How Did The US Go From A War On Terror To A War Of Terror?

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

By Robert Fantina

....Last year, for example, three of the five top corporate donors to political action committees were military contractors, and members of the U.S. House and Senate are not known for biting the hands that so generously feed them.

But the constant flow of campaign contributions is not the only reason for the ongoing war on terror. In December, Time magazine reported that U.S. weapons sales the previous year had increased by 10 percent to a staggering total of $36.2 billion, ensuring the United States’ continued place as the world’s top purveyor of weaponry. Russia was a distant second, with a mere $10.2 billion in global weapons sales.

Let us summarize: The U.S. drops bombs around the world (right now, it’s focused on the Middle East) in order to destroy terrorists, some of whom it has created. Other countries assist this ignoble effort, and many of them purchase armaments from the U.S. in order to do so. The companies that manufacture these weapons lobby the U.S. government, by way of contributions to various PACs, to legislate in their favor. The governing officials of the U.S. invent new enemies (right now, it’s Islam) with which to frighten a gullible populace, allowing them to continue that most profitable of U.S. businesses, war.

Meanwhile, we all watch and listen as spokespeople for the only nation ever to have used nuclear weapons decry the “crimes” of other nations. We hear them talk about the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran, but note their silence about a nuclear-armed Israel. We watch incredulous as Mr. Obama sheds tears over children who are victims of gun violence in the U.S., while he remains silent about children who are victims of U.S. bombs and materiel around the world....

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article44056.htm

[MisterP]

1. And what medicine would taste too bad/ to a dying man

And what baseness would you not commit/ Could you rid the earth of all baseness?
And if in the end you change the whole world/ For what task are you too good?

[delrem]

2. One of the arguments in favor of the war of aggression on Iraq

was that the war would "pay for itself".

It would "pay for itself" in the form of gov't contracts to "rebuild" Iraq, which in turn would be paid for by total US control of the Iraq oilfields.

win win

It would pay for itself because it's purpose was to plunder. Dick Cheney's relationship with Haliburton was remarked on, but not looked sufficiently askance at by the majority of people in the US to stand in the way of his re-election, even after all was known and there could be no more excuses. After something so brazen, what more can we expect in the future? Myself, I expect them to act much more jaunty.

[libodem]

3. Ever since Shock and Awe

And the annihilation of Faluja. That whole Abugrabe and Gitmo and black sites and extraordinary rendition.

We did all kinds of no knock door busting, house tossing and carrying of the fathers and sons. We hired mercenary killers to do the illegal stuff that wasn't sanctioned.

Cheney and Rumsfeld wanted the mid east to hate us so we would have perpetual war. They were ugly on purpose.

[uriel1972]

4. It would be a mistake...

To think the War on Terror was ever anything, but a War of Terror.