Saturday, July 20, 2013

PART ONE : 911 ATTACKS COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED






Part One : 911 ATTACKS COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED


Both the attacks on 9/11 and Pearl Harbor could have been prevented if the US government was more interested in the well being of the average American instead of

being more interested in satisfying corporate interests and the warfare complex which in turn

fueled the US government's budget busting militant interventionism both in the Middle East (during the 1990s) and the Far East ( during the 1930s) and

the budget busting militant interventionism ( mostly through the use of heavy weaponry (example: missiles and drones) and the maintenance of a worldwide military base ) continues to this day.

For details regarding the complete disregard by the US government in not learning from 300 years of hindsight due to the adverse influence from corporate interests, 


the details/discussion of  the above topic is in the second half of this page, thanks for your patience.




IF YOU HAVE ALREADY READ THE FOLLOWING, PLEASE SCROLL TO THE SECOND HALF OF THIS PAGE:



PLEASE DO READ PART SEVEN OF THIS SEVEN PART BLOG THAT WILL DISCUSS


A NEW AND MUCH BETTER FORM  OF GOVERNMENT CALLED 


an " INTELLECTOCRACY " under which it would have been impossible for a person like Hitler or a group like Hamas to be elected since democracy  emphasizes, appeals to and encourages the most irrational fears of the electorate.


Joseph Goebbels, Reich Minister of Propaganda in  Nazi Germany, knew that in a democratic election " arguments must therefore be crude, clear and forcible, and appeal to emotions and instincts, not the intellect.....Propaganda works best when those who are being manipulated are confident they are acting on their own free will " (end of quote ). 


Hitler knew how easily a democracy can be hijacked ( watch at the 15:50 timeline in the documentary video below ):






OVERVIEW OF THE SEVEN PART BLOG:


Throughout this blog, ask yourself this question : 

Did the christian children of Nagasaki ( Nagasaki was the center of Japanese Christianity ), did those children feel the same pain ( being burned alive ) as the tragic victims on 9/11/01 experienced in New York ?

Notice in the following video (below) at the 24:05 timeline that President Truman was smiling when talking about the atom bombs dropped on Japanese cities and why is he smiling ?

 even though Truman was warned after the first atom bomb test, not to drop the atom bomb within 150 miles of a human being.

If you tried watching the video ( below ) in order to see Truman smiling and

 you see the video labeled as "private", its because the person posting the video on youtube decided to take it out of public viewing due to possibly the public outrage in the comments section. 

Terrorists and Truman have one thing in common when they smile : 

political strategy is the most important thing and if they are able to achieve it, nothing else matters,

 not human lives,

 not the innocent being burned alive because

all terrorists see war in terms of damage caused to the enemy and not in terms of innocent lives lost, not even 

if those lives are nuns and christian children who were burned alive in the center of Japanese christianity, which was Nagasaki.





 Below is another video of Truman smiling ( hope the youtube poster did not label it as "private" )





Let us assume you have watched people fight over the years and what you learned is ":violence begets violence ".

So today, if the neighbor nearest to you is fighting with his neighbor, would you supply weapons to your neighbor in order to help him or

 would you try to be a Peacemaker between your neighbor and his neighbor ? so likewise, 

before the US government ever adopted its first militant interventionist  policy towards the Middle East, was anybody in the government ever thinking about the 300 years of the "violence begets violence " hindsight gathered from

 the 300 years of the cycle of violence between the British/US governments and the Native Americans ? or 

as highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Butler in his book titled "War Is A Racket",  stated (paraphrasing here ) :


  the US government is blind to the consequences of a militant interventionist policy but only looks at the profit agenda of the warfare complex and any adverse consequences of  looking after the interests of the warfare complex is looked upon as the "cost of doing business".

 Richard Clarke ( former National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection and Counter-terrorism for the United States. ) inadvertently slipped up in the following video, when he used the phrase "cost of doing business" at the 39:50 timeline in the video below titled " The Man Who Knew" :

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/remembering-911-three-docs-to-watch/



President Bush on 9/11/01 stated that "Americans saw evil" but as Americans saw evil, the warfare complex only saw the attacks on 9/11/01 in terms of  "dollar signs", as the American public did not question the almost 6 trillion dollars spent on the so-called "war on terror" when only a few million dollars could have been intelligently used to capture Osama Bin Laden.

Remember, just one trillion is  five hundred thousand million dollars added to another five hundred thousand million dollars.


There is nothing noble about war (details below)  according to highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler in his book titled "War Is A Racket". 


The government has knowledge of the following 10 points below and yet the government is not interested in being a Peacemaker but rather finds ways and means to support the government's political and financial supporters in the warfare complex :

(1) Pro-war governments know that every war produces millions of refugees since war is so imprecise and so horrific, innocent civilians flee in terror, so there is nothing noble about war because if war was truly noble, people would not be fleeing but staying and rejoicing in its nobility. 

(2) 300 years of the cycle of violence between the British/US governments and the Native Americans should have taught the US government that war is never the answer.

300 years of hindsight should have taught the US government that "violence begets violence".


Why the US government does not learn from the "violence begets violence" hindsight is described in the book titled, " War Is A Racket", written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler.

According to highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Butler in his book titled "War Is A Racket", the profit motive and corporate interests is more overwhelming than wanting to save the lives of our soldiers.


(3) the US government knows it takes years or even decades before a conflict becomes a war so there is time to make peace.


(4) Pro-war governments know that in every war, "friendly fire" does exist due to the imprecise nature of war and

 the opposite side of that "coin " is  the immense collateral damage which results in too many innocent people dying horrifying deaths or being maimed, disfigured, deformed, paralyzed or blind for life or

too many people getting diseases or cancer due to the highly unsanitary conditions and pollution created in war zones.


(5) Pro-war governments know that in every war, the weaker enemy does not have the superior weaponry or shielding of the stronger force and so the weaker enemy would hide in civilian areas and yet pro-war governments have no problem going to war and  hitting targets with civilians in them but at the same time,

pro-war governments know that if their own children or loved ones are held hostage or as "human shields" by the enemy, pro-war politicians would be "tripping over each other" to make peace with the enemy, so the US government knows there are always non-militant alternatives compared to profit driven violence.


(6) Ever since  the Civil War, the US government knows the emotional and psychological trauma that soldiers go through due to seeing innocent people and their own buddies being blown to pieces or laying on the ground with half their heads blown away.

Most of the patients in mental hospitals after the Civil War were veterans.

Today, hundreds of thousands of veterans are either suffering from PTSD, depression or drug addiction resulting in divorce, homelessness and even suicide.

Over 8000 veterans commit suicide every year; one tragic suicide almost every hour and on average, 22 tragic suicides daily.


(7)  America's problems with defense contractors dates back to the Revolutionary War when George Washington himself blasted defense contractors for supplying defective arms and bullets to the Continental Army.

The US government knows that the best time to steal money or overspend hard earned tax dollars is during a conflict or war when

 the public are more afraid of the enemy than concerned about overspending or looting by the warfare complex and more recently, 

the Pentagon has not passed a financial audit since the Defense Department was created in 1949 and

since 1995 when audits were mandated, at least 8.5 trillion dollars spent by the Pentagon is either missing, wasted or stolen.


(8) Italian political theorist Niccolò Machiavelli states that " War against an external foe is a most excellent means of distracting people from grievances (problems) at home" (end of quote )

 meaning,

for example, even though over a million Americans die from cancer alone, every two years, the government only funds $1 of every $6 of NIH  peer reviewed medical research funding request and why ?


because the government does not have the resources for medical research since

 the government spends between $1.1 and $1.4 trillion every year  (base DOD budget plus other national security programs plus the interest on the debt from past unnecessary wars ) on  maintaining a unnecessary, profit driven world wide militant enterprise system which results in

 sucking as much taxes as possible from hardworking Americans who are too afraid to question the government's corporate welfare to the warfare complex due to the exaggerated fear of the enemy created by puppet politicians of the warfare complex.


(9) Pro-war governments know exactly what they are doing when they drop leaflets on an enemy city, asking the civilians to leave because it gives the impression that pro-war governments care about the civilians in an enemy city.

The pretense of caring about citizens can be seen in all pro-war governments but in reality

 they do not care about civilians who are either

 too poor,

 too sick, 

too elderly or

  too handicapped to leave a city and

 those poor citizens who are unable to leave are burned alive in a terror bomb attack

 ( example : the terror bomb attack on the center of Japanese christianity which was Nagasaki in which nuns and christian children and babies were burned alive ).


(10) The government knows that atrocities are committed by both sides in every war since

 the very nature of war makes humans into being less than human as the basest instincts take over the mind due to the very inhumanity of war 

(example : the US government purposely targeted Japanese transport ships knowing that tens of thousands of American POWs were within those ships, resulting in tens of thousands of Americans dying horrifying deaths, being drowned alive ).

Historian Niall Ferguson states that terrorism increases, the longer the war takes as soldiers increasingly become more brutal on the enemy in a seemingly endless cycle of violence.


People are  right when talking about hindsight that is, if the US government did not learn from 300 years of hindsight.

300 years of the cycle of violence between the British/US governments and the Native Americans should have taught the US government that war is never the answer.

300 years of hindsight should have taught the US government that "violence begets violence".


Why the US government does not learn from the "violence begets violence" hindsight is described in the book titled, " War Is A Racket", written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler.

According to highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Butler in his book titled "War Is A Racket", the profit motive and corporate interests is more overwhelming than wanting to save the lives of our soldiers, 

as pro-war politicians send our vulnerable soldiers deliberately into harm's way, resulting in over 8000 veterans committing suicide every year; one tragic suicide almost every hour and on average, 22 tragic suicides daily.


While our veterans are committing suicide by the thousands every year, the favorite phrase of defense contractors is "peace through strength" but

defense contractors and their puppet politicians will never tell you that strength has never brought peace but rather 


war after endless wars due to "violence begets violence". 

We know for a fact that if the loved ones of pro-war politicians are held hostage by the enemy, there would not exist any war since

 the pro-war politicians will be "tripping over one another" to make peace with the enemy, in other words, whatever it takes to save the lives of their loved ones, but sadly,


since the loved ones of pro-war politicians are not held hostage by the enemy, we see the tragic consequence of the history of warfare where the profit motive takes over as described in the book titled "War Is A Racket" written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler and saving lives is a secondary priority among pro-war politicians.


You might believe that the US government only does good and you might be right if the "good" the US government does is in line with corporate interests, meaning, 

if the corporations want you to have clean water and clean food then you will have clean water and clean food but it all boils down to corporate interests as the main priority of pro-war politicians.

