Since 9/11 there has been much made of the police and how they are protecting us from the terrorists.
Also...as the Iraq war drags on...much is heard about "supporting the troops".
But is there another side to the coin...and other "truths" about the police and the military you should know?
Here are a few...
* The proposed U.S. military spending for FY 2008 is larger than military spending by all of the other nations in the world combined. So which country could be seen as the greatest threat in the world?
* Around 2/3s of the military voted Republican in the '96 Presidential election....later years after 2001 have probably seen a higher % voting Republican....I'd guess in the 75% range.
You won't easily finds the "facts" on this issue and you will find misinformation. Why isn't the data available?
* The police and the military are "enablers"...in that they enable the aggressive foreign and domestic policies of the US government....which seem to primarily serve corporate interests?
...
* Those in the military have placed themselves in a kind of voluntary/involuntary Stockholm Syndrome situation...where they have tended to indentify with their captors...during basic training and later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_Syndrome
This does not include the seemingly endless indoctrination during school years.
* The emphasis in the military is on the buddy system...where the decisions...stress and emotions of risky situations is focused on a soldiers survival and that of his fellow soldiers...not on moral or political issues. They are "drones" trained to do what they are told?
* Those who join the military have a certain personality type...if there were no wars...the whole process would need to be invented to keep them happy? They are told and they think they are doing you a great favor and service...and believe they will come back as a hero.
* Many cops were once in the military. The police have increasingly become more militarized.
http://www.copwatch.org/Militarizationofpolice.html
http://www.ichblog.eu/content/view/96/2/
...
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e16058.htm
...
* added comments *
"Soldiers and Imperial Presidents
By Charles Sullivan
01/03/06 "Information Clearing House" -- -- The vast majority of
those who serve in the United States military probably do so with the
best of intentions and with honor. The belief that they are defending
their country from foreign attackers and doing their patriotic duty
as citizens is persistently reinforced. Military service is one of
America’s sacred cows; it is something that is rarely questioned and
is surrounded by an invisible aura of nobility. No one, especially
those who serve, wants to think of their time in the military as
anything less than honorable and worthy of glorification.
But the trouble with sacred cows is that they tend to preclude
critical examination and often escape the scrutiny of rational
thinking and moral judgments. The premise of honorary military
service thus goes virtually unchallenged, and often becomes the
essence of dogma. But it seems to me that anyone contemplating a
military career, especially since it may require killing other human
beings and broad scale environmental destruction, should do so with
open eyes and clear senses. They need to know who they are serving
and whose interests they are protecting.
There is no escaping the fact that the U.S. is an imperialist nation
conceived in genocide and racism that has continued through the ages,
and worsened with the rise of modern technology and weaponry. With
the advent of smart bombs came stupid and immoral leaders. Our litany
of crimes against earth and humanity are concealed under layers of
moral language, but the actual deeds belie the intent behind what is
being done in our name. Ignorance, however, does not absolve anyone
from culpability.
Anyone considering military service should deliberate upon the
promises proffered by recruiters with extreme skepticism. Recruiters
are trained to exalt war as the highest expression of patriotism and
love of country; when, in fact, it is often the most debasing
expression of our humanity that makes a shallow mockery of real
service to god and country. The war resister and the conscientious
objector may be the true patriot.
I will make no effort to conceal my contempt for military recruiters
who prey upon unsuspecting and inexperienced youth, especially the
poor and economically disadvantaged. No parent should expose their
children to these predators. Recruiters are the moral equivalent of
ambulance chasers, and they should be accorded no more respect than
them, or the corporate con men who sell us goods that are detrimental
to our health. These people are not concerned about the welfare of
our children or the country; they are the representatives of
imperialism, empire, and Plutocracy; and they are in search of cannon
fodder.
Marketing militarism and war to society at large is no different than
selling potato chips laced with trans-fats or carcinogenic chemicals,
without regard to public health and its attendant social costs. It is
all about managing public perception and providing widening profit
margins to the corporations that are running the government. To hell
with the public welfare and moral pronouncements, the plantation
owner demands blood sacrifices as a show of loyalty and gratitude.
