Perpetual War Without End

Perpetual War Without End by Breshvic Penicillin

As we enter another year of drone strikes, cyber-warfare, espionage, pre-emptive strikes, funding of coups, instigation, and still those combat boots on the ground, many Americans are shaking the daze of election-year, fiscal debt lies, and popular culture distractions from their minds. Just how long are we going to be embedded in the Middle East? Why does it seem we are moving on to parasitically do the same in Africa? Are these theatres of war par for the course? Have we been witnessing a new Vietnam? Fed up citizens everywhere are sick of the deaths of civilians, the war crimes, the cover-ups, the secrecy, the lies.

Glenn Greenwald, one of the few tirelessly crusading journalists left, rounds up the talking head hypocrisies and obstinate thinking of our leaders and policies associated with the War on Terror. Like the War on Drugs, this ideological jihad has no specific end date; it can’t possibly by definition. The declared national security objectives make it theoretically and practically impossible. The reality is, of course, that they are accelerating. So if the parade of conflicts (Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Eastasia, Eurasia, Eastasia, Eurasia) is as infinite as the human penchant for bloodletting and violence, then can it even be called a war? And if it isn’t a war, what is it, and what the hell are we doing to our fellow humans with our death from above?

Excerpts from Glenn Greenwald’s column at The Guardian:

The polices adopted by the Obama administration just over the last couple of years leave no doubt that they are accelerating, not winding down, the war apparatus that has been relentlessly strengthened over the last decade. In the name of the War on Terror, the current president has diluted decades-old Miranda warnings; codified a new scheme of indefinite detention on US soil; plotted to relocate Guantanamo to Illinois; increased secrecyrepression and release-restrictions at the camp;minted a new theory of presidential assassination powers even for US citizens; renewed the Bush/Cheney warrantless eavesdropping framework for another five years, as well as the Patriot Act, without a single reform; and just signed into law all new restrictions on the release of indefinitely held detainees.

Does that sound to you like a government anticipating the end of the War on Terror any time soon? Or does it sound like one working feverishly to make their terrorism-justified powers of detention, surveillance, killing and secrecy permanent? About all of this, the ACLU’s Executive Director, Anthony Romero, provided the answer on Thursday: “President Obama has utterly failed the first test of his second term, even before inauguration day. His signature means indefinite detention without charge or trial, as well as the illegal military commissions, will be extended.”

There’s a good reason US officials are assuming the “War on Terror” will persist indefinitely: namely, their actions ensure that this occurs…

There’s no question that this “war” will continue indefinitely. There is no question that US actions are the cause of that, the gasoline that fuels the fire. The only question – and it’s becoming less of a question for me all the time – is whether this endless war is the intended result of US actions or just an unwanted miscalculation.

It’s increasingly hard to make the case that it’s the latter. The US has long known, and its own studies have emphatically concluded, that “terrorism” is motivated not by a “hatred of our freedoms” but by US policy and aggression in the Muslim world. This causal connection is not news to the US government. Despite this – or, more accurately, because of it – they continue with these policies.

They act ignorant of blowback precisely because they are counting on it to maintain the status quo of the ongoing conflict. Either that, or they’re hoping that once all their tactics are fully “normalized”, they can toss any contradictory information down the memory tube. Read or subscribe to Glenn Greenwald’s daring coverage here.

,

  • alizardx

    Why not? It’s profitable and sometimes gives US corporate interests access to resources at reduced cost to them (war as a tax subsidy).

  • evan black

    The parallels between life in the Vietnam-era and life now are strikingly similar. Opposition to war/corruption/state-sponsored evil will still get you beaten in the streets. Marijuana is still the devil’s plant (although people are starting to come-around to that). The economy sucks. Makes me sit back and wonder where exactly all the effort and innovation of mankind has gotten us. What do we have to show for our struggles? The dollar is worthless, we are fast becoming a third-world country, shooting sprees have become an everyday occurrence it seems. Sigh. At least I can take solace in knowing nearly 50 thousand people “like” Disinfo. Maybe there is hope after all…

    • Breshvic

      All of the social aspirations for change by 60′s movements were either ridiculed as alternative, underground and dirty, squashed and silenced by the establishment, or co-opted by corporate pop culture. This is a general statement, of course, there are plenty of organizations and individual luminaries who have grown out of that era to inspire and make change even today. But on the whole they were not able to keep pace with the neo-conservatizing, corporatizing, industrial-military fundamentalist dogma that took hold of our country after the cold war and post-9/11.

  • http://www.zoboprepublic.wordpress.com/ zobop republic

    People should know by now that “War is Peace”. It’s very Orwellian and profitable to the Military Industrial Complex.