<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19394">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV id=header>
<DIV id=masthead-dailykos class=masthead>
<H1><A href="http://www.dailykos.com/"></A></H1><IMG
style="Z-INDEX: 100000; POSITION: absolute; TOP: 11px; LEFT: 368px" id=flagman
src="http://www.dailykos.com/i/header/masthead/flagman.png">
<H2>News, Community, Action</H2></DIV>
<DIV id=nav-main class=clearfix>
<FORM id=search-form method=get action=/search>
<DIV><A id=titleHref
href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/15/1179140/-The-hypocrisy-of-gun-control-during-the-War-on-Terror">The
hypocrisy of gun control during the War on Terror</A><SPAN
style="WHITE-SPACE: nowrap"></SPAN></DIV></FORM></DIV></DIV>
<DIV id=content>
<DIV id=main class=published>
<DIV id=storyWrapper class=ajax-delay-load>
<DIV id=article-1 class="article collapsable-panel" data-story_id="1179140"
,="">
<DIV class=article-body>
<DIV id=intro>
<P> What nation can <A
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/07/us-military-targeting-strategy-afghanistan">intentionally
target children for death</A> and still expect to win the hearts and minds? All
the deaths, torture and wasted treasure was bad enough, but this is simply
beyond the pale.</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE> "It kind of opens our aperture," said Carrington, whose
unit, 1st Battalion, 508th Parachute Infantry Regiment, was assisting the
Afghan police. <B>"In addition to looking for military-age males, it's looking
for children with potential hostile intent."</B></BLOCKQUOTE>Children.
<I>Children!</I><BR> It sort of puts those school shooting deaths in
perspective, doesn't it?<BR> While we debate <A
href="http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/12/the-simple-truth-about-gun-control.html">saving
the lives of children with gun control</A> here in The States, we are treating
them as combatants overseas.<BR> Am I the only one that feels like
my brain is going to explode from the contradictions here? </DIV>
<P class=divider-doodle></P>
<DIV id=body class=article-body>
<P> Lost in the debate about gun control in America is the fact that we
are by far the <A
href="http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/09/2012916104846486602.html">largest
gun trafficker in the world</A>.</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE> the US actually tripled its arms sales last year, hitting a
record high, and cornering almost 78 per cent of the global arms
trade.</BLOCKQUOTE>We have a near monopoly in the world's arms trade. <B>We are
literally flooding the world with guns!</B> It exposes any effort at
domestic gun control as total hypocrisy.
<P>By definition that makes us the greatest threat to world stability and
peace.<BR> When did America's morals stop at the border?</P>
<P><IMG border=0 alt=Photobucket
src="http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f53/midtowng/arms-sales_zps4d89daaa.jpg"
width=500></P>
<P><B>Back to the Global War</B></P>
<P> Pop-quiz time: In which nation did 200 Marines begin armed operations
last September?</P>
<P><B>a) Afghanistan<BR>b) Pakistan<BR>c) Iran<BR>d) Somalia<BR>e) Yemen<BR>f)
Central Africa<BR>g) The Philippines<BR>h) Guatemala</B></P>
<P> If you guessed any of these, you were pretty close to being
right.<BR>After all, we have an ongoing war in Afghanistan that <A
href="http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/08/201282873530364972.html">will
not end</A> after we've supposedly "withdrawn" in two years.<BR>
There's been <A
href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008/09/us-special-oper/">armed border
crossing</A> by U.S. Special Forces in Pakistan.<BR> Special Forces
operate on the <A href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/jsotf-gcc/">Iran
border</A>.<BR> We <A
href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/08/somalia-drones/all/">bomb
Somalia</A> on a regular basis, and the <A
href="http://www.thenation.com/article/161936/cias-secret-sites-somalia">CIA
operates there</A>.<BR> Special Forces operate <A
href="http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/08/world/la-fg-us-yemen-20120809">on
the ground in Yemen</A>.<BR> 100 Green Berets were sent to <A
href="http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2012/0430/How-US-special-forces-help-in-the-hunt-for-Joseph-Kony-video">Central
Africa this past summer to work against a rebel army.<BR> Special
Forces have been operating in</A> <A
href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39444744/ns/world_news-asia_pacific/t/americas-forgotten-frontline-philippines/#.UE5GXxgVmUd">the
Philippines against rebels</A> for some time now.<BR> The correct
answer is "h", where Marines will be working against <A
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/200-us-marines-are-patrolling-guatemala-coast-as-part-of-region-crackdown-on-drug-trafficking/2012/08/29/1dbc09fe-f22a-11e1-b74c-84ed55e0300b_story.html">drug
traffickers</A>.</P>
<P> Currently, U.S. Special Forces are operating in <A
href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/archive/175426/nick_turse_a_secret_war_in_120_countries">120
nations</A>.</P>
<P> Just a few decades ago the idea of American troops being
deployed in almost every nation on Earth would have freaked a few people out.
