Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 28 Share on Twitter 2 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEdNews:
OpEdNews Op Eds    H2'ed 3/19/21

War is the answer! But what was the question?

By       (Page 1 of 2 pages)   27 comments
Become a Premium Member Would you like to know how many people have read this article? Or how reputable the author is? Simply sign up for a Advocate premium membership and you'll automatically see this data on every article. Plus a lot more, too.
Author 66223
Become a Fan
  (48 fans)


(Image by John Rachel, The Peace Dividend Project)   Details   DMCA
 

In the forums for our national conversation, there is no earnest discussion of peace and cooperation now . . . period! I'm not talking lip service or political posturing. I'm talking about REAL DISCUSSION, widespread, inclusive, comprehensive discussion. In the media, by our leaders, among everyday people. NONE!

We have a war economy, a war on terror, troops fighting in seven countries (that we know of), over 800 military bases across the planet, countless secret missions and special ops, soon weapons in space, and to add more gasoline to the fire our boorish leaders are insulting and openly hostile to Russia and China, apparently to provoke them into a war. We the public are prompted to believe the only available options are how much war and who to attack next.

There are no prominent media platforms, no high-visibility celebrities, no folk or pop songs being aired, no TV shows or movies, no major love-ins/teach-ins/sit-ins, no massive demonstrations, PROMOTING PEACE.

If spectacle is out of the question because of Covid-19 lockdowns and social distancing, an effective peace movement would at bare minimum establish a national conversation challenging the official narrative with the powerful tools that are available. But the current appeals for peace are a total washout. That's the reality. There are sparsely-attended Zoom sessions, enthusiastic but isolated and very small clusters of activists, occasional listless street protests, none of which create enough buzz to be news to the greater mass of American citizens. Most people hear as much about peace now as they hear about alchemy and powdered wigs.

As for our spokespersons at a federal level, all they officially talk about is "defending our national interest" (whatever that means) and the need for bigger, more powerful, more exotic, more expensive weapons. This salivating for a bigger badder military is bipartisan. Apparently blowing things up, generating animosity, and creating more refugees are the only items the Democrats and Republicans can agree on.

But here's the wrench in the gears of this doomsday machine: The simple, obvious truth is, all of the current talk about the urgent need to extend and expand our military is predicated on completely flawed thinking and a deceptive premise, one that we're hearing belched out with teeth-gritting hysteria more and more these days.

Here it is:

"We can't win a war against China or Russia, much less both at the same time."

Actually yes! This is absolutely true.

BUT THE REALITY IS, THIS SHOULD BE A HUGE CAUSE FOR CELEBRATION. Because THEY can't win a war against us either! It's a perfect standoff. No one wins. No one loses. Why bother?

What a relief! There will be no war. Right?

Wrong.

Instead, it's the basis of the further absurd claim that since we can't beat Russia or China, we are militarily weak, vulnerable, lacking the necessary hardware and fire power. It's used to promote expanding the military even more.

Where's the deception? The deception is the wording. It should be: We currently can't win a war of AGGRESSION against them, attacking them on THEIR soil. The need for the pivot to Asia. Putting NATO troops and missiles on Russia's borders. Our never-ending wars in the Middle East. Expansion of our military footprint in Africa. Our secret ops everywhere. All of this projection of power "over there" to confront and defeat our "enemies" on their soil, in their waters, in their skies, requires bigger and better weapons, more ships and planes, means trillions more dollars to float the bloat.

This sprawl of U.S. fighting forces is predicated on the misguided, nefarious, and patently false assumption that WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DEFEAT ANYONE, ANYWHERE, AT ANY TIME.

Next Page  1  |  2

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

 

Must Read 2   Well Said 2   Supported 2  
Rate It | View Ratings

John Rachel Social Media Pages: Facebook Page       Twitter Page       Linked In Page       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

John Rachel has a B.A. in Philosophy, and has written eight novels and three political non-fiction books. His political articles have appeared at OpEdNews, Russia Insider, The Greanville Post, and other alternative media outlets. Since (more...)
 

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines
Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Be Afraid ... Be Very Afraid!

Obama Surrounds Himself With Neocons and Other Hawkish Lunatics

Trump's Gone Too Far This Time!

Isn't it Time to Stop America's Ugly Game of Thrones Business?

Freedom of the Press

Ten Commandments For A New American Century

To View Comments or Join the Conversation: