Mr. President, don’t make us grumpy. You won’t like us when we’re grumpy.
Why is the U.S. so gung-ho and bloodthirsty in attacking Syria? If your answer is to prevent al-Assad from massacring his own people with chemical weapons, then I hate to burst your bubble of naïveté.
Here’s the thing: wars are almost always waged *not* for humanitarian reasons. Aside from it being a sophisticated money laundering scheme used by the sociopathic elites, wars are almost always about *control of resources* and *strategic global financial dominance*.
For the past week I’ve been ranting my heart out on Facebook and other social media sites about my opposition to the impending military intervention on Syria knowing full well that I can rant all day long but it won’t amount to anything other than me feeling better for making my opinions known to the public (as well as to the NSA cyber-snoopers). So I’ve decided to not only rant but also do my civic duty as an American citizen of this great nation which was hijacked by sociopathic elites in the Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex.
So I signed this petition started by Rep. Alan Grayson and included this quote in the Comment section:
“Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness in a descending spiral of destruction … The chain reaction of evil — hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars — must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation.” ~ M.L.K., Strength to Love, 1963
And then I also went to House.gov and contacted my Representative after I found out that she’s still “undecided” (really?!) on her vote on Syria. It looks like she needed more pushing from her constituents. And so I did. Below is the email I sent her. I also called her office to urge her to *not* support the warmongering on Syria but her voice mail inbox was already full. Go figure.
Regardless of what the government naysayers and über-conspiracy theorists think, I believe that we still have a semblance of a functioning democracy (or whatever little is left). So it’s better to exercise our civic duties than just rant all day and do nothing.
I urge the people who are reading this to do the same. It’s an opportunity to pitch in our small voices and stop the madness of this runaway Military Empire.
Rep. Delbene,
As one of your constituents whose voices you represent in Congress, I urge you to please VOTE *NO* on the military intervention against Syria.
Former Congressman Dennis Kucinich laid out the reasons very succinctly.
DENNIS KUCINICH: Top 10 Unproven Claims for War Against Syria
~ http://www.alternet.org/world/top-10-unproven-claims-war-against-syriaThank you very much. Please do the right thing.
And now that we’re on the brink of another war, it’s important that we revisit the series of dirty wars that the Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex dragged us into and are still doing in our names. Those sociopathic bastards…
Jeremy Scahill’s “Dirty Wars: The World is a Battlefield”
P.S. Some Obama supporters who are still deep asleep or under the spell of the Obama-Kool-Aid are floating the theory that the President is playing a chess game — that he doesn’t really want to go to war with Syria in the first place. That’s why he has asked Congress to get involved (as if that is not part of the U.S. Constitution, jeesh.). Well, it’s a possibility. But I think that’s just plain chicken crap! If Obama is playing international political chess then he’s the most incompetent chess player around. If this is really just a chess game for Obama, then this is the point in the game where the chess player resigns.
Oddly, many in the media seem convinced that Obama’s pledge to seek congressional authorization for a Syria intervention was a clever gamble. It wasn’t. It was, to paraphrase Obama, a dumb gamble. That’s because there is now no good outcome for Obama, only a range of painfully ironic outcomes.
Consider the possibilities:
One: Congress votes against authorizing military action in Syria, so Obama decides not to move ahead with military action. But wait: Obama already informed the nation that as commander-in-chief, he has “decided that the United States should take military action against Syrian regime targets … based on what I am convinced is our national security interests.” If that’s true — and if Obama also believes he has the authority to act without congressional authorization — how can he possiblyrefrain from military action merely because he can’t get enough votes in a famously dysfunctional, do-nothing Congress?
Two: Congress votes against authorizing military action in Syria, and Obama — the one-time constitutional law professor — goes ahead with airstrikes anyway, ignoring the clearly expressed will of Congress.
Three: Congress votes in favor of authorizing military action in Syria, leaving Obama permanently beholden to congressional Republicans. This means the White House can kiss its domestic legislative agenda goodbye.
Comments (2)