Now it is simply <A
href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/01/the-war-on-terror-spreads-to-africa-u-s-sending-troops-to-35-african-nations.html">business
as usual</A>.</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE> <B>U.S. Army teams will be deploying to as many as 35
African countries early next year</B> for training programs and other
operations as part of an increased Pentagon role in Africa. The move would see
small teams of U.S. troops dispatched to countries with groups allegedly
linked to al-Qaeda, such as Libya, Sudan, Algeria and Niger. The teams are
from a U.S. brigade that has the capability to use drones for military
operations in Africa if granted permission. <B>The deployment could also
potentially lay the groundwork for future U.S. military intervention in
Africa</B>.</BLOCKQUOTE> Most of these nations have <A
href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-u-s-military-swarms-over-africa/5318560">no
al-Qaida presence</A>.<BR> What happened to President George
Washington's warning about <A
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington's_Farewell_Address">foreign
entanglements?</A>
<P> <A
href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/america-invades-africa-the-resource-war-and-the-invasion-of-mali/5315477">Some
say</A> that our real reason for extending our military presence in Africa to
combat China's recent rising prominence in Africa.<BR> I don't know
if that it true, but it certainly wouldn't be the first time our military has
been used for reasons <A
href="http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/08/2012826114237508113.html">other
than national security</A>.</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE>after nearly nine years of war and occupation, US troops finally
left Iraq. In their place, Big Oil is now present in force...<BR>
to protect the oil giants from dissent and protest, trade union offices have
been raided, computers seized and equipment smashed, leaders arrested and
prosecuted.</BLOCKQUOTE><B>You missed the punchline</B>
<P> The War on (some) Terror has always been a bad joke.<BR>Let's start
with some basic facts:</P>
<P> If we were serious about destroying al-Qaida, we would go after
them where they are, right? Well, the largest known number of al-Qaida agents in
the world are <A
href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/06/panetta-escalate-shadow-wars-expand-black-ops/">in
Iraq</A>. You know, the country we just pulled out of.<BR> There are
over 1,000 agents in Iraq presently. Recall that the number of al-Qaeda agents
in Iraq <A
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein_and_al-Qaeda_link_allegations">could
be counted on one hand</A> before we invaded.</P>
<P> Our terrorism policy could be better summerized as "Good Terrrorists
versus Bad Terrorists". Good Terrorists are in conflict with common
enemies.<BR> Conservatives have long <A
href="http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh">supported
terrorist groups</A> that operate <A
href="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/leading-conservatives-call-obama-terrorist-group/">against
iran</A>.<BR> Plus, we tend to overlook terrorist connections
against common enemies in <A
href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html">Libya</A>
and <A
href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/12/02/176123/al-qaida-linked-group-syria-rebels.html">Syria</A>.</P>
<P> However, all that pales in comparison to the fact that the
United States has allowed terrorists to operate from American soil for over 50
years (see <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Posada_Carriles">Luis
Posada Carriles</A> and <A
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_Bosch">Orlando Bosch</A> as prime
examples).</P>
<P><IMG border=0 alt=reagantaliban
src="http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f53/midtowng/reagantaliban_zpse56181c5.jpg"
width=400></P>
<P><B>American Imperialism and Backlash</B></P>
<P> By now many of you have probably heard of the Korean rapper,
Psy. His song "Gangam Style" is the most watched video in YouTube
history.<BR> What many of you probably don't know is that he
performed a song in 2004 called "Hey American". The lyrics go like <A
href="http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/12/201212108205749534.html">this</A>:</P>
<P><I> "Kill those f---ing Yankees who have been torturing Iraqi
captives<BR> Kill those f---ing Yankees who ordered them to
torture<BR> Kill their daughters, mothers, daughters-in-law
and fathers<BR> Kill them all slowly and painfully"</I></P>
<P> South Korea is not a place you normally think of for being
anti-American, but it is hardly alone. America is currently <A
href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/23/reality-check-obama-has-not-restored-america-s-image-in-the-middle-east.html">more
unpopular</A> in the middle east than during the darkest days of the George W.
Bush administration.</P>
<P><IMG border=0 alt=Photobucket
src="http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f53/midtowng/defense_population_gdp_zps18b3656a.png"
width=450></P>
<P> Why are we so hated? Is it because of our freedom?<BR>Obviously not.