But when corporate interests dictate that your water should be allowed to have mercury due to coal and oil fired plants and that you are not able to eat fish poisoned by mercury, the good the US government does is by advising you to limit your fish consumption but

 the government will not switch to clean energy due to corporate interests which is right now very much against a clean environment even though its economical to be a clean energy economy that creates millions of permanent clean energy jobs (details in part seven of this seven part blog ).


Now, back to the pro-war faction of the government that will inevitably lead to the bankruptcy of our government.


The reason that American history is full of blowback and the resulting tragedy that results in civilians dying is because 

the US government is either not able to or does not want to see that "violence begets violence" due to 

the US government being blinded by the profit motive described in the book titled "War Is A Racket" written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler and


 the most recent result of blowback were the attacks on 9/11/01.

300 years of hindsight ( learned from the cycle of violence between the British/US government and the Native Americans ) should have taught the US government not to use militant interventionist policies due to the profit motive as described by General Butler above.

For example in Asia, the US government's profit driven militant interventionism against Japan (details below ) resulted in the removal of Japan as a regional power which in turn created the dangerous conditions under which nearly a 100 million civilians died under communism and nationalism.

Truman was advised to not drop the atom bomb within 150 miles of a human being, so Truman knew that nuns, little kids, babies, the poor, the handicapped, the blind, the paralyzed and the elderly lived within 150 miles of the bomb and yet ( against the objections of numerous scientists ) atom bombs were dropped on both Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

If you believe its ok to drop an atomic bomb right above a church in Nagasaki ( Nagasaki was the center of Japanese christianity ) burning alive the nuns in the church and thousands of christian children nearby and

if you believe that its ok to drop an atom bomb, resulting in tens of thousands little kids and babies being burned alive ( not counting the tens of thousands of little kids and babies  burned alive with incendiary bombs in scores of Japanese cities ), 

because the Emperor wanted to only conditionally surrender since he did not want his homeland occupied by the US government, then

 you also must believe that if a relative of yours does an atrocious act and does not want to surrender his home to the authorities, the victim's family has the right to burn alive your entire family for the evil done by your relative.


Throughout this seven part blog, you will see that pro-war politicians will try to convince you that it is ok to sacrifice the lives of the innocent ( example: burning alive tens of thousands of little kids in Japan ) for the greater good and


 according to the book titled "War Is A Racket", written by  highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler, the so-called "greater good" is all about corporate interests and the profit motive behind every war or conflict.

The US government spends about $30 million a year on researching food poisoning, even though 3000 Americans die every year from food poisoning but at the same time,

 the US government (due to the undue influence from the profit minded  warfare complex on their puppet politicians in Congress ), the US government is willing to spend trillions on the so-called "war on terror" since 2001 even though 

the total number of American civilians who died in the "war on terror" in the past 14 years is less than 4000 ( average of about 285 American civilians per year ).


Also, throughout this seven part blog, you will realize that the US government should never have  a militant interventionist policy in the world which almost always results in blowback  (example: in Asia, nearly a 100 million civilians died under communism and nationalism due to the US government's militant interventionist policies  which directly resulted in extremism thriving ).


Keep reminding yourself throughout this seven part blog, the following:



Over 8000 veterans commit suicide every year on average ( almost one tragic suicide every hour and on average 22 tragic suicides daily )

because war is about our vulnerable soldiers seeing the immense suffering of the innocent,

seeing the innocent being maimed or

deformed or

blinded or

disfigured or

paralyzed and being fed through a tube for life,


due to collateral damage,


seeing the horror of war, our vulnerable soldiers end up devastating their families by committing suicide by the thousands,

while the Swiss live in peace without enemies due to the Swiss non-militant interventionist policies.

Pro-war politicians are willing to collaterally kill as many innocent people as it takes for the so-called "greater good" which is detailed in the book written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler .

The title of the book is "War Is A Racket" in which General Butler says war is all about profits, which to the defense contractors is the so-called "greater good".


As stated by  Italian political theorist Niccolò Machiavelli : " War against an external foe is a most excellent means of distracting people from grievances at home" (end of quote ) 

and at the same time,


US defense contractors and their puppet politicians constantly exaggerate the threat of the enemy, so that

the American public are too afraid to notice

hundreds of billions being borrowed every year from places like China which will inevitably lead to financial disaster for America.


US Generals do not object because

they have perks like the use of 234 US military golf courses around the world,

US armed forces ski center in the Bavarian Alps and

71 luxury Lear jets to whisk them around the world and

when Generals retire, they are rewarded for their silence by

being given seats on the executive boards of defense sector companies.


US defense contractors get a big slice of the 1.1-1.4 trillion dollars spent on so-called defense every year (base DOD budget plus other national security programs plus the interest on the debt from past unnecessary wars ).

The US government spends more on defense than all the world's defense budgets put together.

By borrowing hundreds of billions a year in order to maintain the US government's worldwide military empire, the inevitable bankruptcy of the US government will happen when

the annual interest on the national debt exceeds a trillion dollars a year .

WHEN THE INEVITABLE BANKRUPTCY HAPPENS,

the best we can hope for is the Union remains intact and powers go back to the states as it was before the Civil War while

there will be drastic cuts in essential government services like food/water/environmental safety and

tens of millions of Americans will have their net worth drastically reduced due to the US government defaulting on its US bond debt obligations.


To prevent the bankruptcy of our government, the financial disaster to US bond holding Americans, drastic cuts in essential government services like food/water/environmental safety and

for a comprehensive peace agreement with the muslim world that defense contractors will not be happy with and

that is different from the peace agreement made between President Reagan and the Islamists in Soviet Afghanistan,

read all seven parts of this blog.

The blog will also show that war results in terrorism and here is one of numerous examples :

The U.S. Staff Sgt. Robert Bales  who murdered 16 Afghan villagers in 2012 says he had lost compassion for Iraqis and Afghans over the course of his four combat deployments.

"My mind was consumed by war," Bales wrote late last year.


"I planted war and hate for the better part of 10 years and harvested violence," he added.

Out of war emerge mass murderers like Hitler who was the product of WW1 ( details below ).


Also, war is about sacrificing the lives of the innocent,

the destitute,

 the poor,

the sick, 

 the hungry,

 the elderly, 

 the handicapped, 

 the children and

 the babies through 

 collateral damage for the so-called "greater good" which always involves 

not national security but rather 

financial security for the owners of the warfare complex who "laugh all the way to the bank" as stated by

 highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler in his book titled " War Is a Racket" and

 while the puppet politicians of the warfare complex send the poor and powerless deliberately into harm's way.



FOR NON-MILITANT INTERVENTIONIST POLICIES AS A MUCH BETTER ALTERNATIVE TO PROFIT DRIVEN WARS OR CONFLICTS, READ ALL SEVEN PARTS OF THE BLOG .


The reason our economy is struggling is because up to 1400 billion is being sucked away every year from the economy and given to those who do not create economically profitable ventures but rather create


 more corporate welfare as they "laugh all the way to the bank" while trying to convince you that you need the "insurance" against the "boogeyman" . 

 This "boogeyman" scare enables government supporters in the corporate welfare system to get away with not accounting for 8.5 trillion dollars of hard earned taxpayers money that has either been wasted, stolen or missing.

 Do we really need to spend up to 1.4 trillion every year ( hundreds of billions of which are being borrowed from places like China) as insurance against this "boogeyman" ?

Read all Seven Parts of this Seven Part Blog and you will realize that  100 billion a year is more than enough to insure against the "boogeyman".

Remember, 100% of your income taxes and almost half of US government revenues is going towards insuring against the "boogeyman" which means,

 maintaining the US government's world wide military empire that cannot be sustained.

 National security spending consists of the base DOD budget plus


 nuclear weapons research, maintenance, cleanup, and production, which is in the Department of Energy budget, plus Veterans Affairs, plus the Treasury Department's payments in pensions to military retirees and widows and their families, plus State Department financing of foreign arms sales and militarily-related development assistance, plus the national security budget within the Department of Homeland Security, plus counter-terrorism spending by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, plus intelligence-gathering spending by NASA plus interest on the debt due to past unnecessary wars.


 In 2012 the government took in about 2.45 trillion in revenues ( while the lowest estimate for national security spending was 1.1 trillion (about 45% of revenues ).


IF THE US GOVERNMENT DOES NOT GIVE UP ITS WORLD WIDE MILITARY EMPIRE,
  

 the inevitable bankruptcy of the US government will come a lot sooner when the interest payment on the national debt exceeds a trillion dollars a year since 

 the present spending on the US government's military empire is as much as 1400 billion a year (base DOD budget plus other national security programs plus interest on the debt due to past unnecessary wars).

 Remember, the US government's national security budget takes up  100% of your income taxes and as much as 50% of  revenues taken in by the government and that cannot be sustained.


WHEN THE INEVITABLE BANKRUPTCY HAPPENS,

 the best we can hope for is the Union remains intact and powers go back to the states as it was before the Civil War while

 tens of millions of Americans will have their net worth drastically reduced due to the US government defaulting on its US bond debt obligations

and for the average American,  there will be drastic cuts in essential government services like food/water/environmental/infrastructure safety.

 If the US government gives up its world wide military empire, we would save hundreds of billions a year in giving up the US government's military overseas which would result in

 the world going back to the "Napoleonic Era" when countries paid for their own defense instead of relying on the US government to pay for their defense and

 in paying for their own defense, they were able to defeat Napoleon with no help from the US government.

Below is one of numerous examples that the puppet politicians of the profit agenda of the  warfare complex pose a very grave danger to the well-being of people around the world and 

the well-being of the poor and powerless in America who are sent deliberately into harm's way, not for national security but rather the financial security of the owners of the warfare complex:



 The US government did not learn the lesson of 300 years of violence begetting violence between the British/US governments and the Native Americans and because of not wanting to learn that violence begets violence ( due to the underlying profit motive behind every act of war according to highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler) the US government got militantly involved in WW1 which in turn beget WW2.

300 years of the cycle of violence (violence begetting violence) between the British/US Governments and the Native Americans should have taught the US government to be a Peacemaker between the British and the German government during WW1 instead of 

the US government supporting the blockade of Germany that was starving the Germans and instead of the US government supplying weapons to the allies that were contributing to the deaths of Germans and that is how the German government declared US shipping as hostile to Germany.


Hindsight from 1776 ( details below ) should have taught the  US government not to get involved in WW1 but instead of learning from hindsight,

the US government created the dangerous conditions under which Nazism and Communism flourished in Europe after WW1 that eventually led to WW2 and the holocaust (details below).

The US government did the equivalent of letting two killers loose ( Hitler and Stalin) and then blamed the killers for the subsequent killings without taking any responsibility for letting those killers loose in the first place ( details below ).

300 years of "violence begetting violence" hindsight should have taught the US government not to have a militant interventionist policy during WW1, the violence of which beget WW2 and the holocaust. ( details below ).

