Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

In reply to the discussion: Why Hagel? [View all]

Peaceful Protester

(280 posts)
61. (Read More: Blowback, Sorrow and Consequences)
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:20 PM
Jan 2013

Chalmers Johnson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chalmers_Johnson#The_Blowback_series

"In Blowback, I set out to explain why we are hated around the world. The concept "blowback" does not just mean retaliation for things our government has done to and in foreign countries. It refers to retaliation for the numerous illegal operations we have carried out abroad that were kept totally secret from the American public. This means that when the retaliation comes -- as it did so spectacularly on September 11, 2001 -- the American public is unable to put the events in context. So they tend to support acts intended to lash out against the perpetrators, thereby most commonly preparing the ground for yet another cycle of blowback."

[hr style="border-style:solid;color:black;height:1px;margin-bottom:-10px;"]

"The Sorrows of Empire was written during the American preparations for and launching of the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq. I began to study our continuous military buildup since World War II and the 737 military bases we currently maintain in other people's countries. This empire of bases is the concrete manifestation of our global hegemony, and many of the blowback-inducing wars we have conducted had as their true purpose the sustaining and expanding of this network. We do not think of these overseas deployments as a form of empire; in fact, most Americans do not give them any thought at all until something truly shocking, such as the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, brings them to our attention. But the people living next door to these bases and dealing with the swaggering soldiers who brawl and sometimes rape their women certainly think of them as imperial enclaves, just as the people of ancient Iberia or nineteenth-century India knew that they were victims of foreign colonization."

[hr style="border-style:solid;color:black;height:1px;margin-bottom:-10px;"]

"In Nemesis, I have tried to present historical, political, economic, and philosophical evidence of where our current behavior is likely to lead. Specifically, I believe that to maintain our empire abroad requires resources and commitments that will inevitably undercut our domestic democracy and in the end produce a military dictatorship or its civilian equivalent. The founders of our nation understood this well and tried to create a form of government – a republic – that would prevent this from occurring. But the combination of huge standing armies, almost continuous wars, military Keynesianism, and ruinous military expenses have destroyed our republican structure in favor of an imperial presidency. We are on the cusp of losing our democracy for the sake of keeping our empire. Once a nation is started down that path, the dynamics that apply to all empires come into play – isolation, overstretch, the uniting of forces opposed to imperialism, and bankruptcy."