* There are strong similarities between Israel and the US? Both involve genocide to near genocide and a land grab. Israel has "Zionism". The US has "Manifest Destiny". Both involve ideas of political/religious/military domination.*
* I'd have to say that one of the underlying reasons for the United States it's perpetual wars is that of always having a loyal & trained group of "heros" to keep the rest of us in line politically and otherwise. *
Thus it is not surprising that military sacrament is couched in the
language of service to country, patriotism, and other noble causes
that are as divorced from reality as the President is removed from
sanity. The hypocrisy of righteous language contrasted to the actual
deed is readily apparent to anyone who knows history. It is
propaganda in the purest and most lethal form.
No doubt, the millions of men and women working in the armed forces
today do so in the belief that they are heroically serving their
country, as well as the cause of freedom and democracy. But in fact,
they are serving the ruling clique, the Illuminati, and a few
thousand wealthy investors, which represent less than 0.02% of the
population. There must be no confusion that the financial interests
of Halliburton, Bechtel, and the Bush dynasty are not the interests
of America’s citizens, especially those in the armed forces.
* Seems that in a true democracy...foreign policy should ultimately be
determined by the citizens...since the citizens evnetually bear the brunt of the
consequences of said policies? *
There is nothing noble or moral about invading defenseless sovereign
nations and killing hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of
innocent human beings. There is no morally justifiable way of making
occupation and the outright theft of natural capital, such as oil,
respectable or gallant. Genocide and theft are crimes against
humanity, regardless how the corporate advertisers and public
relations firms couch them; and the military is complicit in the
commission of those crimes, whether they are ignorant of their role
in them or not.
* I've heard the expression..."join the miltary...it will make you into a man"
or variations of it...many times. Those in the military are societies trained
killers that are not only socially accepted, but are called "heros" on their
return. The so called "respect" for the military & police is actually more
a fear of bullies? *
Consider, for example, the role the military has traditionally played
in carrying out the plans of one imperial president after another. We
have troops permanently stationed in 135 nations protecting America’s
corporate interests from democracy. Stifling democracy is quite
different from nurturing it. Either most of our presidents are
pathological liars or they do not know the difference between
nurturing and destroying. America’s record of imperialism speaks for
itself; and it is something that, when critically examined, is not
easily mistaken for anything other than what it is.
Similarly, the bogus war on terror is a contradiction in terms, as
historian Howard Zinn has so aptly pointed out. War is terrorism.
Terrorism begets terrorism, and nothing but terrorism. War does not,
and cannot ever lead to peace.
Aided by the CIA and death squads trained at the School of the
America’s at Fort Benning, Georgia, the U.S. has crushed one
fledgling democracy after another and replaced them with brutally
oppressive right wing dictatorships friendly to American corporations
and financial investors. Let us recall that Saddam Hussein was our
man in Iraq until he converted from the dollar to the euro. From Iran
to Chile there are hundreds, if not thousands, of cases that could be
cited. For a more detailed analysis of these incursions, I refer
readers to William Blum’s provocative book, Killing Hope: U.S.
Military and CIA Interventions since World War Two.
Let us assume that the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq is a
fairly typical example of imperial policies that have been in vogue
for well over a century. Like previous military actions, the invasion
of Iraq was based upon a litany of lies set forth by the president
and his cabinet, and carried forth in the corporate media. Iraq did
not pose a threat to America or to the interests of the American
people, and both the President and the commercial media knew it.
Their intent was to deceive and to garner support for unconscionable
acts of aggression and terror that are not in the people’s interest.
Thus our armed forces are in Iraq under false pretenses that have
nothing to do with spreading democracy or liberating oppressed people
from tyranny. They are there for reasons that are as nefarious as
they are treasonous. More than anyone, the men and women in the armed
forces need to know why they are in Iraq and what is expected of them
by the commander in chief.
The Plutocratic interests in Iraq may be summarized as the use of
technologically advanced military forces and high tech weaponry that
provide incalculable wealth to a privileged few. In this context,
soldiers are nothing more than a means to and end; a Machiavellian
way of socializing costs and privatizing profits—the ultimate in
corporate welfare. Well over $50 billion in profits have been hauled
out of Iraq by 150 U.S. corporations, including the privatization of
lucrative Iraqi oil. The profits and the death toll continue to rise
simultaneously.
To date, some 700,000 Iraqi people have died in the war and
occupation, and the violence is rapidly escalating. Most of the dead
are civilians, many of them women and children. Over 3,000 American
soldiers have died on the basis of lies and thousands more are
permanently maimed and traumatized—all to enhance the bottom line of
America’s wealthiest and most privileged elite.
