American warmongering
From WhyNotWiki
[edit] Thomas Barnett: The Pentagon's New Map (book) and The Military in the 21st Century (video)
"The Military in the 21st Century" (On C-SPAN, 2004-06-02)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4689061169761152025 at 52:07
We've got to stay out there. We have to avoid what we've been doing for the past 15 years, which is sucking the troops back home. 'So are the boys coming back home?' No, they're never coming home. No exit, no exit strategy.
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/ar/t212.htm.
One of the Pentagon's top strategists, Tom Barnett, gives his infamous brief detailing Transatlantic Imperialism and how the US/Britain exports "security" in exchange for "cars, home computers, etc...” Hell ya!!! The military gets to invade any country they want and we get paid off with overpriced toys!!!! Not for the faint of heart. Thomas Barnett spends 2+ hours detailing how "the forces of Globalization" intend to dominate the planet.
Just goes to show if you give some of these men enough rope, they will hang themselves. A freaking Pentagon War Guru with an agent and a book on Amazon bragging about being an Imperial Power
In a PowerPoint presentation Professor Barnett talked about developing a global perspective that integrates political, economic and military elements in a model for the post-September 11 world. He argued that terrorism and globalization had combined to end the great-power model of war that has developed over 400 years, since the Thirty Years War. Instead, he divided the world into an increasingly expanding "functioning core" of economically developed, politically stable states integrated into global systems and a "non-integrating gap," the most likely source of threats to U.S. and international security. Professor Barnett used this map to call for a new system for deployment of the U.S. armed forces. Following his remarks he answered questions from military officials in the audience.
Mark Erwin (September 20 2004). The Pentagon's New Map: Our Government's Hellish Vision of Endless War Against Hapless Third-Worlders (http://www.prisonplanet.tv/articles/september2004/200904newmap.htm). [Military industrial complex (category)]
Why would our spooks kill 3000+ Americans in the 9-11 faux-terror event, you ask?
It really comes down to this: without an "enemy," our parasitical "national security" establishment has no reason to exist in its present form, much less continue to grow.
...
So, incredibly, they're pitching the hapless, near defenseless third world, which they've styled "the Gap" (the shaded region in the map above), as the latest "mortal enemy" of we who dwell in "the Core," their shorthand for the first world (US, Canada, Western Europe, Israel, Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa) and all those who toil in the already-globalized (and, therefore, economically subservient) second world (Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Eastern Europe, Russia, China, and India).
Henceforth, if you happen to live in a society that prefers to order itself according to ancient patterns and are unwilling to exchange your traditional ways of living for abject subservience to the interests of multinational corporations or international finance, you and your kin have been marked for destruction.
If these megalomaniacs get their way, our recent invasions of Panama, Somalia, Haiti, Yugoslavia and Iraq are just the beginning. Watch Pentagon guru Thomas Barnett's presentation on C-SPAN of the globalists' master plan for endless war and you'll begin to get the bigger picture.
But to realize their hellish vision of globe wide war against "the Gap," they need we of "the Core" to willingly yield up to them our blood and treasure, continuously and without interruption, for years, even decades to come. 9-11 was a cynical, spook-sponsored psychological operation designed to manipulate we Americans into doing exactly that.
But we're not the only ones being cynically psy-opsed. The entire "Core" has been targeted. To get Australians and New Zealanders on board, the Bali bombing was staged shortly after 9-11. To get even Old Europe on board, and save Aznar's servile government from the righteous wrath of the Spanish people, the Madrid bombs blew, but then politically backfired, badly. And presently, coordinated airplane downings and the horrors of Beslan are warping the minds and hearts of Russians towards war just as 9-11 warped our own, for a while anyway.
But will we of "the Core" in fact respond as they hoped? Will we give them our sons and daughters? Will we give them the hard-earned fruits of our labors? Will we allow ourselves to become unwitting participants or witting accomplices in monstrous crimes against our fellow man? Or will we resist them and deny them the means they seek to prey upon the poor and the weak of this world?
Only we, the relatively rich and privileged people of "the Core," can restrain this all-devouring beast that purports to act in our name. Only we can make it act less beastly and more human. But will we? Or are we and this awful beast now no longer distinguishable?
http://sillielizziesrock.blogspot.com/2006/04/brave-new-bad-world.html.
In an article entitled "The Bad", William Lind quotes the father of conservatism Russell Kirk, "There is no surer way of making someone your enemy than to announce you will remake him in your image for his own good."
Isn't that the truth? When I hear Muslims demanding their sharia-law inspired visions of paradise, imposed by the sword, it drives me deeper into the commitment that a war against them is all or nothing, to the death. Now, I'm no anti-war pacifist, nor do I oppose either the war on Islamic terrorism or the war in Iraq, as does Mr. Lind. However, he makes a good point. We cannot beat our enemy by resorting to the same tactics. As the old saying goes, you don't fight fire with fire, but with water.
According to Lind, that "fire" is the Washington "neo-cons" twisting of "Fourth Generation Warfare" into an imperialistic quest to remake the world in our image. Lind contends that "Hell on Earth" is the predictable result of following the neo-con policy, as described in two books by Thomas Barnett "The Pentagon’s New Map" and "Blueprint for Action". He says " What Barnett advocates is bad in two senses: first, that it won’t work, and second, that if it did work the result would be evil." In other words, aren't we guilty of doing exactly the same as our enemies? Russell Kirk is right. What good could come of it?