Dismantling the Empire: America's Last Best Hope

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Why Hagel? [View all] WilliamPitt Jan 2013 OP
Another well thought out and written OP. Thanks. n/t Sekhmets Daughter Jan 2013 #1
Agreed. n/t Still Sensible Jan 2013 #2
K&R..... spanone Jan 2013 #3
Hagel is a combat Infantry vet pinboy3niner Jan 2013 #4
Can't say it any better than you did, +1 n/t Victor_c3 Jan 2013 #24
Hitler and Churchill were combat veterans, neither had qualms about ordering men to die. FarCenter Jan 2013 #68
I had to ask "Why not Hagel?" vaberella Jan 2013 #5
And frankly, WilliamPitt Jan 2013 #7
I wonder what Hagel's on the repeal of DADT is? vaberella Jan 2013 #9
Quote WilliamPitt Jan 2013 #11
To equate opposition to marriage equality to refusing to hire a qualified person dsc Jan 2013 #19
Obviously, I was not the only person asking that question. Thanks. n/t vaberella Jan 2013 #82
Wall Street Journal article from yesterday says Obama was assured that Hagel TwilightGardener Jan 2013 #25
actually the quoted text doesn't agree with you header dsc Jan 2013 #27
Good to hear. I was also happy to hear that Hagel apologized for his homophobic comments. n/t vaberella Jan 2013 #84
If he brings troops home from A'stan he'll bring home all, SaveAmerica Jan 2013 #76
Not the best of sources waronxmas Jan 2013 #20
He. also, ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2013 #48
I love DU WilliamPitt Jan 2013 #49
Sorry ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2013 #59
Hence the reason I refrained. Weren't democrats back then what Republicans are largely now? vaberella Jan 2013 #83
That's A New One On Me... KharmaTrain Jan 2013 #62
. . . . . WilliamPitt Jan 2013 #67
Andrew Jackson's actions in dealing with the Cherokee were both vile and unconstitutional. white_wolf Jan 2013 #53
Honestly, I am still dotymed Jan 2013 #44
That's where I'm at.... Little Star Jan 2013 #6
Glenn Greenwald cares deeply about civil liberties, constitutional process, & defense policy. Faryn Balyncd Jan 2013 #8
He may care deeply mimi85 Jan 2013 #42
Kicked! n/t sheshe2 Jan 2013 #10
No flames, I just don't believe Kelvin Mace Jan 2013 #12
Agreed alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #13
I don't discount concerns from progressives out of hand... That said, I'm NOT convinced by them. hlthe2b Jan 2013 #14
You want flames? I gotcher flames right here... pinboy3niner Jan 2013 #15
Want WilliamPitt Jan 2013 #18
Beautiful lead sled! 49 Merc? Dustlawyer Jan 2013 #23
nice uponit7771 Jan 2013 #32
I made much the same point yesterday in an answer to a post. s-cubed Jan 2013 #34
I could never have a car like that because A Simple Game Jan 2013 #56
To get a better price, of course. Lizzie Poppet Jan 2013 #16
It took me an hour to get that. WilliamPitt Jan 2013 #35
*grin* Lizzie Poppet Jan 2013 #36
hagel will be a good pick madrchsod Jan 2013 #17
Of course. There are/were lots of Republicans in this administration. progressoid Jan 2013 #21
K & R. n/t FSogol Jan 2013 #22
Bill Clinton managed to cut defense spending during his first term without a Republican Secy. progressoid Jan 2013 #26
Here's a lengthy article that shows why Obama probably likes the guy... TwilightGardener Jan 2013 #28
Thanks! WilliamPitt Jan 2013 #30
this article provides a very good understanding of Nagel riverbendviewgal Jan 2013 #63
I'm not against Republicans in the administration.... GatorOrange Jan 2013 #29
It's really simple think_critically Jan 2013 #31
Perhaps Obama needs to play different game CranialRectaLoopback Jan 2013 #37
I would suspect that the gop, in general, ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2013 #50
well, his opponents don't even know how the knight moves, so may a different game is in order.. snooper2 Jan 2013 #55
Agree. Finally, a voice of reason.......nft plethoro Jan 2013 #33
Give the guy a break. That was in the 90's. I guarantee a lot of others were saying it with him. judesedit Jan 2013 #38
thank you! Voice for Peace Jan 2013 #43
Great OP riqster Jan 2013 #39
If POTUS wants 'significant cuts' to the defense budget ... Myrina Jan 2013 #40
Barney Frank Dials Back Opposition to Hagel Nomination WilliamPitt Jan 2013 #41
OK, but what happened to Kerry? I thought it was going to be him. nt rivegauche Jan 2013 #45
Kerry for Secy of State.` progressoid Jan 2013 #46
DOH!! Thanks, I am dumb today. ;-) rivegauche Jan 2013 #74
Chuck Hagel went to the wall for Max Cleland mac56 Jan 2013 #47
I'm not anti Republican PatrynXX Jan 2013 #51
MJ Rosenberg on why Hagel has so much oposition buzzroller Jan 2013 #52
MJ assumes the Jewish Lobby (his term) is always the bad guy oberliner Jan 2013 #71
He has to do better on explaining himself regarding LGBTIQ rights.We should not accept anything less stevenleser Jan 2013 #54
Steve Clemmons at The Washington Note supports Hagel. mulsh Jan 2013 #57
And here is David Sirota's view buzzroller Jan 2013 #58
Defense Budget Accountability Peaceful Protester Jan 2013 #60
(Read More: Blowback, Sorrow and Consequences) Peaceful Protester Jan 2013 #61
Heh-heh, sometimes I forget how smart Chalmers Johnson was... immoderate Jan 2013 #81
Some might prefer that the job not be qualified by reverse McCarthyism TheKentuckian Jan 2013 #64
Just us acknowledging leftynyc Jan 2013 #65
Can you imagine the emails to Bernie Sanders? plethoro Jan 2013 #66
It's another one of those "best we can get" situations Taverner Jan 2013 #69
Might've been nice to not have chosen another white male oberliner Jan 2013 #72
Glenn Greenwald is an idiot oberliner Jan 2013 #70
Conservatives seem to be furious with the choice... Jeff In Milwaukee Jan 2013 #73
I'm with you and Glenn Greenwald. MissMarple Jan 2013 #75
Just Imagine The Optics Of Republicans VIRULENTLY OpposingThe Nomination of REPUBLICAN Chuck Hagel Skraxx Jan 2013 #77
THAT? Will be merely theatrics for the easily fooled. WinkyDink Jan 2013 #88
For What Purpose? They Will Do Themselves No Favors With Those "Theatrics" Skraxx Jan 2013 #89
Kerry @ Sec'y State = Democratic Senate majority's loss; Hagel @ DoD Sec'y = Haliburton's loss Texas Lawyer Jan 2013 #78
Agreed, Will. But I have another, slightly parochial reason for liking Hagel as SecDef ... 11 Bravo Jan 2013 #79
Hagel is fine. jsr Jan 2013 #80
I support his nomination now, too Politicub Jan 2013 #85
Good points, Will. Two other considerations: watrwefitinfor Jan 2013 #86
Obviously, because we've run out of Democrats. Yes, I'm hard-core. To me, a "good Republican" WinkyDink Jan 2013 #87
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why Hagel?»Reply #61