The war on terror has been thoroughly debunked

Discussion in 'Politics' started by poncho, Aug 31, 2008.

  1. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    The war on terror has been thoroughly debunked (see this and this).

    So the military-industrial complex is trying to find another enemy sufficiently scary to justify trillions of dollars in defense spending and the continuation of the perpetual state of war.

    Our former enemy - the Soviet Union - has now broken up. Russia's economy pales in comparison to that of the former USSR. Russia is run more by billionaires and the Russian Mob than by the Communists. And Russia harbors very few imperial ambitions.

    But that isn't stopping people like Dick Cheney from trying to raise the "Red menace" from the dustbin of history.

    Remember - in the 70's - Cheney was instrumental in generating fake intelligence exaggerating the Soviet threat in order to undermine coexistence between the U.S. and Soviet Union, which conveniently justified huge amounts of cold war spending. See also this article.

    SOURCE.

    Today, in the news...sort of.

    [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Bush quietly seeks to make war powers permanent, by declaring indefinite state of war[/FONT]

    As the nation focuses on Sen. John McCain's choice of running mate, President Bush has quietly moved to expand the reach of presidential power by ensuring that America remains in a state of permanent war.

    Buried in a recent proposal by the Administration is a sentence that has received scant attention -- and was buried itself in the very newspaper that exposed it Saturday. It is an affirmation that the United States remains at war with al Qaeda, the Taliban and "associated organizations."

    Part of a proposal for Guantanamo Bay legal detainees, the provision before Congress seeks to “acknowledge again and explicitly that this nation remains engaged in an armed conflict with Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated organizations, who have already proclaimed themselves at war with us and who are dedicated to the slaughter of Americans.”

    The
    New York Times' page 8 placement of the article in its Saturday edition seems to downplay its importance. Such a re-affirmation of war carries broad legal implications that could imperil Americans' civil liberties and the rights of foreign nationals for decades to come.
     
    #1 poncho, Aug 31, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 31, 2008
  2. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0

    I can't help but recognize how often this following is said but nobody seems to understand its meaning.

    President Bush has become the neocon vehicle for a policy that is based on unilateralism, permanent mobilisation and "preventive war".

    War and militarisation would have been impossible without 11 September, which tipped the institutional balance in favour of the new right.
     
  3. givengrace

    givengrace
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    393
    Likes Received:
    0
    U.S. to return province to Iraq’s care
    Marine general says violence stays low in Anbar, troop drawdown proposed
    BY ROBERT BURNS THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

    Security in the western Iraqi province of Anbar, where a brutal insurgency once ruled, has improved so drastically that the United States is about to return it to Iraqi control — opening the door to possible further cuts in U.S. troop levels, officials said Wednesday.


    Looks to me it all depends on who you get your News from.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     
  4. ray Marshall

    ray Marshall
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    570
    Likes Received:
    0
    a quote I heard some 30 yrs ago: "Pay no attention to what they say, but rather what they do!"
     
  5. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Another end justifies the means defense huh? Seen alot of those since the neocons came to power.

    You said a mouthful there. Who can we trust to give us the facts?

    The mainstream coroporate press? And the government? The government spent over 2 billion dollars on fake news reports that the corporate press was happy to air. The Pentagon infiltrated the nightly news for years with "message force multipliers" aka propagandists.

    After all that you still trust these guys? "Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me". (G. Bush quoting engineer Scott of Star Trek...sort of)

    Fool me all the time? Well, you figure it out.:wavey:

    The "war on terror" is a hoax. Aldus Huxley told us the elite would use terrorism to consolidate their power and control over us thirty plus years ago. The PNACer's and Zbigniew Brzezinski admitted their plans for "American Primacy and it's geostrategic imperitives" (spelled global hegemony) would never be realized without some sort of "truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat"

    Look on page 221 for that quote.

    The idea being it would get the public behind an "imperial mobilzation" ZB's words not mine.

    The Grand Chessboard is an interesting book. Read it if you really want to know why we invaded "Eurasia". The "war on terror" is a cover for another agenda.

    Read the elites writings they've already told us what they're really up to with this "war on terror". If you don't want to do the reading then by all means go turn on Faux Snews listen to the "message force multipliers" think positive and Hail Victory!
     
    #5 poncho, Aug 31, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 31, 2008

Share This Page

Loading...