Starting in 1914, the British attempted to starve the German people by blockading Germany. ( An academic study done in 1928 put the starvation death toll at 424,000 ).

 President Wilson rejected the German arguments that the British blockade was illegal, and was a cruel and deadly attack on innocent civilians.


Later during WW1, the British ran out of money  and had to rely on the US government to finish WW1 and 

in finishing WW1,

the US government did not heed to the "violence begets violence" hindsight gained from 300 years of the cycle of violence between the British/US governments and the Native Americans.


Why the US government does not learn from 300 years of hindsight is detailed below.


Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan advised President Wilson that " (U.S.) ships carrying contraband (weapons) should be prohibited from carrying passengers ... [I]t would be like putting women and children in front of an army" (end of quote ).

US Secretary of State Bryan later resigned because he felt the Wilson administration was being biased in ignoring British contraventions of international law, and that President Wilson was leading the USA into the war.


While leading the US into war, President Wilson demanded that German submarines not sink ships ( with weapons shipment on board ) until the ships had been boarded and searched, even though any surfacing submarines were at a great risk of being easily sunk by an armed ship.


According to historian Thomas Fleming, in his book "The Illusion of Victory: America in World War I" Fleming states :

  "Without the backing of American weaponry, munitions and loans, the Allies would have been forced to abandon their goal of the knockout blow.

 The war might have ended in 1915 or 1916 with a negotiated peace based on the mutual admission that the conflict had become a stalemate" (end of quote).


Historian Niall Ferguson goes further to state that Germany would have won WW1 if Britain had not entered the war :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT81WwCix4M


In other words,  the Treaty of Versailles would not have existed if Germany had won and 

the only way Germany could have won is if the US government did not have a militant policy during WW1, that resulted in 

the US government arming the allies which made Germany an enemy when

 the US government refused to stop arming the allies which was contributing to the deaths of Germans and

President Wilson rejected the German government's appeal that the British blockade was a cruel and deadly attack in starving the German civilians.



During WW1, through the treaty of Brest-Litovsk, Germany was keeping Russia from becoming a world communist power but

 the defeat of Germany at the hands of the US government enabled Russia to break the treaty and then

 Russia went onto become a world communist power resulting in tens of millions dying under communism. 


In other words, WW1 (which the US government helped to finish ), 

WW1 beget

 WW2, the Zionist-Palestinian conflict, communist expansion and

 WW2 beget the Cold War and

 behind all the above wars and conflicts was the militant interventionist policies of the US government that beget war after war (except for WW1 ) and conflict after conflict (except for WW1) including the recent "war on terrorism".




The US government was very much involved in WW1 from the very beginning, starting with 

American banks wanting to profit from the war by loaning money to the Allies  when the US government already knew from their 1776 hindsight that violence begets more violence

 ( example: 300 years of the cycle of violence between the British/US governments and Native Americans from 1622 through 1911   ).


300 years of violence begetting violence.


General Butler (below) explains why the US government does not learn from 300 years of hindsight.

Highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler states in his book titled " War is a Racket", that WW1 was all about the profit agenda of the warfare complex and their puppet politicians in the US government.

Pro-war politicians who are puppets of the warfare complex deliberately send our soldiers into harm's way resulting in over 8000 veterans committing suicide every year (  one tragic suicide almost every hour and on average, 22 tragic suicides daily ).



Instead of making the profit agenda of the rich and powerful as their priority, hindsight should have taught the US government that a militant interventionist policy is not the answer to solving problems.

 Militant interventionist policies by the British resulted in hundreds of years of  terrorism from Native Americans and drawing from that experience (hindsight),

 the US government should not have had a  militant interventionist policy during WW1 which resulted in 

the destruction of the Ottoman Empire and the subsequent Zionist-Palestinian conflict,

communists extending their power to become a world power and

WW2 and the terrorism from Hitler since Hitler blamed the Jews for the defeat of Germany during WW1.


 "The core of Hitler's hatred of the Jews lies at the defeat of Germany in WW1," said historian and journalist Dr Joachim Riecker, "where Hitler blamed the Jews for the defeat of Germany, the collapse of the monarchy and the ruination of millions".

 In the book titled 'November 9: How World War One Led to the Holocaust', the historian Dr Joachim Riecker examines the speeches both public and private of Hitler to try to solve the riddle of how a dictator could morph into the industrial-scale murderer of an entire people.



The entire discussion below will show that the violence of war is not the answer to the profit driven motives of the short sighted, militant US government because

 war begets war and in the case of the US government winning WW1, the consequence of that victory in turn beget WW2 and the resulting tragedy of the holocaust.


 For non-interventionist policies as a much better alternative to a profit driven war, read the end of this post for the link to non-interventionist policies.


 According to a comrade, Hans Mend, Hitler was in depression during WW1 and would leap up, and running about excitedly, say that "in spite of our big guns, victory would be denied us, for the invisible foes (Jews) of the German people were a greater danger than the biggest cannon of the enemy" (end of quote ).


 WW1 put Hitler in the hospital due to a bomb shrapnel and Hitler recalled in 1941 how WW1 made him enter politics as he wrote ""I brought back home with me my experiences at the (WW1) front; out of them I built my National Socialist community."


After hearing about Germany's defeat in WW1 at the hands of the US government  and the subsequent Treaty of Versailles,  Hitler said, 

"When I was confined to bed, the idea came to me that I would liberate Germany, that I would make it great. I knew immediately that it would be realized" (end of quote ).


Hitler gained popularity for his rowdy polemic speeches against the Treaty of Versailles.


In a speech to the Reichstag on 17 May 1933, Adolf Hitler denounced the Treaty of Versailles because, in part, it had imposed such large reparations payments as to leave Germany in economic shambles. 


Hitler entered politics in order to exploit the cruel attributes of the Treaty of Versailles to his advantage while, Hitler blamed the Jews for Germany's defeat during WW1.

The holocaust happened due to WW2 and 

 WW2 happened due to Britain declaring war on Germany and 

 the declaration of war on Germany was due to Germany's invasion of Poland and

Germany's invasion of Poland was due to Hitler wanting to prevent the persecution of German Poles at the hands of the Poles.

 Hitler warned the allies that if another war was declared on Germany, the Jews would pay (since Hitler blamed the Jews for Germany's defeat during WW1 )

and that is how the holocaust happened due to Britain declaring war on Germany and 

if Britain had not declared war on Germany there would not have been a holocaust and 

 Hitler would have continued with The Haavara Agreement that was designed to help facilitate the emigration of German Jews to Palestine.


How did the US government defeat Germany during WW1 ?

Since Britain ran out of money, 

 the U.S. government extended cash and supplies to its European allies, expending more than $7 billion in US government funds,
 way before the entry of the US government into WW1 while

supporting the blockade of Germany by the Allies that was starving the German people.


 Before the US government appeared on the scene, the Allies were in a stalemate (trench warfare ) with Germany even though

 the US government was supplying military equipment to the Allies and Germany was fighting a two front war with Russia and the Allies and 

even then,

 Germany was  still able to defeat Russia during WW1 which resulted in the treaty of Brest-Litovsk and

 the Treaty had the effect of preventing communism from becoming a world power until

 the US government made the Treaty void, enabling Russia to become a world communist power.


Historian Niall Ferguson in the youtube video interview below states that we would not have heard about Hitler if Germany had won WW1:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT81WwCix4M



We would not have heard about Hitler if the US government did not have a militant interventionist policy during WW1 which resulted in

 Germany losing to the US government's million man military and 

the subsequent Treaty of Versailles which created the dangerous conditions under which Hitler rose to power.


Should the US government be held responsible for Hitler's rise to power ?

Would you blame the person for letting a tiger out of its cage, so similarly,

the US government helped Hitler and Stalin by creating the dangerous conditions for Nazism and Communism to flourish as the result of 

 the US government's one million man personnel defeating Germany during WW1.


If Germany had won WW1, the following would have happened:

(1) Germany restraining Russia (through the treaty of Brest-Litovsk) from becoming a world communist power.

(2) Hitler stating his injuries that landed him in hospital during WW1 was worth it.

 (3) No Treaty of Versailles.

  (4) Hitler not hating the Treaty of Versailles because the Treaty would not have existed.

 (5) Hitler not hating his own government because he would have thought of his government as honorable for winning WW1.

 (6) Hitler not hating the Jews for Germany losing WW1 if Germany had actually won WW1.

 In other words, if Germany was triumphant after WW1, Hitler would not have had the motivation to enter politics and

 even if Hitler did enter politics in the midst of a triumphant Germany, 

winning WW1 would have put Germany in a much better political position to deal with Hitler while

 Hitler who tried to overthrow the German government for losing WW1 would not have had the motivation to overthrow the German government if

 the German government had actually won WW1.

At the same time, even if Hitler did gain power in a triumphant Germany that won WW1, Hitler would have continued the policies of previous governments in Europe in treating Jews as second class citizens and

 no holocaust or the expulsion of Jews would have happened.


SO THE ONLY CONCLUSION ONE CAN DRAW IS:

 The US government did not learn from 300 years of hindsight gathered from the cycle of violence between the British/US government and the Native Americans and in not learning from hindsight, due to the profit motive, 

 the US government's short sighted, profit driven militant interventionist policies during WW1 created the dangerous conditions under which

 Nazism and Communism flourished in Europe after WW1 that eventually led to WW2 and the holocaust.

In the book titled "War Is A Racket", written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler, we can come to the conclusion that the reason the US government does not learn from the "violence begets violence" hindsight is due to the profit motive that is behind every war.

For example, the US government knew that violence begets violence ( due to hindsight gathered from the 300 years of the cycle of violence between the British/US governments and the Native Americans ) 

 and yet due to the profit motive, 

the US government was not interested in a conditional surrender of Japan during WW2 but rather

 more interested in  removing Japan as a regional power  which in turn created 

dangerous conditions under which almost a hundred million civilians died in China, Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia under Communism and Nationalism.


