April 30, 2006 at 23:00:00

America's Hitler

SAVE AS FAVORITE

VIEW FAVORITES

By Lonna Gooden VanHorn (about the author) Page 2 of 2 page(s)

opednews.com Permalink

Compare that to what a real Republican war hero, Dwight Eisenhower, said at a press conference in 1954: �I don't believe there is such a thing as a preventive war, and I would not seriously listen to anyone who came and talked to me about such a thing.�

But in their quest for world control, the neocons may get more than they bargained for. Their pollyannish belief that the people of the countries involved would be willing to stand docilely by and cheerfully let America occupy their nations and steal their resources while they, themselves, were left destitute has proven to have been overly optimistic.

Had the Iraq War gone more smoothly, would American troops be fighting in Iran and Syria already?

It defies reason that while the neocons took advantage of the passions aroused by American nationalism after 9/11 to accomplish their agenda, they have not been able to understand that people in other countries when attacked will also respond with their own brand of nationalism. Hatred against the outside invader takes precedence over disagreements with any �inside� enemy, and various factions inside targeted countries will forget differences among themselves and join forces to fight the foreign enemy, even if they hate their rulers and would like a freer society. They do not want a government that will be shoved down their throats by Americans over the bodies of their children and the destruction of their cities. They will fight to prevent America dictating how they should live, just as we, in 1776, fought a revolution against England because we wanted the freedom to determine our own destiny. This has turned out to be true of Iraq, and will doubtless be true of Iran as well, just as Hal Crowther in his delightful piece "With Trembling Fingers"
said it would be true of America under similar circumstances as well.

�If our presidential election fails to dislodge the crazy bastards who annexed Baghdad, many of us in this country would welcome regime change by any intervention, human or divine. But if, say, the Chinese came in to rescue us -- Operation American Freedom -- how long would any of us, left-wing or right, put up with an occupying army teaching us Chinese-style democracy? A guerrilla who opposes an invading army on his own soil is not a terrorist, he's a resistance fighter. In Iraq we're not fighting enemies but making enemies. As Richard Clarke and others have observed, every dollar, bullet and American life that we spend in Iraq is one that's not being spent in the war on terrorism. Every Iraqi, every Muslim we kill or torture or humiliate is a precious shot of adrenaline for Osama and al Qaeda.�

America was attacked on 9/11. Relatively few people were killed and only several buildings were affected by the attack. Yet because of that attack, Americans wanted revenge and were willing to bomb one country. And because of that attack, and their need to feel �in charge� again, Americans were willing to support a war against another country � one not even involved in the 9/11 attack. However, because of the administration's deliberately misleading morphing of Osama bin Laden and Saudi Arabia into Saddam Hussein and Iraq, the lie of which our pathetic broadcast media did not bother to clarify, most Americans believed Hussein had something to do with 9/11 and ties with Al Qaeda, and many do to this day.

Imagine the resolve of people to fight back who have been or will be on the receiving end of the much greater destruction to their homes and countries brought about because of American bombs?! No other country can come close to matching the number or power of the weapons of mass destruction America possesses. Indeed, if any nations could legitimately claim the right to launch �preemptive� wars by claiming they were doing it to stave off attack, those nations would be the nations America threatens. And there would be no ambiguity about who is responsible for any massive bombings America initiates. America will not be blamed for something someone else did, as Hussein was blamed for what bin Laden did.

Consequently, Bush, in the fulfillment of his mission has the potential to kill an unthinkable number of people. Iraq is only a good start. He may be, as Nelson Mandela has said, a man of �little foresight� who �doesn't think properly, � But if the past four years have proven anything, they have proven he is �resolute.� It is not likely that widespread death, which seems to be an abstraction to him � aided by the fact that he has never attended a soldier's funeral � would cause him to doubt the path Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Perls have set him upon. Not only did Bush say �Bring 'em on!� He also uses the term �stay the course.� He may not believe as Henry Kissinger wrote that �Military men are just dumb, stupid animals,� but he certainly believes the second part of that statement � that they are �to be used as pawns in foreign policy.� General Zinni said the path Bush has set himself upon so resolutely leads us right over a cliff. But Bush, like Hitler, knows that frightened people like to be led by someone who is confident. Even if he is confident and wrong.

�I follow my course with the precision and security of a sleepwalker.� (H. p. 31)

Let us also not forget, Bush is the president under whom torture has been deemed okay, and who is outsourcing torture to countries where even such methods as boiling people has been known to take place. He is the man who has placed convicted felons and known supporters of torture and death squads -- Negroponte, to name one -- in positions of power.

Additionally, Bush has a potential Hitler really did not have. He has the potential to virtually end life on earth. His power mad underlings, the ones former CIA agent Ray McGovern says were called �the Crazies� during the first President Bush's administration, talk about �limited� and �winnable� nuclear war. Bush himself, of course, has a �nukaler� bomb proof underground bunker. And Bush's virulent faith might convince him that God would rescue �God's country� and �good Christian� people from any devastation his acts might rain down on the �evil� people and the �evil� countries. Against, I might add, all historical evidence to the contrary. After all, fifty million people, the majority of them Christian people, died during WWII. And, while the Crusaders were certainly dedicated to their mission, on the whole they lost those early Christian wars.

Remember the �Axis of Evil?� Bush does not see those countries as areas of land made up of innocent people, most of whom are simply trying to live their lives as best they can, just as we all are . Instead, he sees them as part of an evil whole. Bush thinks in terms of black and white. Good versus evil. �Evil doers.� �You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists.�

In a word. BULLSHIT!!

In 1943 Langer wrote, �It was not only Hitler, the madman, who created German madness, but German madness that created Hitler. Having created him as its spokesman and leader, it has been carried along by his momentum, perhaps far beyond the point where it was originally prepared to go...The madness of the Fuehrer has become the madness of a nation...a reciprocal relationship exists between the Fuehrer and the people...the madness of the one stimulates and flows into the other and vice versa.� (L. 154.)

--- to be continued

1 | 2

Bio: Lonna Gooden VanHorn was born and raised on a small farm in Minnesota. She is the mother of 6, a grandmother, and the wife of a Vietnam veteran. Formerly a person who did not "get involved" in controversy, the constant lies and deceit of (more...)

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.