Lind claims that Barnett's books propose a policy that will :
"..... represent Hell, or at least Hell’s first cousin, Brave New World. He would create an inescapable new world order that bears a remarkable resemblance to the one Aldous Huxley described in his short novel Brave New World, published in the 1930s – a "soft totalitarianism" where the first rule is, "you must be happy." Happiness, in turn, is a product of endless materialism, consumerism, sensual pleasure and psychological conditioning. If that sounds like a good description of American popular culture, it is exactly that culture Barnett proposes to force down the throat of every person on earth, with the U.S. military serving as the instrument of coercion."
Lind doesn't actually say this, but I suspect he means the George Bush wing of the Republican Party and their single minded pursuit of "democracy" imposed by military means. But is that unique to the Bush administration? Heck NO! From Truman's Korea, Kennedy's Vietnam, Carter's "human rights" jihads, to Clinton's Bosnia and Sudan, the quest has been alive and well in Democrat administrations as well. Even more so. At the core of all policy is ideology, and attitude. Mr. Lind goes on to enlighten us as to what's wrong with the positions taken by Washington.
"Like the (other?) neo-cons, Barnett sees the world and its cultures in Jacobin terms, as a combination of Rousseau’s natural goodness of man and Newtonian clockwork mechanism. Just twist a few dials here, throw a couple of levers there and presto!, Switzerlands spring up from Ouagadougou to the Hindu Kush."
Exactly! This is the SAME Humanist expression of self-worship that gave the world the "hard totalitarianism" of communism, and their "Central Planning" schemes. Only now it speaks softly while dressed in a Western suit...a "soft totalitarianism" that caters to our desires, passions and comforts while the elite bask in power and wealth.
The trouble is that they're wrong... on several levels. Dangerously so. [...] The best planning is never perfectly executed, while "the Road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions". Then throw in the seven deadly sins just listed. No, neither a US led coalition nor the United Nations will bring about "paradise" and "peace on earth" any more than the communists did. It's delusional to think so. Lind is right, Hell on Earth will result.
Lind says:
"...Real Fourth Generation theory counsels caution, prudence and a clear grasp on the limits of American power in a world where the state itself is in decline."
Lind is right in asserting the limitations of fourth generation, or any warfare. But I disagree with him on this: we are NOT at the decline or end of the nation state. America will either grasp these truths, and reverse its quest, or the success of the quest itself will lead to our purge as an errant nation by other nations that recognize the threat we pose. We may find ourselves treated no differently than we are acting in checking the rise of terrorist inspired form of Islamic globalism. Perhaps we'll be forced to regroup here at home to preserve our "nation state" from the rising tide of Mexican illegal immigrants with designs on recapturing the Southwest for Mexican glory. Stranger things have happenned... the new State of Palestine for example. :-)
Anyway, I think wars will never cease because they act as a damper against unbridled human aggression. The impulse to preserve "nation states" will itself survive because it is ingrained in man's nature to organize ourselves into societies for self-preservation, organized around a common language and a common religion. Think of it as Tower of Babel syndrome. Multiculturalism is what unravels the thread that holds a nation together, and its worst enemies are those that are within. False prophets teaching pernicious doctrines.
If only our leaders would recognize these things... especially that self-preservation is the ONLY cause that justifies waging a just war -- before they lead us into the abyss.
...
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0504/0504thepentagonsnewmap.htm.
[...] Barnett's magnificent The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century argues that the moral mission of the United States is to extend the benefits of globalization to the one-third of the world that is disconnected from the global community. America's new strategy isn't to prepare for the next great clash of civilizations, as commentators like Samuel Huntington have theorized, but rather to create a more secure world by eliminating the seeds of conflict.
In Barnett's world, Earth is essentially made up of two groups. The first is the Functioning Core, nations like the U.S., Canada, much of Europe, Russia, China, Japan, India and several other nations. The second is the Non-Integrating Gap, made up of the Middle East, most of Africa, parts of Central and South America and parts of Asia. The Core is defined by economic, political and military stability while the Gap is home to poverty, authoritarian regimes and conflict. Led by the U.S., Barnett argues, it is the Core's mission to shrink the Gap and usher in a new era of relative global stability.
Not surprisingly much of the work will be the responsibility of the United States as it is the only nation powerful enough to act anywhere it chooses. Before it can be successful, however, a massive reorganization is needed. The centerpiece of this reorganization is the Pentagon, an institution Barnett says remains mired in Cold War thinking. Although it is slowly shifting its emphasis from fighting The Big One to the new asymmetrical threats of 9/11-style attacks, the transformation is far from complete. There will be future wars that the U.S. will be drawn into; conflicts were a massive Cold War style force will be of little use.
This new military -- one that would eventually see the present force split into two radically different organizations -- would then be used to provide security to Gap nations. It is only with security, Barnett argues, that globalization will be able to take root. As Gap nations are slowly added to the Core, these regions will become safer and by extension the threats to global security will diminish. The United States -- with help from other nations -- will play the role of global policeman and occasionally, when necessary, global SWAT officers.
Understandably this vision of the future will provoke accusations on both sides of the political fence that Barnett is describing nothing less than an American empire. American soldiers will be used to enforce a global capitalist order for the benefit of the West, they argue, in the same way that British redcoats once safeguarded colonial provinces. Barnett dismisses that notion as simplistic and insulting.
"America does not shrink the Gap to conquer the Gap, but to invite two billion people to join something better and safer in the Core. Empires involve enforcing maximum rule sets, where the leader tells the led not just what they cannot do but what they must do. This has never been the American way of war or peace, and does not reflect our system of governance. We enforce minimum rule sets, carefully ruling out only the most obviously destructive behavior. We push connectivity above all else, letting people choose what to do with those ties, that communication, and all those possibilities. Many in the Gap, and not just a few in the Core, will choose to opt out."
...
http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/
[edit]
{{aliases|American imperialism, [[America's interventionist foreign policy}}