It is not well publicized in the western mainstream media that
fourteen permanent military bases are under construction in Iraq. The
occupation is growing deep tap roots that are drawing the life, and
the oil, out of the region, and consuming it in a firestorm of
self-perpetuating violence.
President Bush and his kind, always eager to exploit a photo
opportunity, frequently pay homage to the troops stationed around the
world and in return garner their respect and admiration, neither of
which is deserved. Placing soldiers in peril when there is no threat
to America or to national security is an expression of utter contempt
for them; it is a treasonous offense worthy of the most severe
punishment short of execution.
Aside from photo ops, Bush and his wealthy brethren do not associate
with enlisted men, whose petty lives transpire far below the lofty
socio-economic status the elite were born into. Enlisted men and
women are permitted to wipe the cow dung from the president’s cowboy
boots, but they are not allowed to wear them or travel in the same
social circles as their owner.
The parasites that are running the country produce nothing, and have
no more loyalty to the American people or to the Constitution than
Frito-Lay or Halliburton. Their only allegiance is to accruing ever
more wealth and power to themselves by all possible means, including
war. You see, America is also an occupied country.
Neither the Iraqi nor American people’s interest is served by the
military industrial complex. War is never in the interest of those
who are fooled into fighting them. War benefits those who instigate
them and reap their financial reward from the safety of posh offices
and marbled halls. War is the century’s old tradition of peasants
doing the bidding of kings and queens. That is whose interest is
being served by our soldiers.
The truth is that soldiering is a particularly virulent manifestation
of America’s unending class war; the continued exploitation of the
working class by the ruling elite—the rich preying upon the poor. Now
the President and his accomplices in Congress intend to send even
more soldiers to Iraq, further escalating the violence, and acting
contrary to public sentiment. The lives of these men and women mean
nothing to the emperor and his minions. They are only so much
excrement to be wiped from their boots; the sacrificial lambs of
empire crawling beneath their ignoble gaze.
Despite my severe criticism, it is not my intention to disparage
either soldiers or military service. However, these men and women are
being duped and exploited, and someone has to tell them what they are
killing and dying for. It will remain for each individual to weigh
the evidence and decide whether it is right or wrong, courageous or
foolish."
* On the other hand...when there is a real need for getting down and
dirty...somebody has got to do it. IMO though...this serious kind of
scenario should only occur infrequently...not be a standard reaction based
on typically false premises.
In other words...you can't talk from a moral high ground and expect to
be taken seriously, if you never stand there long enough to say anything. *
* Don't EVER believe that these "heros" couldn't be turned on their fellow
citizens if someone in power had an excuse or just decided to. The laws are
now in place to do so at the whim of those in power. But would they really
need laws?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e17683.htm
"A recent U.S. Army survey shows that some 40 percent of American soldiers and Marines support the use of torture as a means of gathering intelligence. Some 66 percent would refuse to turn in a fellow soldier or Marine for abusive actions against civilians, and less than 50 percent believe that noncombatants should be treated with dignity and respect. Ten percent of those surveyed actually admitted to abusing civilians and their property for no reason whatsoever. While acknowledging that this mind-set is at complete odds with official policy concerning the conduct of military personnel in a combat zone, the Pentagon did its best to portray the survey results as clear evidence that there was, in fact, “good leadership” in place, since the desires of the troops had not manifested themselves in large-scale acts of abuse or torture. True, but the survey is also clear evidence that when such abuse or torture does occur, it is not the result of a few “bad apples,” so to speak, but instead indicative of a trend that could easily spiral out of control on any given day.
The survey results should not come as a surprise to anyone. The innumerable home movies shot in Iraq and Afghanistan, some immortalized on YouTube, some in documentary film, some simply shared with friends and family, all show the same disturbing trend. Whether it is a Marine singing the lyrics to the self-written “Hadji Girl,” or soldiers speaking disparagingly about “ragheads” or “sand niggers,” or any other dehumanizing remark imaginable, the reality is our troops aren’t in Iraq to liberate the Iraqi people. We’re there to kill them and we do an extraordinarily good job. The British government recently certified as “sound” the methodologies used by the study published in the medical journal The Lancet which estimates the number of deaths (as of 2006) that can be directly attributed to the 2003 invasion of Iraq and its aftermath at 655,000. If anything, this number has grown by leaps and bounds since the study was conducted."
