Bombing Iraq. Not what I voted for.

[woo me with science]

59. I appreciate your rational responses throughout this thread,

and I respect your argument here, although I don't share your leaning toward trust. IMO, there will always be another humanitarian venture used by the MIC to expand their wars...and in many cases we have a hand in creating them. The first Iraq was supposed to last six weeks. I can't name a recent "humanitarian" venture that actually turned out to be humanitarian rather than an entry into more MIC profit and expanding pain and devastation. On the other hand, humanitarian crises that don't happen to be in areas of strategic interests for the US, for the most part, need not apply.

Bottom line, at this point I actively distrust any claims about "humanitarian" bombing from our government anymore. I think history shows clearly that humanitarian causes are the last concern of our MIC, unless they are used as a wedge to insert us into ventures that end up expanding into even more blood and death and wild profitability. We are warned about the need to bomb to prevent "potential genocide" in Iraq, while we abet *ongoing* genocidal slaughter in Gaza...carpet bombing of neighborhoods using our tax money and our bullets. And our military is engaged every single day in droning civilians to create more angry people to create more humanitarian crises.

I'm going to link again to this post by JackRiddler that I think should have hundreds of recommendations:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025355401

It describes the persisting behavior and policies by the MIC that ensure the continuation of this cycle of violence: humanitarian crisis followed by urgent bids for military "rescue" followed by bloodbath and escalation, followed by more military expansion, arming the lesser of evils, causing more unrest, which leads to more humanitarian crises and profit for the warmongers. The post rightly points out that there are things the MIC could be doing to show good faith in actually trying to end the violence rather than perpetuating this cycle, but their behavior, and the behavior of US politicians, does exactly the opposite.

We are constantly urged to see each new MIC project in isolation, instead of observing the larger pattern that reveals the true motive and intentions. The cycle of war is increasingly tethering our economy to military empire and hollowing out the rest of the country. At a certain point, we need to demand an overall change in behavior instead of allowing this constant reactivity to crisis that perpetuates the cycle of war and death and destruction and the draining of our national coffers into the pockets of the banks and the businessmen and their MIC.