faith in your secondary sources (whoever they are) rather than actually going to the original source to check the validity of your claims.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Liking or disliking the United States is a different issue entirely. The United States is the greatest nation on this Planet at this time. Just as Rome & Greece were in their times. They were the baddest & smartest and were what most other nations wanted to be like. This is also true of the U.S. in this time. Arguing against the greatness of the U.S. is just plain absurd.

 

[georgephillip]

They were killing French people.

When France lost, we stepped in and killed roughly four million "little yellow people" with our for-profit warfare.

Right?

Four million? The numbers I've seen do not agree. Link, please. And no Chomsky -- he lies.

"The Viet Cong and upon occasion the North Vietnamese Regulars would often wear civilian clothes. Civilians could thus be mistaken for a being a supporter of one side or the other and be shot. They were also sometimes killed simply for being caught up in a battle.

"South Vietnam suffered the majority of an estimated[1] 2,000,000 civilians killed this way[4]

"Rummel's review of the various data led to a mid-level estimate of 843,000 civilian deaths in both North and South Vietnam. The detailed Figures are not complete, but the mid-level R.J. Rummel estimates are that around 391,000 South Vietnamese civilians died. Another 643,000 died as the Communist North Vietnamese consolidated power.

"Rummel's low-level estimate was 361,000 South Vietnamese civilians and his high-estimate was 720,000.[9] Below is a loose outline of which forces caused these non-uniformed and civilian deaths.

"The Communist Vietnamese government in 1995 estimated that 2,000,000 Vietnamese civilians on both sides died in the war, but does not allocate these deaths between North and South Vietnam.[4] Rummel estimated (apart from the post 1975 communist power consolidation) that a low-level of 486,000 civilians died; the mid-level was 843,000, with a high level at 1,200,000.[10][4]"

Vietnam War - Wiki

 

[georgephillip]

Liking or disliking the United States is a different issue entirely. The United States is the greatest nation on this Planet at this time. Just as Rome & Greece were in their times. They were the baddest & smartest and were what most other nations wanted to be like. This is also true of the U.S. in this time. Arguing against the greatness of the U.S. is just plain absurd.

How are you defining national greatness?

Here's were Jensen begins his definition:

"What is greatness?

"Let's assume, for the sake of discussion, that determining which nation on earth is the greatest would be a meaningful and useful enterprise. On what criteria would we base the evaluation? And how would the United States stack up?

"In other words, what is greatness?

"We might start with history, where we would observe that the histories of nation-states typically are not pretty. At best, it's a mixed bag.

"The United States broke away from a colonial power ruled by a monarch, espousing the revolutionary political ideal of democratic rights for citizens.

"Even though the Founding Fathers' definition of 'citizen' was narrow enough to exclude the vast majority of the population, that breakthrough was an inspirational moment in human history.

"That's why, when declaring an independent Vietnam in 1945, Ho Chi Minh borrowed language from the U.S. Declaration of Independence."

Are you old enough to remember how that turned out for Ho?

In short, are you conflating the ability to kill millions of human beings on the opposite side of the globe with greatness?

 

[daveman]

They were killing French people.

When France lost, we stepped in and killed roughly four million "little yellow people" with our for-profit warfare.

Right?

Four million? The numbers I've seen do not agree. Link, please. And no Chomsky -- he lies.

You so don't know anything about anything what Chomsky reports on. I'll wager you've never read anything he's written, too

Those lies you claim he makes?

Let me tell ya', Kid, he documents everything he says because he gets it either off the MSM or the offical government reports.

And if you read as much as he obviously does, you would actually know that instead of spewing ad hominen attacks on one of this nations greatest scholars.

So if what he says is not true?

Then the offical media and government reports he is quoting are likewise not true. And those FYI are the only sources any of us have to work with, lad.

Perhaps you ought to take some time to actually read Chomsky, before spouting off another load of ignorant rightwing faith-based* nonsense, eh?

*Faith based not as it pertains to religion, but as in you've taken a position about Chomsky based on your faith in your secondary sources (whoever they are) rather than actually going to the original source to check the validity of your claims.

I've read enough critiques of Chomsky to know he's full of shit.