[Peace-discuss] [ufpj-activist] [peace.geezers] IMPORTANT ANALYSIS; Bacevich "Beyond Isis"

[Karen Aram]

John,


Thank you for saying so well, what I was not able to articulate.


________________________________
From: John McMahon <jmcmahon6 at gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 5, 2015 6:55 PM
To: Karen Aram
Cc: info at mail.whitehouse.gov
Subject: Re: [ufpj-activist] [peace.geezers] IMPORTANT ANALYSIS; Bacevich "Beyond Isis"

Karen: Thank you for your thoughtful comment! I agree with you completely!

When I was stationed at Fort Huachuca, Arizona, a friend poked a rattlesnake that was at rest; probably sleeping. On awakening it struck nearly hitting my friend.  It could have been me.

There is something to be said for not ‘poking' or provoking people whom we seem to need (?) as enemies (Russia, China and Iran).

No Nation ‘needs enemies’! Alas, it appears to me that our entire US economic system is built on such a preposterous need; much to the detriment of the entire social fabric. Would that this were not true…

By the way “When (if) the big battle comes with Russia and China…” is presumptive! This is a Most Dangerous Practice our Politicians have been using to fuel the Weapons Industry and keeping us in a perpetual state of war and preparing for war!.

Presumption is the first phase in the self-fulfilling prophesy. The ‘trick’ for us is to find ways to inform people suffering delusions and misconceptions about needing enemies. They must discover that their Practice is insane,,,

Also, accounts from the Citizenry being exploited and victimized by the USA using them as ‘Proxies’, it is considered by them to be a singularly loathsome Neo-Colonial Exploitation Practice by which the United States and Other countries garner the world’s material resources.

In the near term all our diplomatic efforts will fail miserably if we cannot learn to stop this practice! The only by-product for American Taxpayers is being forced to pay for wars we do not want that rage on 24/7/365

Peace and Blessings in Solidarity
John C. McMahon Boise, Idaho


On Dec 5, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Karen Aram <karenaram at hotmail.com<mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com>> wrote:

The very suggestion "When (if) the big battle comes with Russia and China, he might be on the pro-war side." is offensive because, the US has been provoking war with Russia and China and the very idea of WW3, with nuclear powers even with our use of proxies, must be considered an outrage to be discouraged, not contemplated.

From: ufpj-activist <ufpj-activist-bounces+karenaram=hotmail.com at lists.mayfirst.org<mailto:ufpj-activist-bounces+karenaram=hotmail.com at lists.mayfirst.org>> on behalf of Brussel, Morton K <brussel at illinois.edu<mailto:brussel at illinois.edu>>
Sent: Saturday, December 5, 2015 2:53 PM
To: David Swanson
Cc: David Hartsough; IPB Board YAHOOGROUP (IPBstct at yahoogroups.com<mailto:IPBstct at yahoogroups.com>); UFPJ Activist List; peace.geezers at lists.riseup.net<mailto:peace.geezers at lists.riseup.net>
Subject: Re: [ufpj-activist] [peace.geezers] IMPORTANT ANALYSIS; Bacevich "Beyond Isis"

Bacevich is of the “realist" school; moral considerations are avoided in his essays. One only hopes that his “realism” has a moral tone, that it will lead to the conclusion that (more) war (now) is not a good idea,  but the morality argument is not obvious in what he writes.

—mkb


On Dec 5, 2015, at 12:13 PM, David Swanson <davidcnswanson at gmail.com<mailto:davidcnswanson at gmail.com>> wrote:

Exactly. Thank you for translating :-)

On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Cole Harrison <cole at masspeaceaction.org<mailto:cole at masspeaceaction.org>> wrote:
David has a point. Bacevich says that total war like WW II is a possible option. He does not think it appropriate to the circumstances. That makes him a tactical ally of our movement.  When (if) the big battle comes with Russia and China, he might be on the pro-war side.

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 1:22 PM, David Swanson <davidcnswanson at gmail.com<mailto:davidcnswanson at gmail.com>> wrote:
I agree with both of you yet again that he's saying that; it's not all he's saying.