Also, at various times in the past, the power hungry and profit motivated US government supplied military equipment to right-wing dictators who murdered dissidents (here is a partial list ): 


General Maximilio Hernández- 1932 of El Salvador, 

Saddam Hussein during the 80s,

 General Sani Abacha of Nigeria,

 Idi Amin of Uganda,

 Colonel Hugo Banzer of Bolivia, 

Fulgencio Batista of Cuba, 

Sir Hassanal Bolkiah of Brunei,

 P.W. Botha of South Africa, 

General Humberto Branco of Brazil, 

Raoul Cedras of Haiti, 

Vinicio Cerezo of Guatemala, 

Chiang Kai-Shek of Taiwan, 

Roberto Suazo Cordova of Honduras,

 Alfredo Christiani of El Salvador,

 Ngo Dihn Diem of Vietnam,

 General Samuel Doe of Liberia, 

Francois Duvalier of Haiti, 

Jean Claude Duvalier of Haiti, 

King Fahd Bin Abdul-Aziz of Saudi Arabia, 

General Francisco Franco of Spain, 

Hassan II of Morocco,

 Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines,

 General Maximiliano Hernandez Martinez of El Salvador,

 Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire, 

General Manuel Noriega of Panama,

 Turgut Ozal of Turkey, 

Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi of Iran, 

George Papadopoulos of Greece, 

Park Chung Hee of South Korea, 

General Augusto Pinochet of Chile, 

General Sitiveni Rabuka of Fiji, 

General Efrain Rios Montt of Guatemala, 

Halie Salassie of Ethiopia,

 Antonio De Oliveira Salazar of Portugal,

 Anastasio Somoza Jr. of Nicaragua,

 Anastasio Somoza Sr. of Nicaragua, 

Ian Smith of Rhodesia,

 Alfredo Stroessner of Paraguay, 

General Suharto of Indonesia,

 Rafael Leonidas Trujillo of Dominican Republic, 

General Jorge Rafael Videla of Argentina, 

Mohammed Zia Ul-Haq of Pakistan.


Ever since the US government decided to cruelly expand from the original 13 United States, the world has suffered.


The US government at one time believed that one way to make a profit was to enslave others (example: Africans ) or

take lands from others ( example: Native American lands ) or 

cruelly occupy far away lands ( example : the extreme cruelty visited upon the Filipinos ) and in more recent times,

 the US government required unconditional surrender and required the occupation of Japan and if that could not be obtained,

 the US government was willing to use as many atomic and incendiary bombs as possible, resulting in hundreds of thousands of little kids being burned alive, even though:

(1) In the past,  Japan never once interfered with the US government's extremely cruel occupation of the Philippines plus 

the Japanese government never once encouraged world powers to stop the US government from cruelly expanding from the original 13 United States throughout North America, the Caribbean and the Pacific.


(2) At the start of the Japanese-Chinese conflict, the US government was not willing to be a Peacemaker between the two parties in conflict.

(3) the US government was the one who started the conflict with Japan when the US government contributed to the shedding of Japanese blood in the late 1930s by supplying weapons to the Chinese military in the Chinese-Japanese conflict.

(4) Japanese expansion beyond China/Korea was in direct response to the shedding of Japanese blood by the allied military supplies to the Chinese during the late 1930s, so

 the Japanese government wanted to expand into Indo-China and beyond in order to cut off allied military supplies to the Chinese and to obtain vital resources due to  embargoes imposed by the allies.

(5) Japan recognized the US government coveting Hawaii as a state of the US and not as a colonial possession and so Japan had no intention of occupying Hawaii,  unlike the US government that wanted to occupy Japan.


(6) Western colonial possessions ( in South East Asia ) were coveted by the Japanese government in order to serve as bargaining chips in a future negotiated peace deal with the Allies.

(7) the US government could have settled for a cease fire since the Japanese government was already defeated as early as 1942 when the Japanese government was not able to take back territory lost to the US.

Since the US government was not interested in a cease fire but only interested in an  unconditional surrender and the occupation of Japan, the Japanese government felt compelled to keep fighting to prevent the occupation of their homeland.


(8)  removing Japan as a regional power  created  the dangerous conditions under which almost a hundred million civilians died in China, Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia under communism and nationalism.


(9) the Emperor was the one who authorized Japanese imperialism and after the end of WW2, the US government did not indict the Emperor for authorizing Japanese imperialism 

but at the same time, 

the US government was willing to burn alive hundreds of thousands of little kids during the war, for the wrongs done by the Emperor and his staff.





FOR NON-MILITANT INTERVENTIONIST POLICIES AS A MUCH BETTER ALTERNATIVE TO PROFIT DRIVEN WARS OR CONFLICT,

 READ PART SIX OF THE BLOG .



The Pentagon will try to convince you that national security is their priority and the financial security of  defense contractors is not but the evidence proves otherwise.

The Pentagon has not passed a financial audit since the Defense Department was created in 1949 and

since 1995 when audits were mandated, at least 8.5 trillion dollars spent by the Pentagon is either missing, wasted or stolen because

according to highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler, in his book titled "War is a Racket", General Butler describes all wars and conflicts as


 corporate welfare to the warfare complex.



CONTRARY TO WHAT THE PENTAGON AND THE PUPPET POLITICIANS OF THE WARFARE COMPLEX  ARE TRYING TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE, 

CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:


(1) Having a military empire is extremely costly because the warfare complex is always wanting a much bigger share of the economy than is necessary.


 Example:


 In 2011, it only cost millions to initiate peace talks with the Taliban and raid Bin Laden's compound and the co-option of Saddam Hussein during the 80s by President Reagan was comparatively inexpensive and yet


due to the undue political influence of the warfare complex, the so-called war on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq  ended up costing as much as $6 trillion, the equivalent of $75,000 for every American household (calculations done by the prestigious Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government).


Another example:

The Cold War was another unnecessary war in which it would have only cost billions if the leaders in the Soviet Empire were co-opted, similar to the co-option of Stalin during the 40s but

 the Cold War and its aftermath ended up costing hard working American taxpayers $8.75 trillion in present day terms on nuclear weapons programs between 1940 and 1996,  according to an audit done by the Brookings Institution.



(2) While enriching the US warfare complex, why should US tax dollars go towards protecting the world,  so that certain countries ( example: Switzerland ) can have a higher per capita income than the US ?

(3) A military empire can't help but be coercive or threatening by nature and at the same time, the US government should learn from the mistakes of the British empire and the Soviet empire  that  maintaining an empire is extremely costly in terms of blood and treasure and

 those who feel "occupied" by military powers tend to rebel as seen by the British being driven out of North America and

 US government troops leaving Saudi Arabia in 2003 due to the terrorist attacks on 9/11/01.


The  link below shows how the US government can police the world without using the military which will only cost about 50 billion a year instead of

 the lowest estimate of 1.1 trillion dollars a year the US government now spends on maintaining its unsustainable military empire.


(4) US government has in the past co-opted dictators ( example: Stalin in the 40s and Saddam in the 80s ) which enabled the US to do business with Stalin and Saddam plus

 by being non-confrontational, the US government can have peace with all its enemies, similar to the peace that exists between China and North Korea.

 Normalizing relations with the enemy ( example: Iran, North Korea etc ) will result in restoring full trade relations. 

 Psychology Professor Steven Pinker of Harvard University agrees with Dr Ron Paul who says that 

 friendly trade with the “enemy” will reap beneficial results since
 the “enemy” has a vested interest in your success when you trade with him.


 (5) Whether the US government has a military empire or not, American goods and services will always be  in demand all over the world, similar to  Swiss goods and services being in high demand throughout the  world, even though the Swiss do not have a military empire.


 (6) In fact, the demand for American goods and services will increase due to the fact that when the US government gives up its worldwide military empire, the friendship towards America (from non-allies) would increase dramatically.


 (7) Countries have to pay for their own security which in turn will keep American goods and services competitive since countries cannot subsidize the private enterprise if they have to foot the entire security bill



 (8) By saving hundreds of billions of dollars in giving up the US government's military empire, the US government can in turn concentrate on making sure our infrastructure is the best in the world, resulting in no traffic jams, blackouts, slow internet speeds etc.,


and in having the best infrastructure in the world, American goods and services can use the infrastructure facilities to further reduce the cost of goods and services produced.



 (9) If the world community, local law enforcement and corporations through private security are not able to keep sea lanes free of piracy, its a lot cheaper raising the price of goods and services ( example : due to the cost of insurance or shoplifting ) than spending up to 1400 billion a year on an unnecessary world wide military empire.



 (10) Corporations should realize that the US government cannot bail them out militarily if corporate assets in a particular country are taxed more heavily or nationalized and so

 just as any smart portfolio manager diversifies his portfolio, corporations should not put "all their eggs in one basket" but rather diversify throughout the world, just in case their assets are confiscated in any one country.


FOR A MORE DETAILED DISCUSSION ON :

(1) how to delay the coming bankruptcy or even prevent the bankruptcy ( read Part Seven of this Seven Part Blog )


(2) how to stop people like Hitler (read Part Five of this Seven Part Blog ),


(3) dealing with human rights issues ( read Part Six of this Seven Part Blog ),

(4) terrorism (read Part One of this Seven Part Blog ) and

(5) how to police the world without using the military (read Part Six of this Seven Part Blog )

which will cost only about $50 billion a year plus another $50 billion to defend the homeland for a total national security yearly bill of $100 billion.


SECOND HALF OF THE PAGE :


THE LATEST (past 7 updates ) INFORMATION HAS BEEN ADDED TO :

PART(S) :


1 on 7/13/13

1 on 7/18/13


1 on 7/27/13

1 on 8/4/13

1 on 8/7/13

1 and 6 on 12/4/13

1 on 12/9/13

1 on 2/2/15





PART ONE: 9/11/01 ATTACKS COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED


 The following unedited 7 part community blog is being updated on a regular basis by

several contributors using the same password,

so forgive us if some material is repeated, thanks.


To watch the youtube links,

change the resolution/quality of the screen by

clicking on the icon that looks like a "toothed wheel" at the bottom of the screen

and choose 480p in order to see clearly the text that has been videotaped

and then click on the "full screen" icon at the bottom right of the screen

and then at any time you can click on any part of the full screen to pause the video as the video scrolls down the webpage video shot



PLEASE CHECK BACK ON A MONTHLY BASIS FOR

NEW INFORMATION ADDED TO

THE 7 PART COMMUNITY BLOG.

If citation links do not open in a new window,

just open a new window

and copy and paste the links as needed.

 

 
If any citation links are outdated or do not work,

please let us know along with your feedback to:


 
worldpeacethruworlddisarmament@gmail.com





When citations do not immediately appear after an important fact,

those important links will appear in other parts of the blog so please be patient

and read the entire 7 part blog.

 

 
Its vitally important that you critique our blog,

since it will help us improve our blog.



 THERE ARE SEVEN PARTS TO THIS COMMUNITY BLOG :

PART ONE :
THE ATTACKS ON 9/11/01 COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED


PART TWO :
A SHORT HISTORY OF TERRORISM


PART THREE :

WHAT IS WAR ALL ABOUT ?
 



PART FOUR :

IS THE US GOVERNMENT CORRUPT ?


PART FIVE:    

WOULD A MILITARILY WEAK US GOVERNMENT BE A BLESSING..... TO THE WORLD ?



PART SIX:
IS THE US GOVERNMENT'S MILITARY EMPIRE NECESSARY ?



