Wars, Governance, Complexity, the Astonishing Decline of USA's Diplomacy, and More

 The ecologist, Nate Hagens, interviews Chuck Watson, an expert with decades of experience in the geopolitics of the Middle East, the USA, and Russia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMVe4nxvQ6U

AT LEAST watch the first 20 minutes or so of this penetrating piece.

In our evolutionary history, we humans have moved further and further away from the reality of Nature.  Instead of Nature, we've used social constructs to make up our own reality.  Mistakenly, it seems most humans now believe the constructs of economics, politics, formal religion, and various other ideologies have placed us in a position superior to and separate from Nature.  That's a false belief, and destructive to our habitat.

Such a view can cause, and is causing, catastrophic consequences.  For example, many governments now appear to believe planetary biophysical limits can be ignored.  As a result of such a belief, natural resources - essential to life - are being depleted or damaged or destroyed at astronomical rates.  One result of that is:  governments are going to WAR over land, water, minerals, fertile soil, natural gas deposits, oil, and the like.  

[See the last online link in the post immediately prior to this piece.  Also see:  https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2021/6/21/palestines-forgotten-oil-and-gas-resources ]

Nothing can excuse the brutal murder of civilians by Hamas; however, the context of Israel essentially strangling Gaza and the West Bank Palestinians for decades should not be ignored.  It isn't only about religion.  Immediately adjacent to Israel, sitting underneath the surface of Palestinian land are deposits of oil and natural gas.  Israel needs such for economic growth.  Like most countries, it believes in infinite economic growth on a finite planet.

Are our made-up constructs necessary?  Yes, that's a given.  But they must be implemented with care and comprehensive thinking, and if we desire to thrive as a species, they must not ignore the Laws of Nature.  In modern times, our social constructs have made our lives more and more complex.  In fact, the complexity now is so enormous it's beginning to look as though our governments are on the brink of not being able to cope with the situation.  Underneath it all is the monstrous mistake we made after our discovery and development of a bonanza - fossil energy.  Instead of thinking comprehensively and sustainably, we went on a 150-year energy binge.  We're still on it.

That binge brought about (and it's ongoing) an exponential increase in the complexity of society in general.  Complexity doesn't have to be harmful.  An ecosystem is orders of magnitude more complex than any machine ever built by humans.  What can be harmful is having the Powers-That-Be (both public and private) analyzing and dealing with complexity using only linear thinking and a reductionist method of analysis.  A nonlinear, holistic approach needs to be in the mix.  Reductionism can be useful in certain circumstances, but holism (or systems thinking) is required for successfully navigating through complexity.  Very few political Leaders of today appear to have any clue whatsoever of holistic thinking.  If they had such a clue, perhaps we wouldn't be entering an era of natural resource scarcity; and maybe there would be a lot fewer wars, especially during troubling environmental catastrophes.  Perhaps differences among us would no longer impede peaceful cooperation.

.....................................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

How Energy and Finance Have Enabled Plutocrats and Ruined Western Democracies

 https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2022/02/the-age-of-plutocracy?emci=61695df0-c598-ec11-a507-281878b83d8a&emdi=8832a6a1-c898-ec11-a507-281878b83d8a&ceid=6171896

If the link doesn't work (after copying & pasting), do a Search for the first line only up through "...plutocracy?".

It all started about fifty years ago in the early 1970's.  Up through today, it only has gotten worse--- more plutocrats and less truly participatory democracy.  A paradigm shift is needed.

The article is an extract from a book, and it's highly informative.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

The Extreme Ignorance of the Don... and the Rigged Game

Let me state again at the outset:  I don't support Clinton, either.  In fact, there isn't a single candidate running this year that I would even consider supporting... not necessarily because of the individual, but rather because the entire System is rigged.  In the present Crony Capitalist atmosphere, it doesn't really matter at all in any significant way who gets into high office.  For that to matter, first the corruption must be changed by peaceful pressure from outside the Rigged Game.  People have been trying to change it from the inside for at least about 100 years...no luck.

Donald Trump can't be a serious candidate...not with the statements he has made for months now.  I'm beginning to suspect that his only function is to guarantee the coronation of Clinton.  Following are just a few of (supposedly) the Don's beliefs... which are extremely ill-informed.

1.  He stated today or yesterday that Iran is the biggest supporter/promoter of State-sponsored terrorism in the entire world.  One only can assume that by "terrorism" he means that of ISIS and Al Qaida... you know, the ones who are Sunnis... the ones who are the sworn enemies of Iran... that same Iran that is in the Shia sect of Islam.  Apparently (& we certainly don't know this for a fact) Trump is unaware that there's a Sunni-Shia civil (or religious) war going on throughout the Muslim portion of the Middle East.  I find it quite incredible that a major candidate for national office here would be unaware of such a thing.

2.  Not long ago, he stated that Obama was the "Founder of ISIS".  He didn't explain why, but I'm fairly sure where that reasoning lies.  [By the way, I'm certainly no fan of Obama's...I think he's a Corporatist and a Perpetual War Hawk, as well as a gross violator of the Constitution.]  It is true that when Obama took office in January, 2009, he was in a big hurry to exit Iraq.  After we left that country, the U.S.-installed Shia gov't there began to oppress the Sunni residents even more...and the Muslim civil war continued, thus giving rise to ISIS (disaffected Sunnis).  Trump's reasoning, however, ignores the Americans who were 99% responsible for generating ISIS:  Dick Cheney, Dubya Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Paul Bremer, and a whole slew of behind-the-scenes NeoCon theorists.  By the time Obama first got in office, the whole thing already was a complete shambles.