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 1:19 PM, David Hartsough <davidhartsough at igc.org<mailto:davidhartsough at igc.org>> wrote:
I agree with Joe. Bacevich is saying that choosing World War IV would be insane and collective suicide.
David Hartsough

On 12/4/2015 5:22 AM, David Swanson wrote:
Again I understand that that's his point, but for much of the middle of the thing he goes along with the idea that war is OK it would just have to be done on a larger scale. There are a couple of problems. One is that it still wouldn't "work." It would produce a global anti-US movement of unprecedented scale. The other is that war is a vicious crime even if small scale and "successful" -- and there are a great many people more than happy to pay his price in dollars and lives for what he suggests could be done if only those dollars and lives were spent (which, yet again, I do understand he wants us to see as too steep a price).

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Joseph Gerson <JGerson at afsc.org<mailto:JGerson at afsc.org>> wrote:
David,

You are missing his point.  By describing the numbers of troops that would be required for a generation, their financial and political costs, he is clearly describing how untenable such a policy would be.  It is worth looking at the historian William Polk's piece (referenced by Noam Chomsky) which describes the trap into which the West is falling and concludes with a sensible approach to counter the collective madness.

Joseph




________________________________
From: David Swanson <davidcnswanson at gmail.com<mailto:davidcnswanson at gmail.com>>
Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2015 11:21 PM
To: David McReynolds
Cc: peace.geezers at lists.riseup.net<mailto:peace.geezers at lists.riseup.net>; Joseph Gerson; IPB Board YAHOOGROUP (<mailto:IPBstct at yahoogroups.com>IPBstct at yahoogroups.com<mailto:IPBstct at yahoogroups.com>); UFPJ Activist List
Subject: Re: [ufpj-activist] IMPORTANT ANALYSIS; Bacevich "Beyond Isis"

I know his intention is to discourage war, but a big chunk of that article is written on the assumption that war would be OK if it were done on a larger scale (though he hopes we won't want to). I'm sorry he's lonely though. Maybe he should reconsider that Christian conservative thing :-)

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:04 PM, David McReynolds <davidmcreynolds7 at gmail.com<mailto:davidmcreynolds7 at gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear David Swanson,

I found the writing of Bacevich helpful. He is not a pacifist, he considers himself a "Christian conservative", but he is an important (and lonely) voice against the drive to endless war.

Peace,
david McReynolds

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:17 PM, David Swanson <davidcnswanson at gmail.com<mailto:davidcnswanson at gmail.com>> wrote:
Beautiful in its grotesque delusion. More war would work better. More war like in Vietnam. This is his model for success? I hope only dedicated peace actvists committed to seeing the best in everyone read this, because anybody else reading this is likely to pay attention to the 90% of it that makes a crazed argument for greater war.

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Joseph Gerson <<mailto:JGerson at afsc.org>JGerson at afsc.org<mailto:JGerson at afsc.org>> wrote:

Friends,

                With the massacre and possible additional consequences of the San Bernardino massacre and the pending Senate vote on Syrian War refugees, we have more than a little on our plate. Led me add the catastrophic consequences of what has been termed a “world war” against Islamist extremists to the list as there are going calls for escalating the war against ISIS.

                Over the last couple of days I’ve been quite disturbed by the portent of articles by people who have long been our allies. In addition to the predictable madness from the militarist right, first came Robert Reich’s piece that appeared to support what he termed the inevitable Third World War. Then, yesterday, came a piece by Stephen Cohen and Katrina Vanden Heuvel of The Nation in which their growing fears of the consequences of the new era of U.S. confrontation with Russia led them to advocate a U.S.-Russian military alliance and war against ISIS.

                Fortunately Andrew Bacevich, who certainly knows war, has written the article the follows which confirms my worst fears of where such an escalation in the whack-a-mole wars will lead.  It’s a bit long, but it’s important, and I hope that it has some influence.  Please take a look.

                In dangerous times,

                Joseph

<http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/176076/>http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/176076/


_______________________________________________
ufpj-activist mailing list

Post: ufpj-activist at lists.mayfirst.org<mailto:ufpj-activist at lists.mayfirst.org>
List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/ufpj-activist

To Unsubscribe
       Send email to:  ufpj-activist-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org<mailto:ufpj-activist-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org>
       Or visit: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/ufpj-activist/jmcmahon6%40gmail.com

You are subscribed as: jmcmahon6 at gmail.com<mailto:jmcmahon6 at gmail.com>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20151206/2eaa8f85/attachment-0001.html>