PART SEVEN:
THE FUTURE OF THE US GOVERNMENT



Part Seven introduces readers to a new type of government called an "intellectocracy".




PROLOGUE TO PART ONE :
THE ATTACKS ON 9/11/01 COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED


Before we get to the summary and the elaboration of Part One ,

we want to emphasize that we do want the US government to be involved in the world but

 not through its worldwide military empire ( in other words being a non-military interventionist power )  because

 the US government becoming militarily involved in the world created the dangerous conditions under which Nazism rose to power and led to WW2


and  the US government becoming militarily involved in the world created the dangerous conditions under which Communism rose to power and led to the bloody and extremely expensive 5.5 trillion dollar  Cold War.



The US government being militarily involved in the world can be compared to how the British became militarily involved in colonial America

 and British militarism is what made the American colonists turn against the British

especially when the British turned to harsh measures, through the military, to put down the American rebellion in the 1700s.


For details on how the US government's militarism created the conditions under which

 Nazism

and Communism flourished,

please read Part Five of this community blog which will show that

 a militarily weak US government would be a blessing to the world,

since a militarily weak US government would have resulted in Nazism and Communism being defeated,

so please do read Part Five of this community blog to see why a militarily weak US government would have been a blessing to the world, resulting in the  defeat of Nazism and Communism.




In other words, Part Five of this community blog will show that,

 if the US government had the non-military interventionist policies of Switzerland, 


 WW2,

the attacks on Pearl Harbor,

the  Israeli-Palestinian crisis,

 the bloody and extremely expensive 5.5 trillion dollar Cold War

and the attacks on 9/11/01



would not have happened, if the US government was militarily weak and a non-military interventionist power.




 We are not talking about adopting all of Switzerland's policies,

 just the Swiss policies that are non-military interventionist in nature that

do not create the dangerous conditions that resulted in attacks against the US ( example: the attacks on 9/11/01)






Part Four will show you how corrupt the US government is,

and  an example of that corruption :

 the US government had no problems dropping an atom bomb over a church in Nagasaki resulting in nuns being burned alive in Nagasaki ( the center of Christianity in Japan ) but

 at the same time, the US government pardoned the Emperor of Japan who authorized the atrocities committed by the Japanese military.





Right now, the US government is spending up to 1.4 trillion dollars a year on a totally unnecessary military empire that we cannot afford,

as the interest on the debt will eventually be over a trillion dollars a year.

Its only a matter of time before the US government will be forced to declare bankruptcy, probably in the next 10-20 years.

When the annual interest rate on the debt exceeds a trillion dollars, it will be a matter of  years before the US government declares bankruptcy.


When the bankruptcy happens,

the health standards of Americans will be dramatically reduced

( example : the US government would not be able to pay Medicare )

and the living standards of Americans will be dramatically reduced

 ( example: Retirees who hold government bonds will only get paid "cents on the dollar" ).


After the bankruptcy, the best we can hope for is

 the Union stays intact and the Federal government is as weak as when the Continental Congress was first formed.




To avoid the bankruptcy, the US government can easily  maintain its defenses with a yearly 100 billion dollar defense budget

and still be able to "police" the world through non-military means.


Please read Part Six on inexpensive, non-military solutions to maintaining world peace,



and in maintaining world peace through non-military means,

our soldiers,

their children

 and children in war zones will be thankful since

right now,

 a new study finds that half a million young children of parents on active duty are facing serious risks to their mental development:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/23/child-trends-study-children-in-military-families_n_3635441.html




and while soldiers’ children are suffering emotionally and mentally,

our soldiers end up committing suicide when the war is over as up to

22 veterans a day commit suicide

and over 8000 veterans commit suicide every year due to the horrors they experience during war:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/01/16811249-22-veterans-commit-suicide-each-day-va-report?lite

 



A 2009 U.S. Army report indicates military veterans have double the suicide rate of non-veterans:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_the_United_States


If veterans have double the rate of suicide as non-veterans,

one can imagine the dramatic increase in the rate of suicides among combat veterans compared to non-combat veterans.



What WW2 taught the elite 15% of the rich and powerful  among Americans is

 that they could actually financially profit by reminding Americans of the danger of another world war or

 in contemporary language, the never ending war on terror,

and those 15% of elite Americans are doing everything within their power to financially support politicians who are willing   to

keep draining the treasury of trillions of hard earned tax dollars on behalf of the warfare complex and corporations,

even though the rich and powerful know that

every war results in thousands of veterans committing suicide due to the horrors of war

and today, 22 veterans commit suicide every single day, which is over 8000 veterans committing suicide every year

and yet the rich and powerful are not willing to push their politician friends to make peace with the enemy

because profiting from conflict is more important to the rich and powerful than the lives of our vulnerable soldiers.

So remember, whenever pro-war, pro-conflict politicians talk about national interests,

its almost always a euphemism for economic interests.


"Peace through strength" has never worked since

strength has only resulted in more conflict and more budget busting wars in which

 innocent lives are always sacrificed for the greater good which almost always involves

 furthering the profit agenda of those who profit from war.


From the History Channel’s “Civil War Journals” :

There is very little honor in  war as was seen during the Civil War when

25% of union soldiers were ravaged by sexually transmitted diseases while

 the US government legalized prostitution due to the demand by soldiers during the Civil War.

Pornography was rampant among Civil War soldiers.

Binge drinking was common as soldiers self-medicated themselves due to the horrors they experienced during war.


Starvation turned Civil War soldiers into a hungry mob, taking what they wanted from poor farmers.

Disease killed more soldiers during the Civil War than the war itself and even minor wounds resulted in death due to gangrene setting in.

 The Civil War was nauseating to many as they had to endure the screams from men whose limbs were being amputated

and the mounds of bloody amputated limbs at field hospitals.

At the end of the civil war,  most of the men in mental institutions were veterans of the civil war, according to HBO’s documentary “Wartorn”

and tens of thousands of families slipped into destitution due to veterans being disabled due to the war :

http://www.civilwar.org/education/civil-war-casualties.html

 and today, over 8000 veterans commit suicide every year ( 22 daily)

 because war has more to do with horror than glory or honor.


What the world needs is not “Peace through strength” but

rather "Peace through non-military solutions" which is how the Swiss are prospering in peace while


Americans are living in constant fear of the unknown due to

pro-conflict, pro-war politicians who are keeping the American people in constant fear of the unknown so that

the American people do not question the trillions of hard earned tax dollars being drained from the US treasury in order to

help the friends of the pro-conflict, pro-war politicians in the warfare complex and corporations

while the health and living standards of the American people or

the mental health and physical well being of our soldiers or

the mental health of our soldiers children or

mental health and physical well being of children in war zones

are of secondary importance to pro-conflict, pro-war politicians.

President Bush is smiling in the video below, just before he announced the invasion of Iraq in 2003:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HG7tkDV7egw



Would President Bush be smiling if there existed a simple law that stated that all eligible children of pro-war politicians would be drafted to the front lines of any action ?

Pro-war, pro-conflict politicians have no problems sending other peoples' poor and powerless children to the front lines of any action but

those same pro-war, pro-conflict politicians would have a major problem if their own eligible children were required by law to be stationed on the front lines.

Pro-war, pro-conflict politicians keep talking about saving lives

and they are interested in saving lives but

they are more interested in saving the bank accounts of their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations even though,

those pro-war, pro-conflict politicians know about the “non-military solutions” record of the Swiss in making peace with the enemy

and yet pro-war, pro-conflict politicians are more interested in helping the profit agenda of their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations

than trying to save hard working taxpayers money by following the “Swiss peace making” model.

 

Here is an example of the US government’s priorities :

The US government first spent trillions of hard earned tax dollars in two unnecessary wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in order to

satisfy the profit agenda of its friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations

before actually solving the problem

and that was “capturing” Bin Laden which was relatively inexpensive, costing only in the millions.



In other words,

the US government will first spend trillions to satisfy the profit agenda of their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations

before actually solving the problem through relatively inexpensive means.


We say the word "capturing" (above)  because we do not believe in extra-judicial killings or assassinations

and Part Six will show how Osama Bin Laden could have been captured without the relatively inexpensive operation being a "kill mission".

 

 

 
Part One below will show that “Peace through non-military solutions” that is adopted by the Swiss would have worked

and thus the attacks on 9/11/01 would have been prevented.

 

We will first summarize Part One and then elaborate on the details.




TO SUMMARIZE PART ONE :

The attacks on 9/11/01 could have been prevented if the US government had done the following :

(1) Not getting involved with the Mujahadeen to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan

(2) Not getting involved in ousting Iraq from Kuwait in the 1990 gulf war

(3) Not stationing US government troops in Saudi Arabia after the gulf war in 1990

(4) Not sanctioning Iraq

(5) Not selling weapons to Israel

(6) Reinforcing cockpit doors and having air marshals on every flight.


IN OTHER WORDS :


The attacks on 9/11 could have been prevented if the US government had the same non-interventionist military policies in the Middle East during the 20th century similar to the non-interventionist policies the governments of the world adopted during 

 the US government's imperial and cruel expansion across North America, the Pacific and the Caribbean.

If the US government had adopted a non-militant interventionist policy during the 20th century in the Middle East, 

poor Melissa Doi (one of the victims on 9/11,  whose 911 call was recorded ) 

would have been happily married with children today 

and 3000 Americans would still be alive today

and America would not have been subject to the horror of 9/11/01

and America would not have experienced the  horror and tragedy that front line soldiers and their families go through  ( over 8000 of our veterans committing suicide every year, one tragic suicide almost every hour and on average, 22 tragic suicides daily ) due to

the US government’s unnecessary world wide military empire‘s militant, interventionist activities.





TO ELABORATE ON
PART ONE:
9/11/01 ATTACKS COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED:


 
We could easily have prevented the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, if the US government had done the following :




(1) Not getting involved with the "Muhjahadeen" to oust the Soviet Union from Afghanistan.

Osama Bin Laden's life was transformed by the experience he had in Afghanistan.

You could say his ideas of jihad were "born again" in Afghanistan

and the aid the US government gave the Muhjahadeen went a long way to helping this "born again" experience.

If Bin Laden was defeated in Afghanistan against the Soviets

( which was very possible if the US government did not help ) then

Bin Laden might have concluded that it was not Allah's will to go after super powers, or

Bin Laden might to this day be too busy fighting the Russian backed government in Afghanistan

and not been able to use Afghanistan as a training base for attacks on the US or Kashmir



(2) Not getting involved in ousting the Iraqi military from Kuwait

which resulted in the US government restoring the cruel dictatorship in Kuwait

and protecting the cruel dictatorship in Saudi Arabia who live hedonistic lifestyles,

even though there was no evidence of Saddam Hussein wanting to invade Saudi Arabia

and even if Saddam did invade Saudi Arabia the result would be the same as when Iraq went to war with Iran, which was a stalemate.