3.  His statements regarding "extreme vetting" and Cold War style identification & handling of those "hostile to our values" essentially is a call to return to the McCarthyism of the 1950's.  Any major candidate calling for such a thing nowadays would have to be a total ignoramus.  That rhetoric appeals to perhaps 10-15% of the electorate...and turns off everyone else.  No serious candidate would ever make such a proposal... because instituting that policy would be completely un-American.  [Instead of "Hoo-ah", the Don's call to action is "H.U.A.C.".]  Anyone who can't see why that would be an extremely dangerous, slippery slope simply is not thinking on all cylinders.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Hey, National Politicians - One More Time

1.  Even the New York Times Editorial Board has stated (paraphrased):  the ISIS-Syria-Iraq War that Obama is waging is unconstitutional.  That's because it is...it's illegal under our system of government.  It's not even properly authorized under the War Powers Act.  You high-level DC politicians keep claiming you're all for the Rule of Law.  Talk is cheap...prove it.

2.  A retired combat veteran and Professor Emeritus of History at Boston University, Colonel Andrew Bacevich, has stated:  "America's war for the greater Middle East cannot be won.".  Using Iraq as an example, for a quarter century we've been hearing the following from three different Presidents:  "We shall prevail.".  Isn't it obvious by now--- this is nothing but Perpetual War for the benefit of a few, and we are not going to prevail.  Who benefits?  Follow the money.  You politicians are serving your primary constituency--- the Super-Rich Oligarchs, the Mega Bankers, the War contractors (facetiously referred to as Defense contractors), and a few others who profit from constant war.  This is so glaringly obvious that it's painful.  Yes, we all know:  "It's complicated."...nevertheless, it's still obvious.  You are not serving We the People.

3.  The U.S. economy is not "recovering"; neither is that of the world in general.  We still are in a Recession, and it's worsening every day; furthermore, we're only a hair's breadth away from a full-blown Depression.  Stop your lying, half-truths, and Propaganda.  We know better than to believe any of it...that's because we live in the world, not in an Ivory Tower.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Malcolm Nance Comments on the Iraq-ISIS Crisis

Who is Malcolm Nance?  He's a retired combat veteran and U.S. Counter-Terrorism Officer who was in Iraq as far back as 1987.  He's Arabic-speaking and a recognized expert on Jihadist tactics, the Iraq insurgency, and Al Qaida's worldwide structure.

He had a good deal to say about the Iraq quagmire today on DemocracyNow.org, Democracy Now!, the War and Peace Report, with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzales.  To me, his most cogent statement was this:  "Invading Iraq after 9-11 made about as much sense as if we would have invaded Mexico after Pearl Harbor...the Intelligence just wasn't there [meaning, Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11].".  Amen to that.

Going way back to the 1950s, a U.S. Government Strategy Report (can't recall the exact title) stated that one of the U.S. Government's primary strategic goals was to secure access to Mid-East oil.  As recently as a few years ago, in an interview with Henry Kissinger, he stated, "Although it's not politically correct to say so, the Iraq invasion was about the oil.".  Most people recognize that today, and yet even now, the highest levels of our Gov't still say we're there for another reason or reasons---now it's the Boogie Man, ISIS.  When the White House spokesmen or Pentagon spokesmen claim that ISIS is a threat to our National Security, what they mean is:  we can't let them control that OIL.

Our President is now in Desperation Mode relative to all the above.  Our recent "support" of the Iraqi Army started out with about 300 "trainers and advisors"; presently, that number has jumped to about 3,000.  Obama today is considering moving the number up by another 500 or so.  It seems logical that the number will continue to rise.  He knows that the public here will not stand for sending in 100,000 troops (or some such number) all at once, so he's doing it incrementally.  He knows full well that an air war and "training" the Iraqi Army will not "defeat ISIS" (which is his stated objective).  In order to secure access to that oil, he must utilize U.S. combat ground forces.  That, of course, is beyond stupid...because we would have to occupy that country forever.  ISIS always can fade back into the population and reappear whenever it wishes.  So, once again the highest levels of our Gov't have stuck their noses into another civil war for reasons they refuse to acknowledge.   And the propaganda rolls on.

Not just my opinion.  Be Well
p.s.  Keep in mind that all our military adventurism overseas is paid for by borrowing more & more money from foreign countries.  That's the only way we can afford it.

The U.S. Gov't and the Middle East

Again, below is an email I sent to a "Conservative" (nowadays that means Neoconservative, a horse of a different color) friend of mine.

HERE IS THE CRUX OF THE PROBLEM RE: the U.S. Gov't and the Middle East---

From the article you sent, toward the end of it:

"But only a fool would believe weapons of mass destruction were the only reason for the war. The U.S.-led invasion, or liberation, was in fact part of a vision to remake the Middle East..."

Show me ANY portion of the Constitution (the Supreme Law of the Land) which delegates authority from We the People to the Fed Gov't to undertake any such task anywhere in the world.  Seriously.

That quote has the footprint of an unelected Oligarchy all over it.  Who appointed the U.S. Gov't to "remake the Middle East"?  No country has the legitimate right to remake any region.

Think about that; I don't see how any person could disagree, especially one who considers himself a Conservative.

The very concept of remaking a region such as the Middle East fits right in with Bush's apparent belief in some sort of Divine Right to "spread democracy" by force.  I'm sorry, but that's totally un-American.  It's blatant hegemony.  We have no such Right.  No government does.  Our motto should be Zero Aggression; self-defense only.

Be Well