"US to fund Iraqi spy networks"
History
quiz:
Q:
What happens when a nation A funds a rebellion within
nation B and (inevitably) at a later date decides to rescind
on its promises and aid?
A: That former rebellion group that appears to be on your
side turns against you, using the weapons and knowledge
that nation A supplied.
Get
it? See title if you do not.
The victims: truth and Arabs
Robert
Fisk predicts endless war and growing power for the
government. And if the Bush administration has its way,
all news will circulate through the Ministry of Truth
(read Office
of Global Communications) and Arabs will be conveniently
disposed of. Thank God, because we wouldn't want the president
to have
his hands tied!
Pax
Romana revisited
According
to Phil Brennan, history demonstrates that certain
US actions will lead to Pax Americana. We may already
be there: the war hawks' insistence of "projecting
power" and constant war are obvious indications.
And conveniently enough, the "war on terrorism"
fits this mold perfectly.
Moral
inequivalence, IDF style
The IDF is using innocent Palestinians to protect themselves
during dangerous missions. Gideon
Levy wonders if one life is cheaper than another:
Underlying all these practices is the fact that the
IDF holds Palestinian life to be cheap, and consequently,
we can endanger them as much as we like.
With war comes the disregard for things just wars
are meant to protect: morals and the rule of law, leading
me to append that famous
aphorism with "...and the death of morality and
law."
Oil on
the brain
What
kind of economic "analyst" thinks that $100
billion tab for a war with Iraq could at all have
an economic benefit? One that has oil on the brain and
who believes that with Saddam gone we will all benefit
with lower oil prices. Am I missing something: since when
was the role of the US military to lower the prices of
consumer goods?
