mundame
05-06-2009, 12:33 PM
I've been expecting war with Pakistan for some months.
When it comes, it will be portrayed as war IN Pakistan, not WITH it, as is our usual propaganda --- we're waging war against the evil whatevers, not the virtuous, oppressed PEOPLE of wherever the war of the moment is.
That's why we always lose, of course, the social work wars we do. Wars aren't for social work; wars are for killing and destroying till we force the enemy to do our will and then getting out. Clausewitz.
So we've been shelling and bombing in Pakistan since last fall and even have a Predator drone base inside Pakistan, as a Dem leaked (on purpose to get us used to that, I'm sure).
Today the WSJ headlines say that we want to put "trainers" in Pakistan, but for some reason (they must remember Vietnam better than we do, that's how we got in there), the Pakis are objecting --- they want their officers to come here to be trained. They also want F-16s given to them; we want to send in "repairmen" to fix their helicopter fleet.
Next up: a faked event will occur that will be portrayed as a cause of war, like the Maine boiler blowing up ("Remember the Maine!"), Tonkin Gulf (nothing happened, it was all a lie), and Saddam having WMD (sigh...).
I think that because our Army is so overstressed now that this cause-of-war event will be promoted as a need to reinstate the draft; we can't keep fighting at this level of troop strength without a draft, particularly as our "allies" keep pulling out from both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Why are we doing this?
1) We are losing in Afghanistan, which is embarrassing, as we have billions in modern machinery and computers and they just have white nightgowns and a few AK-47s. We can't win without enlarging the war, I would agree.
2) We cannot continue to dominate the world without being dominating. That's how it works with all empires: British, Rome, and now us. We want significant control, but we are declining from all these failures of the last decade. Going home and giving up isn't going to keep countries respecting and fearing us, hence the wars.
We don't know how to fight and win anymore, though, so I don't agree with war in or on Pakistan. If we could win, that would be another thing, as they are a pretty seriously obnoxious Islamist people. But we only do social work wars and lose for many long years, so I don't see the point.
Anyone else think we'll soon be at war with/in Pakistan?
When it comes, it will be portrayed as war IN Pakistan, not WITH it, as is our usual propaganda --- we're waging war against the evil whatevers, not the virtuous, oppressed PEOPLE of wherever the war of the moment is.
That's why we always lose, of course, the social work wars we do. Wars aren't for social work; wars are for killing and destroying till we force the enemy to do our will and then getting out. Clausewitz.
So we've been shelling and bombing in Pakistan since last fall and even have a Predator drone base inside Pakistan, as a Dem leaked (on purpose to get us used to that, I'm sure).
Today the WSJ headlines say that we want to put "trainers" in Pakistan, but for some reason (they must remember Vietnam better than we do, that's how we got in there), the Pakis are objecting --- they want their officers to come here to be trained. They also want F-16s given to them; we want to send in "repairmen" to fix their helicopter fleet.
Next up: a faked event will occur that will be portrayed as a cause of war, like the Maine boiler blowing up ("Remember the Maine!"), Tonkin Gulf (nothing happened, it was all a lie), and Saddam having WMD (sigh...).
I think that because our Army is so overstressed now that this cause-of-war event will be promoted as a need to reinstate the draft; we can't keep fighting at this level of troop strength without a draft, particularly as our "allies" keep pulling out from both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Why are we doing this?
1) We are losing in Afghanistan, which is embarrassing, as we have billions in modern machinery and computers and they just have white nightgowns and a few AK-47s. We can't win without enlarging the war, I would agree.
2) We cannot continue to dominate the world without being dominating. That's how it works with all empires: British, Rome, and now us. We want significant control, but we are declining from all these failures of the last decade. Going home and giving up isn't going to keep countries respecting and fearing us, hence the wars.
We don't know how to fight and win anymore, though, so I don't agree with war in or on Pakistan. If we could win, that would be another thing, as they are a pretty seriously obnoxious Islamist people. But we only do social work wars and lose for many long years, so I don't see the point.
Anyone else think we'll soon be at war with/in Pakistan?