<A
href="http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/06/24/253135/half-of-worlds-refugees-are-running-from-u-s-wars/?mobile=nc">Half
of all the refugees in the world</A> are fleeing Americas wars. And that doesn't
even count the policies of American clients, such as Israel's Palestinian
problem.</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE> What this appears to represent is a type of brazen ignorance
and egotism which has come to represent mainstream government policy; the type
of myopia under which a country can launch a full-scale war, invasion and
occupation of another sovereign nation under entirely false pretences, kill
hundreds of thousands in the process and create millions of refugees and still
at the end sincerely ask the question "Why they do hate us?".</BLOCKQUOTE><B>The
Cost of Empire</B>
<P> It's a statement to the power of the military-industrial complex that
Social Security and Medicare are on the table for being cut, but cutting back on
a worldwide military empire is spoken only in whispers.</P>
<P><IMG border=0 alt="military spending"
src="http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f53/midtowng/military_spending-1_zps75d7bced.png"></P>
<P> We have <A href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175338/">over
1,000 overseas military bases</A>, plus another <A
href="http://www.acq.osd.mil/ie/download/bsr/BSR2012Baseline.pdf">4,000</A> here
at home. How much does all this "forward presence" <A
href="http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/12/20121213122226666895.html">cost
us?</A></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE> Forced by Congress to account for its spending overseas, the
Pentagon has put that figure at $22.1bn a year. It turns out that even a
conservative estimate of the true costs of garrisoning the globe comes to an
annual total of about $170bn. In fact, it may be considerably higher. Since
the onset of "the Global War on Terror" in 2001, the total cost for our
garrisoning policies, for our presence abroad, has probably reached $1.8
trillion to $2.1 trillion.</BLOCKQUOTE> Why the huge difference in numbers?
Well, for starters Defense Department numbers simply can't be trusted.
<BLOCKQUOTE> (The Department of Defence remains the only federal agency
unable to pass a financial audit.)<BR> Although the Overseas Cost
Summary initially might seem quite thorough, you'll soon notice that countries
well known to host US bases have gone missing-in-action. In fact, at least 18
countries and foreign territories on the Pentagon's own list of overseas bases
go unnamed.</BLOCKQUOTE> Nearly all this military spending overseas does
nothing to help the domestic economy.<BR> In fact, even if it wasn't
being spent overseas, military spending is probably the worst type of government
spending when it comes to fiscal stimulus.
<BLOCKQUOTE> Military spending creates <A
href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175627/tomgram:_david_vine,_the_true_costs_of_empire/costsofwar.org/sites/default/files/articles/26/attachments/Garrett-Peltier%20%20Jobs.pdf">fewer
jobs</A> per million dollars expended than the same million invested in
education, health care, or energy efficiency - barely half as many as
investing in schools. Even worse, while military spending clearly provides
direct benefits to the <A
href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/04/23-4">Lockheed Martins</A>
and <A
href="http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2011/09/contractor-waste-iraq-KBR">KBRs</A>
of the military-industrial complex, these investments don't, as economist <A
href="http://costsofwar.org/sites/default/files/articles/31/attachments/Heintz%20military%20assets%20and%20public%20investment.pdf">James
Heintz</A> says, boost the "long-run productivity of the rest of the private
sector" the way infrastructure investments do.
<P>To adapt a famous line from President Dwight Eisenhower: every base that is
built signifies in the final sense a theft.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR><IMG
border=0 alt=Photobucket
src="http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f53/midtowng/growth_effects_on_military_zps208a36b3.png">
<P> So why do we keep mortgaging our future for a navy that hasn't served
a real military purpose since WWII? Why do we keep mortgaging our future on
missle defense systems eventhough the Cold War is over? Why are we spending
insane amounts of money on bombers designed to penetrate Soviet air space when
the Soviet Union no longer exists? The <A
href="http://lewrockwell.com/salerno/salerno12.1.html">answer is as obvious</A>
as the current owners of all those Iraqi oil wells.</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE> We thus arrive at a universal, praxeological truth about
war. War is the outcome of class conflict inherent in the political
relationship – the relationship between ruler and ruled, parasite and
producer, tax-consumer and taxpayer. The parasitic class makes war with
purpose and deliberation in order to conceal and ratchet up their exploitation
of the much larger productive class.
<P>Thus, a permanent state of war or preparedness for war is optimal from the
point of view of the ruling elite, especially one that controls a large and
powerful state.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> It seems rediculous to me the subjects of
gun control, freedom and protecting our children are even being debated, while
we stretch our military empire over the world, flood the world in guns, and
intentionally target children for death.<BR> We talk about security,
while still supporting terrorists. We talk about fiscal responsibility, while
mortgaging the future of our children to spend on useless wars that cause the
rest of the world to hate us.
<P> Our foreign policy is so far outside of sanity and morality one has to
wonder what future generations will think about us? Will they be able to forgive
us?</P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>