Below are examples of Saddam wanting to be an ally of the US :

Saddam Hussein was anti-religious and ready to sell oil to the West.

In fact, during the oil embargo of the seventies, when Arab nations restricted the sale of oil, Saddam Hussein went against the embargo and sold oil to the west:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Saddam_Hussein.aspx




In a custodial debriefing, Saddam said he wanted to develop better relations with the US over the latter part of the 1990s.

He said, however, that he was not given a chance because the US refused to listen to anything Iraq had to say.

In 2004, Charles Duelfer of ISG and Special Advisor to the CIA said that

between 1994 and 1998, both he and UNSCOM Executive Chairman Rolf Ekeus were approached multiple times by

senior Iraqis with the message that

Baghdad wanted a dialogue with the United States,

and that Iraq was in a position to be Washington’s “best friend in the region bar none.” :

https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd_2004/chap1.html#sect6



If Saddam Hussein were to have taken over the middle east

(which is next to impossible as seen in Iraq’s stalemate war with Iran )

Saddam would not have allowed religious terrorists a base to operate from,

he would have checked the regional aspirations of Iran

and sold cheap oil to the US,

and even if Saddam restricted oil sales, it would not have adversely affected the US economy:

http://www.davidrhenderson.com/articles/0902_sorrysaddam.html


Saddam Hussein promised to stop supporting insurgent groups which in turn led

President Ronald Reagan to initiate a strategic opening to Iraq,

signing National Security Study Directive (NSSD) 4-82

and selecting Donald Rumsfeld as his emissary to Hussein,

whom he visited in December 1983 and March 1984.



....the above is another of several examples that Saddam wanted to be our ally.



Even though during the 80s when Saddam Hussein was at his worst

and actually using WMD,
there was not one CIA report stating that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the US
which in turn allowed for the US government’s

aid to Iraq which included

several billion dollars worth of economic aid,

the sale of dual-use technology,

non-U.S. origin weaponry,

military intelligence,

Special Operations training,

and direct involvement in warfare against Iran:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_war




and yet, the US government chose to invade Iraq in 2003 with the excuse that

Saddam wanted to hand over WMD to terrorists even though

when Saddam was at his worst in the 80s and actually using WMD,

President Reagan did not receive any CIA report that stated that Saddam was a threat to the US or Israel

and so President Reagan co-opted Saddam in the 80s even when Saddam was at his worst and actually using WMD.


So why did the US government change its mind about President Reagan's co-option program regarding Saddam when Saddam was at his weakest in 2003 ?

ignoring the fact that Saddam had always wanted to be an ally of the US government,

but still the 2003 invasion of Iraq took place,

even though the CIA knew about the consequences of the 2003 Iraq war .


Even though the following documentary "War Made Easy" points to many factually incorrect statements made by the Bush Administration :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpXZyhr1Sbg


President Bush did also omit the fact that

in 2003, Saddam Hussein not only wanted to allow the CIA into Iraq to show that Iraq was not hiding nuclear weapons

but also that Saddam


wanted to be our ally in the middle east when President Bush must have got the 90s report from Charles Duelfer (Special Advisor to the CIA) that stated that

Saddam wanted to start a dialog with the US and wanted to be America's best friend in the middle east.

Also, President Bush failed to reveal to the American people what the CIA must have known from the following NPR report :

March 7, 2003 from Morning Edition (Before the Iraq War ) :


(a) plots of land along its (Jordan's ) common border have been set aside as possible settlements for Iraqis fleeing the country.

(b) Turkey is preparing to send troops into northern Iraq once hostilities break out to keep the Kurdish population there contained.

(c) And an Iraqi Shiite militia opposed to Saddam Hussein reportedly already is occupying a stretch of northern Iraq.

(d) Within Egypt, which is a close ally of the United States and no friend of Saddam Hussein, there are fears that a war in Iraq could destabilize an already volatile region.

(e) A neat military operation to defeat Saddam is possible to launch, but aftermath of that is unimaginable. It's going to be very messy. the first Bush administration recognized this fact after the last Gulf War.

(f) (Iraq) consists of different ethnic groups that were put together under colonial rule and then stayed together under the iron fist of Saddam and the Ba'ath Party. And once that iron fist is removed, Iraq will begin to unravel as these groups begin to scramble for their share of the pie.

(g) Chaos after invasion : Kurd vs. Turkoman; Shiite vs. Sunni; Syrians, Muslims, Ba'athis vs. non-Ba'athis, tribes vs. urban centers; there are a thousand contradictions and it's a tough, tough, tough task for anyone to control.

(h)if the US fails to address these contradictions, Iraq could quickly disintegrate into a Kurdish state in the north, a Sunni state in the center and a Shiite state in the south.

(i) Result of invasion : a benign authoritarian leader, then you haven't changed much. All your talk (US govt) about democracy and so on is not realized. And then if you have military rule, then you have military occupation of a country which will be resented by almost everyone in the Arab world.

(j) The US has yet to explain how it intends to reform and democratize Iraq's political system now firmly in the control of Saddam's ruling Ba'ath Party. There have been hints the administration plans to leave some lower level Ba'athists in place in order to help run Iraq's infrastructure. that's a risky proposition.

(k) In fact, you (US govt) are playing with a double-edge sword of using the Ba'ath's administrative system in Iraq by removing only the heads of it, but the rest of it is there. While you are trying to go into a despecification of the Ba'ath Party in the country, that means you are dealing with the enemy and using it in the same time.

(l) there's no clear indication how US troops would be received by the Iraqi people if and when the war starts. So even though many Iraqis there would say would like to get rid of Saddam, they don't want this to be done by American troops.

(m) the initial response (of the invasion) from Iraqi civilians to be favorable. The difficulty, they say, will come when the various groups competing for influence begin to feel they are being left out.

(n) the US military will need to stay in Iraq for far longer than the one- or two-year time frame the Bush administration appears to favor. But this, too, presents a problem. The longer the US stays, the more likely it will be seen as an occupying power that could lead to an increase in terrorist attacks against US targets in Iraq and around the globe with more young Muslims flocking to Islamic militant groups like al-Qaeda.

(o) By the end of the day, we might end up with several bin Ladens, not only one. And that's what I mean by Iraq being a really messy situation afterwards.

(end of NPR report right before the invasion of Iraq in 2003)


Lastly, President Bush failed to answer the following question that must have been posed by the CIA :

For the past 25 years when Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction,

why did Saddam Hussein not use those weapons of mass destruction against the US or

Israel, or

hand them over to the Al-Qaeda terrorists or

the terrorists in the west bank, even though

during the past 25 years, on and off, the following were done which angered and humiliated Saddam Hussein:

(a) Israel destroyed Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactors in the 80s

(b) Through the Iran-Contra scandal, the US supplied arms to Iran in the Iran-Iraq war in the 80s

(c) In the 90s, the US ousted Saddam Hussein from Kuwait

(d) In the 90s, The US openly encouraged the Iraqi Kurds and Shias to rebel against Saddam Hussein and overthrow him from power and in this case, he did not even use his weapons of mass destruction against the rebellious kurds and shiites

(e) In the 90s, Saddam Hussein's palaces were destroyed by the US

(f) In the 90s, the CIA made several assassination attempts on Saddam Hussein

(g) In the 90s, the US prevented Saddam Hussein's planes from flying in the no-fly zone

(h) In the 90s, the US had crippling economic sanctions on Iraq

(i) Throughout the 90s, the US periodically bombed Iraq which resulted in massive property damage and the deaths of thousands of Iraqis including relatives of Saddam Hussein

(j) Throughout the 90s, the US systematically decimated almost the entire air defense systems of Saddam Hussein

So even though the US and Israel for the past 25 years have angered and humiliated Saddam Hussein,

why did Saddam Hussein not use his weapons of mass destruction against Israel or

the US or

hand them over to the Al-Qaeda terrorists or the terrorists in the west bank, these past 25 years ?


So even though there did exist WMD at one time in Iraq,

Saddam did not use it against Israel or the US, because

Saddam was more interested in staying in power than giving Israel or the US an excuse to go to war against Iraq.


President Bush knew that the war with Iraq was not necessary since

he could have co-opted Saddam Hussein like President Reagan did in the 80s when Saddam was at his most dangerous

and so President Bush failed to disclose to the American people regarding President Reagan’s successful co-option program in co-opting Saddam Hussein.



President Bush failed to also accept Saddam's invitation to the CIA to enter Iraq to search for WMD:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/wanniski/wanniski6.html


Even though the British bullied and instigated the US government into the war of 1812,

the US government never asked the British for unconditional surrender but

rather the war ended in a ceasefire.

In the case of Iraq, the US government was only interested in an unconditional surrender of Iraq in 2003 even though

Iraq did not do anything close to what the British did to Americans before the war of 1812.



The US government only asks comparatively weak nations for unconditional surrender as seen in the case of Iraq in 2003 and Japan during WW2

but the US government will never ask powerful nations like China or the Soviet Union (Russia) for unconditional surrender even though

China and the Soviet Union were directly and indirectly responsible during the Cold War in Vietnam and Korea for

hundreds of thousands of US soldiers either dying horrifying deaths or

being maimed,

disfigured,

blinded,

paralyzed and spoon-fed for life

and/or deformed for life due to

the direct and indirect actions of the Soviet Union and China.



While Iran, North Korea, China and Russia would never allow the CIA into their countries,

Saddam wanted the CIA inside Iraq to prove that he had no WMD

but President Bush was not interested in President Reagan's co-option program making Saddam Hussein an ally but

rather interested in a short sighted profit driven policy of invading Iraq for the profit benefit of his friends and political supporters in the warfare corporations and institutions.

President Bush knew the Iraq war was unnecessary, even smiling before announcing the invasion :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HG7tkDV7egw





An unnecessary Iraq war that has resulted in thousands of US soldiers lives lost,

tens of thousands of US soldiers maimed,

deformed,

blinded,

paralyzed and spoon-fed for life

and/or

disfigured for life,


the trauma that the families of US soldiers have gone through with

US soldiers kids suffering from anxiety attacks

and not knowing whether their dads were ok,

trillions of dollars wasted,

millions of pitiful Iraqi refugees,

hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians

and children losing their lives or

being maimed,

deformed,

blinded,

paralyzed and spoon-fed for life


and/or

disfigured for life due to sectarian violence or

US government collateral actions.

Many of our poor soldiers and innocent iraqis have to be spoon-fed the rest of their lives due to

the horrifying and paralyzing injuries suffered in the horror that people call war.



