Tuesday, September 29, 2015

Living in a War Based Economy: Time to Decide Guns or Butter

Monday the President of the United States excoriated Russian President, Vladimir Putin for supporting the elected President of Syria, Bashir Assad and Syria’s military in Syria’s fight against the U.S. supported rebels and terrorists who have waged war in Syria for the past five years.    

President Obama further accused Putin of annexing Crimea, after the people of Crimea voted to join the Russian Federation following the removal of the elected President of Ukraine through a U.S. backed bloody coup.  From Washington Post:


At U.N., Obama takes Russia to task for actions in Ukraine, Syria

UNITED NATIONS -- President Obama blasted Russian President Vladimir Putin's approach to other countries Monday, suggesting in a speech at the U.N. General Assembly that the world's nations must uphold international order in Syria and Ukraine or risk global instability.

In his speech, Obama praised the international order "that has underwritten unparalleled advances in human liberty and human dignity…"

The president said Russia's annexation of Crimea and support for separatists in southeastern Ukraine has backfired, bringing Ukrainians closer to Europe and damaging Russia's economy. "We cannot stand by when the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a nation is flagrantly violated."

And he said that the United States was willing to work with any nation, including Iran and Russia, to end the lengthy civil war in Syria. At the same time, he emphasized, any resolution of the conflict must lead to the exit of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The destabilization caused by US foreign policy of regime change has led to unbelievable tragedy, human suffering and death and does not support Obama’s claims before the United Nations that “international order and unparalleled advances in human liberty and human dignity” have resulted from the American, EU/NATO military aggression.  From World Socialist Network:


Washington prepares heightened aggression against Damascus and Moscow

Addressing the United Nations General Assembly on Monday, President Barack Obama portrayed himself and the US government as the preeminent defenders of international law and diplomacy. He did so even as the catastrophic consequences of the illegal wars of aggression he has overseen continued to send waves of refugees fleeing the ruins of entire countries—including Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen—and as Washington took new steps to turn Eastern Europe into a militarized zone for eventual war against Russia.

With his trademark hypocrisy and contempt for the intelligence of his audience, Obama hailed “an international system that imposes a cost on those who choose conflict over cooperation…..”

This from a man who asserts the right of his government to launch “preemptive” wars against any country or group deemed hostile to Washington’s drive for hegemony over the oil-rich Middle East and the rest of the world; who has killed untold thousands in drone missile assassinations; waged an unprovoked war against Libya and murdered its leader, Gaddafi; and armed and financed a sectarian civil war using Al Qaeda-linked killers as its proxy force, turning Syria into a chamber of horrors….

He denounced the main targets of US aggression, calling Assad a “tyrant,” accusing Russia of violating “the sovereignty and territorial integrity” of Ukraine, implied that China was attacking “the basic principles of freedom of navigation and the free flow of commerce” in the South China Sea and singled out Iran for continuing to “deploy violent proxies to advance its interests.”

The chief backer of tyrants in the Middle East, violator of national sovereignty and territorial integrity in Ukraine, threat to freedom of navigation in East Asia and deployer of violent proxies is, of course, the United States.

Looks like Obama may see regime change in the Middle East after all, just not the one he wants.  One of Obama’s “chief tyrants in the Middle East and violent proxies” is on the hot seat.  From The Guardian:


Saudi royal calls for regime change in Riyadh

A senior Saudi prince has launched an unprecedented call for change in the country’s leadership, as it faces its biggest challenge in years in the form of war, plummeting oil prices and criticism of its management of Mecca, scene of last week’s hajj tragedy.

The prince, one of the grandsons of the state’s founder, Abdulaziz Ibn Saud, has told the Guardian that there is disquiet among the royal family – and among the wider public – at the leadership of King Salman, who acceded the throne in January.

The prince, who is not named for security reasons, wrote two letters earlier this month calling for the king to be removed.

“The king is not in a stable condition and in reality the son of the king [Mohammed bin Salman] is ruling the kingdom,” the prince said. “So four or possibly five of my uncles will meet soon to discuss the letters. They are making a plan with a lot of nephews and that will open the door. A lot of the second generation is very anxious.”

“The public are also pushing this very hard, all kinds of people, tribal leaders,” the prince added. “They say you have to do this or the country will go to disaster….”

Tsk, tsk, tsk.  Sounds like Saudi Arabia is feeling the angst that comes from a war based economy like just like the rest of the world.  Wars are expensive, you can have butter or guns, make your choice.

Prince Mohammed bin Salman is a new arrival to the Saudi senior leadership team but has already become one of the most controversial…

Many Saudis are sickened by the sight of the Arab world’s richest country pummelling its poorest, and as the cost in lives and treasure grows, criticism is mounting that Prince Mohammed bin Salman– whose unofficial nickname is “Reckless” – rushed in without a proper military strategy or an exit plan.

Ha, ha, his nickname is “Reckless” must be because of the friends he keeps. And you know who else’s country is sick of sacrificing butter for guns?  Obama’s buddy David Cameron, seems the new Labour Leader Corbyn is causing a stir.  From New Europe:


The new Labour strongman and scarecrow of the political establishment Jeremy Corbyn might be derided for his appearance, attire and archaic speech, but he certainly understands about spin. Labour has announced it had set up an advisory committee including Nobel Prize-winning U.S. economist Joseph Stiglitz and Frenchman Thomas Piketty to help develop its anti-austerity policies.

Britain’s opposition Labour Party will thus launch a “radical review” of the national institutions that manage the economy, including the Bank of England, its finance spokesman said.

John McDonnell, a hard-left former trade unionist who has advocated renationalising banks and imposing wealth taxes, promised a Labour government would ensure the proceeds of economic growth are shared more equally around the country.

McDonnell said that if his party wins power in 2020 Britain would live within its means but invest to help the economy grow.

McDonnell has previously called for the government to reclaim the power to set interest rates from the Bank of England. But the source said the party’s position would be that the central bank would remain independent.

Yowza, it’s back to the future.  Back to where people run the banks instead of banks running the people.  But it looks like Cameron isn’t interested, he’s still wedded to a war based economy and regime change in Syria.  From LancashireEvening Post:  


World leaders remain "miles apart" over the Syria crisis, David Cameron conceded as he dismissed any prospect of any "phoney" solution that involved Bashar Assad.

The Prime Minister is at the United Nations in New York where talks between Western allies and their Russian and Iranian counterparts have failed to break the deadlock over taking on Islamic State (IS)….

"In the end, however far apart we might be whether with the Iranians or the Russians, those two countries have an influence over what happens in Syria and we need to convince them that a new Syria with a different leader wouldn't necessarily be against their interests but it would help to get rid of Isil.

"So far the problem has been that Russia and Iran have not been prepared to contemplate the end state of a Syria without Assad."

Vladimir Putin - who met face to face with US President Barack Obama for discussions last night - said it would be "an enormous mistake" not to involve the Syrian president.

I have an idea, how about regime change in the UK, US and Canada.  That might be a good start, and let’s end this war based economy once and for all.  It’s time to decide on what is your priority, guns or butter.  You know, we’ll never get out of this world alive.''

By Patricia Baeten

No comments:

Post a Comment