We could have left Vietnam alone. Eventually we did leave Vietnam alone, and nothing happened. Logically then, it stands to reason that whether we left Vietnam alone when we did, or, years earlier than we did, or, from the beginning, or, before the beginning, nothing would have happened.
Having a war is, itself, though, the point, I guess. Dropping more tonnage of bombs on Vietnam than were used on all sides combined during WWII is an end in itself, needs no justification. “It is what it is”, as it were, and whatever… There certainly is, “… no reason to stop the bombing”. There never is.
These two articles remind us of Kissinger’s time and precisely the kinds of American consistency that he developed, that we’ve chosen to hold to consistently, defining us:
“America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests”. ― Henry Kissinger.
I remember as a kid seeing on TV about Kissinger’s “denial of safe haven” to Vietnamese, by bombing neighboring countries as well!
As a strange thought experiment: if the US and Vietnam were not separated by an ocean but shared a border instead, would the “no safe havens policy” (bomb neighbors) have applied as well?
Maybe we’d bomb ourselves, I guess, if it served our interest. It’s the interests that matter, aside from, or that is – above – everything else, to the extent really that nothing else matters, only the interests. What is our interest though?
That becomes clear if you look: we’ve got all these bombs. And they have to be dropped.
American consistency is twofold.
- American bombing is continuous. War is permanent, perpetual.
- Americans fail to question perpetual war, and, over time, even to notice it.
American war is above reproach, beyond question. It just is. It’s like the sun rising and the sun setting. Who argues against the sun rising or the sun setting? There is no point in questioning the sun rising or the sun setting. There is no reason for it. It just is.
There is a little bit of difference of opinion though, among Americans, around the edges. What to do with refugees? Sometimes we bomb them. Sometimes we don’t. These days we’re in the business of overthrowing the government of Syria. That creates a lot of refugees for near neighboring countries to absorb, and given the sheer volume of refugees we create, for Europe to absorb as well.
Here then is the difference of opinion. Some say there is no limit to how many refugees can be absorbed by neighbors near and distant. And some say there are limits.
And that’s the extent of the difference of opinion.
But of course there is no debate on the production of refugees. Debate is confined to the degree to which refugees are welcomed or not welcomed wherever they arrive. It’s taken as normal and inevitable that refugees will continue to be produced, by the millions by American bombs in an American war of choice. Sure it’s a choice. But it’s an American choice, so there is no other choice. The sun comes up everyday. The sun sets everyday. There’s nothing for anyone to do about it. American war is permanent. Period. Go on about your business.
The production of millions of refugees is beside the point and of no consequence for American policy. However, or more to the point, the war against Syria isn’t going very well. That is to say, it isn’t meeting stated US war goals. Well, we should be careful here; the war is meeting some American goals: War is an absolute good, so, therefore, if there is war, then that’s good. But, in it’s 5th year, the war is not yet fulfilling publicly stated US intent: the overthrow of the government of Syria.
Return again to the Kissingerian American Consistency: the bombs will fall. Period. Nothing else matters. However, there is a second aspect to American Kissingerian Consistency.
It is this:
When the US (officially) says something, then it will do what it says.
If you read carefully what the US says, you’ll notice that the US says very little. It’s a nation of few words. Of course there are the meaningless bits. They fill the space (politely!) with sounds that sound like speech. But, if you want to know when the US is speaking with intent, it’s easy to recognize this and tune into it. You know it like this: if the subject is bombing, then the US is speaking with intent, speaking clearly, purposefully.
If it says it’s going to bomb; then it’s going to bomb. Similarly, if it says it’s going to arm “moderates” to overthrow today’s latest “Satan/Hitler“, then that’s what it’s going to do. That’s what it is doing, what it will do, and what it will continue to do, permanently, just as the sun rises and the sun sets. It doesn’t matter the meaning of the word “moderates”, and it doesn’t matter the reasons for the bombing, other than the reason given. You have to listen and recognize exactly what is being said when the US speaks with intent. The US says perfectly clearly that it intends to destroy the Syrian government, and that is what it is going to do. Bank on it.
Anyone can easily recognize the inevitable result: Syria will be given over to ISIS control. This is the predictable and inevitable result of our policy and our stated intent. We see, also, that this is precisely the result of our application of the same policy before in neighboring countries, Libya, and before that, Iraq. American regime change in Iraq spawned ISIS over large parts of Iraq. After that, Libya, same result. Syria, again the same.
But this doesn’t matter. And the consequences don’t matter. YOU can deal with the consequences, whatever they are, however you want to deal with them. America won’t be dealing with them. You will. The consequences are your problem. But the source of your problem is none of your concern. Nothing you can say or think about it matters.
Facts certainly don’t matter. Morality doesn’t matter. International law. Crimes against humanity. Nuremberg principles prohibiting wars of aggression, crimes against peace, none of these matter, at all. Nor does anything else, except for this: the bombs will fall.
We’re fighting an anti-Syria war by proxy, arming and funding ISIS and it’s variants, albeit with a rhetorical fig leaf covering over ugly facts that are plain to see anyway (the fig leaf is itsy-bitsy-teeny-weeny yellow polka dot bikini). The fig leaf, “we’re arming moderates“, can be so tiny that its public appearance becomes obscene, and it doesn’t matter, because the fig leaf has a single and very simple purpose.
Covering crime, grave crimes, is no longer necessary. The fig leaf allows the US, while it carries out atrocities, to make official sounds in public that sort of sound like speech that sort of sounds appropriate. And that is all that is necessary now, since the complete evaporation of any standards that could define any behavior as criminal.
Eager for fulfillment of it’s intent stated years ago (the destruction of the Syrian government), 51 US State Department self-declared “dissenters” this week have penned a letter calling for, guess what? …bombing.
Seeing that our proxy war is not yet sufficient, now its time to boost the effort. It’s time for “ze bombink” (Kissinger: “the bombing”). It’s time to boost our proxy army (ISIS and its variants) with aerial bombing of the Syrian army, and bombing Syrian infrastructure and so on in the usual way.
And the bombs will fall, as sure as the sun rises and the sun sets. 51 diplomats signing a letter calling for the amplification of our illegal and criminal war can hardly be called “dissenters”. But they call themselves that and there’s nothing you can do about it. The sun rises and the sun sets.
For actual dissent, see this article https://www.thenation.com/article/the-state-departments-wrong-headed-push-for-war-with-syria/ . Such dissent is futile, but at least it’s actual dissent. Just don’t bother signing up to it. You can’t stop the US war. You can’t stop the bombs from falling. You can’t stop the endless production of refugees. You can only choose whether to send refugees away or welcome them. You can’t stop the bombing. You can’t shut off the refugee spigot.
The bombing is. The bombing will be. The bombing will continue. The bombing is what it is. And “zat is no reason to stop ze bombink.” And nothing ever is. There is no reason, ever, to stop the bombing.
We are certainly consistent. Kissingerian consistency. Strangely though, we’ve become more Kissingerian than Kissinger. Kissinger says today that we should stop our war against the government of Syria. He says that destroying ISIS is more important than destroying the Assad government, that instead of destroying sovereign Syria we should back away instead, leave them alone, let Assad, and Russia, defeat ISIS (rather than supporting ISIS, as we do).
Reasonable? Sure, but, “zat is no reason to stop ze bombink”. The bombs will fall. The sun will rise. The sun will set.