The only winners in this unnecessary war are the warfare corporations and institutions

and their pro-war politicians in the US government who have

funneled tens of trillions of dollars of hard earned taxpayers money over the decades into the corporate welfare system of the warfare corporations and institutions,

all in the name of honor,

duty,

freedom,

patriotism

and liberty while deliberating sending our poor soldiers into harm's way.

As one wise Samuel Johnson said on the evening of April 7, 1775, "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel".



If any defense contract gets reduced or cancelled,

you can bet the war profiteering defense contractor will rally up his supporters

and say its not patriotic to cancel a defense contract.


The problem with pro-war, pro-conflict politicians is not that they do not care about the horrors that our soldiers go through resulting in over 8000 veterans committing suicide every year or

that hundreds of thousands of the children of soldiers go through emotional and psychological trauma not knowing what is happening to their dads, especially on the front lines.

Pro-war, pro-conflict politicians do care about our soldiers and the children of the soldiers but

they care more about their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations

always pushing off the thousands of yearly veteran suicides to the back of their minds,

saying that the “ends justify the means” meaning,

its okay to sacrifice the lives of the innocent in order to save other lives which almost always includes

enormous profits to their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations;

and that is why either consciously or subconsciously pro-war and pro-conflict politicians almost always

create the conditions for conflict and when the conditions result in war,

they don’t blame themselves for creating the conditions for war or conflict but

rather look upon the conflict as an opportunity to further their power agenda

and the profit agenda of their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations;

and that is why the attacks on 9/11/01 gave the opportunity for pro-war and pro-conflict politicians to ramp up military spending (base budget) to about $700 billion from $300 billion a year between 2001 and 2011 :

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324712504578131363091573002.html
By 2012, the total security budget ( base plus other programs related to national security ) of the US government was as much as 1.4 trillion dollars a year :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States#Budget_breakdown_for_2012
Always remember,

when politicians tell you that our soldiers are serving our country,

 those politicians are actually telling you that soldiers are actually serving those who profit from war

and protecting the bank accounts of the rich and powerful in the warfare complex and corporations.



By taking refuge in the magical words,

“ patriotism”,

“honor”,

“duty”

and “defense of country”,

and controlling the American people by keeping the American people in constant fear of the unknown,

pro-war and pro-conflict politicians,

in their thirst for more power have managed to

drain the US treasury of trillions of dollars of hard earned tax dollars in order to

further the profit agenda of their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations.

Remember, pro-war and pro-conflict politicians will always tell you that

 the reason they have to take your hard earned tax dollars is to

send other peoples poor and powerless children  ( not their children ) deliberately into harm’s way in order to

 “save the world” but

they will never tell you that

in order to “save the world” ,

millions would have to end up as pitiful refugees in extremely unhealthy, unsanitary conditions,


hundreds of thousands or even millions of innocent lives have to be sacrificed,

including the yearly suicides of thousands of our veterans after the war is over

and the emotional suffering of hundreds of thousands of children of our soldiers;

and those same pro-war and pro-conflict politicians will definitely not tell you

how much money their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations will make in a conflict or war that could have been prevented or avoided.


In other words,

pro-war, pro-conflict politicians will never tell you that

waging war is the greatest violator of the human rights of the innocent,

compounding the suffering of the innocent due to

the short sighted, profit driven, military interventions of the US government.

So do not believe the propaganda that war is good;

its only good for those who are very far from the conflict

and war is good to those who profit from it.

 


Why is it when 3000 Americans died on 9/11 , the government was willing to spend trillions

( a trillion is five hundred thousand million dollars plus another five hundred thousand million dollars )

on the "war on terror ",

but at the same time, the same government is cutting cancer research when over a million Americans are dying from cancer alone, every two years ?http://www.aacr.org/home/public--media/science-policy--government-affairs/resources-for-policymakers/federal-cancer-research-funding.aspx


Is supporting the profit agenda of the warfare corporations and institutions more important than

the lives of your friends and loved ones and the millions of Americans dying from cancer alone every two years ?


An easy way to prevent  all wars is for two simple laws to be enacted :

(1) All pro-war politicians' eligible kids would be drafted to the front lines of any action.

(2) Instead of borrowing the money from China, all actions will have to be paid for by the American taxpayer within a year of the action taking place.

If the two simple laws above are enacted, pro-war politicians will be "tripping over each other " trying to make peace with the enemy

because as it is now, pro-war politicians have no problems sending other peoples poor kids to the front lines but

would have a major problem if their own kids lives are at stack.

So the above two laws recommended is not a punitive measure but

 its a way to save both the lives of the pro-war politicians' children and the lives of the children of the poor and powerless

because no war will ever happen if both the two laws above are enacted

but instead what will happen is

a concerted effort to make peace and to resolve conflicts through diplomacy and other non-war, non-military  efforts

because as it is now,

even though conflicts take years or even decades to develop,

 the Pentagon and the US government is not interested in promoting long term peaceful solutions to avert violence or war

because pro-war politicians are  more interested in promoting short sighted, profit driven policies mainly to

support the profit agenda of their friends and supporters in the warfare complex,  corporations and institutions.

Please do read Part Five of this 7 part community blog where you will see

how the US government got involved in  major conflicts over the centuries,

even though the US government, due to its

short sighted, profit driven policies, created

the conditions for Nazism, Communism and dictatorships to flourish resulting in

 the horrors of the 20th century

and the US government is now heading towards its inevitable financial bankruptcy in the 21st century due to

the annual interest on war debts and perpetual conflict (example: the Cold War and the war on terror ) approaching a trillion dollars a year by the  year 2020.


PART SIX of this 7 part community blog will give pragmatic, non-military solutions to

prevent or avoid war so that all can prosper in peace and good health.



CONTINUING WITH

" THE ATTACKS ON 9/11/01 COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED IF THE US GOVERNMENT HAD DONE THE FOLLOWING" :




(3) Not sanctioned Iraq.... ..Osama Bin Laden points to UN reports, that the US government sanctions on Iraq was the cause of half a million Iraqi children dying prematurely:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions#Estimates_of_deaths_due_to_sanctions


The UN Humanitarian Program for Iraq that was established in 1996, was set to fail.

Hans Von Sponeck, one of the main co ordinators, who resigned in disgust in 2000, recently wrote:

“…the per capita value/ day of humanitarian goods actually benefiting Iraqis amounted to 51 US cents – a shameful reality for which the US & UK Governments were largely responsible.”




Under-five mortality rate in the Center and South of Iraq (136 per 1,000 live births) remained at 2.5 times the level recorded in 1990 ( before the gulf war )


http://childvictimsofwar.org.uk/the-impact-of-the-iraq-war-on-iraqi-children/

In other words, Iraqi children were better off under Saddam Hussein before the US government's first war with Iraq ( the gulf war )



(4) Not sold weapons to Israel... ...Osama Bin Laden points to the fact that US government made weapons were used by the Israeli government to kill Palestinian men, women and children through collateral damage:




http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7204.htm


(5) reinforced pilot doors and had air marshals on every flight, like Israel did long time ago.


(6) Not setting up bases in Saudi Arabia.

IF THE US GOVERNMENT HAD NOT

GOT INVOLVED IN THE GULF WAR, THE US GOVERNMENT WOULD NOT

HAVE HAD TROOPS IN SAUDI ARABIA..

The presence of US government troops in Saudi Arabia after the 1990-91 gulf war was the "straw that broke the camel's back"

The gulf war was a totally unnecessary war, in which civilians died by the tens of thousands (one estimate was at about 100,000) due to


bombings by the US government and the after effects of the war:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War#Civilian

and the eventual premature deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children due to US government sanctions:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions#Estimates_of_deaths_due_to_sanctions


which in turn motivated Bin Laden to want to expel US government troops from Saudi Arabia.



If the US government followed the non-military, non-interventionist policies of Switzerland that

never experiences religious terrorism,
Melissa Doi who died a horrible death on 9/11/01 would still be alive today, happily married with children.


If Melissa Doi was living in Switzerland on 9/11/01, she would be alive today, happily married with children.

Who is Melissa Doi ?



Melissa Doi was crying to the 911 operator saying

she knew she was going to die

and pleaded with the operator to stay on the line with her because



she did not want to die alone

and as the 911 operator was trying to comfort her, the building collapsed around poor Melissa Doi who died plunging to her horrifying death.

Listen to the pitiful Melissa Doi as she is helplessly pleading with the 911 operator :


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDBjsKDagqk


WHAT DID BIN LADEN SEE IN THE US GOVERNMENT’S MILITARY EMPIRE ? :


If "taxation without representation" resulted in collective punishment when

American mobs terrorized and disfigured by

tarring innocent British civilians/American loyalists over a tiny tea tax,

a tax that mainly affected the rich:



http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Tempe

is it surprising that Bin Laden started a 10 year terror campaign to get US troops out of Saudi Arabia as a result of

Saudi dissidents being tortured for opposing the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia following the carnage of the gulf war

in which

the US government was accused of not only massacring fleeing Iraqi soldiers from Kuwait :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_of_Death

but also
air strikes that collaterally killed Iraqi children and babies in the gulf war where US bombs

and the after effects of war killed tens of thousands of Iraqis, destroyed 20,000 Iraqi homes, leveled schools and hospitals:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War#Coalition_bombing_of_Iraq.27s_civilian_infrastructure


plus sanctions that according to the UN estimates, between 500,000 and 1.2 million children died during the years of the sanctions:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War#Sanctions



In one air strike by the militarily strong US government :

three hundred Iraqi children were killed by "smart" bombs in a Baghdad bomb shelter on February 16, 1991.

The blast caused a fire so intense that it flash-burned outlines of those children and their mothers on the walls; you can still peel strips of blackened skin-from the stones.

And in 1994, religious scholars safar al-hawali and salman al-awdah were tortured by the Saudi government for protesting against US government troops in Saudi Arabia

which made Bin Laden even more determined to get US government troops out of Saudi Arabia.




Revenge was created in  Osama Bin Laden's mind due to the US government's 1990 gulf war and its tragic consequences for the civilians, children and babies in Iraq

and the following events ( mentioned in various fatwas issued by Al-Qaeda ) finally led to the attacks on 9/11 :


(1) Osama Bin Laden read about the US government . fire and atom bombing Japan in 1945 when

Japan was already defeated as early as 1942 when

Japan was not able to take back territory already lost,

but FDR did not care about

the chinese communists and chinese nationalists who were killing  millions of civilians ( Benjamin Valentino in his book titled "Final Solutions: Mass Killing and Genocide in the Twentieth Century"  has estimated atrocities in the Chinese Civil War resulted in the death of between 1.8 million and 3.5 million people between 1927 and 1949. Atrocities include deaths from forced conscription and massacres).


With the removal of Japan as a regional power by the US government, the communists and nationalists in Asia eventually killed almost a hundred million civilians in China, Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia.

Ever since 1776, the US government's militant interventionist policies have resulted in hundreds of thousands of US soldiers either

dying horrifying deaths or

being maimed,

disfigured,

deformed,

blinded or

paralyzed for life.


(2) Osama Bin Laden read about US/Allied POWs in Japan

and hundreds of thousands of Japanese children being terrorized, tortured and burned alive in the US government's fire and atom bombings of Japan


and Bin Laden concluded that

if FDR/Truman did not care about the plight of their own US soldiers captive in Japan who were being killed by the US government's atom and fire bombings of Japan

and since FDR/Truman did not care about the lives of hundreds of thousands of Japanese children and babies,


Bin Laden concluded that he did not have to care about American civilians either when

strategic goals were more important ( this is how both state and non-state terrorists think and we do not agree with the way they think ).


(3) Bin Laden read about atrocities by US government personnel in Korea and Vietnam :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes#My_Lai_Massacre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Gun_Ri_Massacre



(4) Osama Bin Laden read about the US government in the 50s overthrowing a democratically elected Mossadegh of Iran and

eventually the Shah terrorized his own people in Iran, thanks to the military support given by the US government

(5) Bin Laden read about the US government in the 60s, arming the Israeli government that used those very US weapons to collaterally kill Palestinian children and babies

(6) Bin Laden saw the US government in the 70s using napalm, agent orange and carpet bombing Vietnam and Cambodia and collaterally killing hundreds of thousands

( millions are still adversely affected by agent orange to this day leading to cancers, birth defects and other life threatening ailments ) :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange#Health_effects


(7) Bin Laden saw the US government in the 80s siding with the "christian" militias in Lebanon, the very christian militias that massacred Muslims


Another example Osama Bin Laden gives is the UN, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International reports in 1996 that blamed the Israeli government using US government weapons to deliberately or carelessly kill women and children in the UN compound near Qana, a village in Southern Lebanon



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_shelling_of_Qana



(8) Bin Laden saw the US government in the 80s supporting cruel dictators like Saddam Hussein


(9) Bin Laden saw the US government in the 90s imposing cruel sanctions on Iraq resulting in UN reports stating that half a million Iraqi children died prematurely due to the sanctions.

In the spring of 2000, a U.S. Congressional letter demanding the lifting of the sanctions garnered 71 signatures,

while House Democratic Whip
David Bonior called the economic sanctions against Iraq

"infanticide masquerading as policy.":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iraq#Infant_and_child_death_rates



(10) Bin Laden saw that the cruel Saudi dictatorship was being supported by the US government , the very dictatorship that tortured dissidents who opposed the stationing of US troops in Saudi Arabia

(11) Bin Laden saw that the US government never left any country in which it had troops in ( example; US troops still present in Germany and Japan, even after the war had ended decades ago)

Mar 24,1991 : US General H. Norman Schwarzkopf, the American commander of Operation Desert Storm, told reporters in Saudi Arabia the United States was closer to establishing a permanent military headquarters on Arab soil.
(AP, 3/24/01)

(12) Bin Laden saw that warnings to the US government to withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia were ignored

(13) Bin Laden saw one way to get US troops out of Saudi Arabia was to launch a terror campaign

(14) Bin Laden saw that his terror campaign during the 90s against the US had failed ( due to Al-Qaeda being a tiny force )

and US government troops still remained in Saudi Arabia 9 years after the gulf war had ended.


(15) Bin Laden saw that the only way to get the US government to withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia was to launch an attack on the US homeland on 9/11/01.

American muslims did not go along with Bin Laden's program of attacking the US homeland

and so on 9/11/01 no American muslims were involved in causing havoc,

which goes to show its extremly difficult to get muslims to attack the innocent

and so Bin Laden was only able recruit 19 muslims out of billions of muslims on 9/11/01



(16) Bin Laden saw that the Bush Administration finally gave into Bin Laden's demands to withdraw US government troops,

only after the 9/11 attacks,

and US government troops finally left Saudi Arabia in 2003,

almost 13 years after the gulf war had ended.


Al-Qaeda does not hate us, they hate the US government's policies that end up collaterally killing innocent muslims.

Off course, Al-Qaeda will never admit to killing the innocent,


just as the US government only sees the good it does but

will never admit to starting, instigating, prolonging or allowing a conflict to flourish

for the benefit of their friends and supporters in the warfare corporations and institutions.




People do horrifying things due to strategic goals and not because they personally have something against Americans or anybody else.

Example :

Truman dropped a bomb on Hiroshima, not because

he was personally wanting to burn alive hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese men, women, children and babies for the sake of terrorizing the innocent

but rather, the terror bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki served Truman's strategic goals of wanting unconditional surrender from Japan instead of

a cease fire or negotiated peace settlement,

so Al-Qaeda thought by attacking America, the US government will remove its troops from Saudi Arabia ( Al-Qaeda's strategic goal ).


The Bush Administration finally gave into the demands of Al-Qaeda and removed US government troops from Saudi Arabia, only after the attacks on 9/11

so Al-Qaeda's strategic goals were achieved and innocent Americans had to tragically pay the price of

the US government's short sighted, profit driven policies in the middle east.


On 9/11/01 Al-Qaeda consisted of a few hundred members who mostly were being trained to fight in Kashmir.

The US government will never be able to eradicate Al-Qaeda as long as it provides the recruiting propaganda for Al-Qaeda through drone strikes that collaterally kill muslim women, children and babies.
Al-Qaeda did not exist before the occupation of Afghanistan by the Soviet military,

so Al-Qaeda's existence is directly related to the occupation of muslim lands.


You will find that whenever western forces leave a muslim country, terrorists from that country never follow the western forces back to the homeland of the western forces

( example : Afghan terrorists not following Soviets back home; Lebanese, Somali and Saudi terrorists not following US troops back home and Iraqi terrorists not following Spanish troops back home )


The Afghan war was unnecessary, as was seen by the inexpensive covert operation against Osama Bin Laden in 2011.

Furthermore, the Taliban ( in order to save face ) told the Bush Administration, that they would put Bin Laden on trial in a neutral country when found, since Bin Laden had fled to the mountains of Tora Bora after the attacks on 9/11/01.

Right after the attacks on 9/11/01, the Taliban stated : "War is nothing but pain and death, blood does not wash blood, negotiations are a good path and we can discuss all issues including Osama:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/05/afghanistan.terrorism


The US government ends up spending trillions of dollars of hard earned tax payers money to benefit its friends and supporters in the warfare corporations and institutions on an unnecessary war

before spending millions to actually solve the problem as when Osama Bin Laden was tracked down in 2011.

The Afghan war was profitable to the warfare corporations and institutions, just check out the share prices of the warfare corporations after 9/11/01.


We have two choices:


Either give in to

the pro-conflict, pro-war politicians and let them help their supporters and friends in the warfare complex and corporations by

 draining the US treasury of trillions of hard earned tax dollars in order to eventually create

 a “fortress America” with soldiers in every corner like in Israel


Or we can

go against the wishes of the pro-war , pro-conflict politicians and make peace with all our enemies like the Swiss have done

and so the Swiss live in peace, while we are constantly in fear of the unknown .

In making peace with all our enemies,

we deprive those who profit from conflict and war from “laughing all the way to the bank” with your hard earned money.


In the end, if the US government does not make peace with all its enemies,

all the money in the world cannot

adequately secure and protect

every mile of railroad,

power station,

every mile of the power grid,

every mile of pipeline,

every nuclear reactor,

every cargo container,

school,

university,

mall,

every mile of bridges,

tunnels ,

subway,

dams ,

every air plane,

 train,

bus,

ship ,

multi-storey building,

stadium,

embassy,

theme park,

locations where thousands of people gather or

locations with huge tanks with explosive gas/chemicals/oil stored.


So either we

behave like the Swiss and prosper in peace or

we give in to the pro-war , pro-conflict politicians

and end up having a trillion dollar annual interest on the national debt,

effectively bankrupting the US government,

resulting in a dramatic reduction in the health standards

and the living standards of the American people

and making our soldiers on the front lines suffer to the point where
 over 8000 veterans commit suicide every year due to

 the horrors they experience during war

including the hundreds of thousands of children of soldiers who suffer PTSD and anxiety attacks because

 of their parents being involved in the US government's unnecessary world wide military empire.





TO REITERATE PART ONE :

The attacks on 9/11/01 could have been prevented if the US government had done the following :

(1) Not getting involved with the Mujahadeen to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan

(2) Not getting involved in ousting Iraq from Kuwait in the 1990 gulf war

(3) Not stationing US government troops in Saudi Arabia after the gulf war in 1990

(4) Not sanctioning Iraq

(5)  Not selling weapons to Israel

(6) Reinforcing cockpit doors and having air marshals on every flight.

IN OTHER WORDS :

IF the US government had the same non-interventionist military policies like the rest of the world governments had,

when governments did not ally amongst themselves in order to interfere when

the US government had its imperial and cruel expansion across North America, the Pacific and the Caribbean,

poor Melissa Doi (one of the victims on 9/11,  whose 911 call was recorded ) would have been happily married with children today

and 3000 Americans would still be alive today

and America would not have been subject to the horror of 9/11/01

and America would not have experienced the  horror and tragedy that front line soldiers and their families go through due to

the US government’s unnecessary world wide military empire‘s militant activities.

The US government can maintain World Peace through

 non-military means as you will find in Part Six of this community blog

and in maintaining world peace through non-military means,

 our soldiers,

 their children

 and children in war zones will be thankful since

right now,

a new study finds that half a million young children of parents on active duty are facing serious risks to their mental development:


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/23/child-trends-study-children-in-military-families_n_3635441.html



and while soldiers’ children are suffering emotionally and mentally,

our soldiers end up committing suicide when the war is over as up to

22 veterans a day commit suicide

and over 8000 veterans commit suicide every year due to the horrors they experience during war:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/01/16811249-22-veterans-commit-suicide-each-day-va-report?lite




A 2009 U.S. Army report indicates military veterans have double the suicide rate of non-veterans:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_the_United_States

If veterans have double the rate of suicide as non-veterans,

one can imagine the dramatic increase in the rate of suicides among combat veterans compared to non-combat veterans.

PLEASE GO TO THE PROLOGUE ON PART TWO:
A SHORT HISTORY OF TERRORISM

http://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/2013/02/part-one-91101-attacks-could-have-been.html#!/2013/02/part-one-91101-attacks-could-have-been.html

3 comments:

  1. What you have fai;led to understand is that war is the best way to reduce excessive population which cost more than war you fucking moron.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. so you do not mind that you or your loved ones live in a war zone ?

      Delete
    2. He want population reduction so long as it is not him or his loved ones I'd imagine. A selfish individual with zero empathy for the other.

      Delete