When will US ever learn?
Mohammed Ali says “No More war”. Copyright of photo is Santa Monica mueseum. Applied for and awaiting release.)
What was the philosophy of the US War on Vietnam.
🇻🇳 The Vietnam War, which lasted from 1955 to 1975, represents a defining chapter in history, both for the United States and Vietnam. The philosophical underpinnings behind the US involvement in the war are complex and multi-faceted, shaped by a combination of ideology, geopolitical considerations, and Cold War dynamics.
I am to analyze the philosophy behind the US war on Vietnam, exploring the key motivations, justifications, and ethical questions that emerged during this divisive conflict.
At its core, the US war on Vietnam can be seen as an extension of the overarching Cold War philosophy of containing the spread of communism. The US viewed Vietnam as a proxy battleground in its global struggle against the Soviet Union and China, believing that the fall of one Southeast Asian nation to communism would lead to a domino effect of communist expansion in the region. Therefore, the primary philosophy of the US war on Vietnam was driven by a fervent anti-communist sentiment, rooted in the belief that the spread of communism threatened global stability and US national security interests.
In addition to ideological motivations, geostrategic considerations played a key role in shaping the US philosophy in the Vietnam War. The US perceived Southeast Asia as an essential region for its economic and security interests due to its access to vital resources and proximity to major maritime trade routes. The philosophy of preserving American hegemony and preventing the establishment of communist governments in these economically important regions was a driving force behind US involvement in Vietnam. The belief in the necessity of safeguarding economic and strategic interests directly influenced US military and diplomatic strategies in the war.
The Domino Theory, which posited that the fall of one Asian nation to communism would inevitably lead to the collapse of others, played a crucial role in shaping the philosophical justifications for US intervention in Vietnam. The moral imperative of preventing this hypothetical cascade of communism created a strong impetus for US involvement, with policymakers arguing that the US had a responsibility to stop the spread of an oppressive ideology and protect the values of democracy and freedom.
The US war on Vietnam raised significant ethical questions and controversies. The war's high casualty rates, extensive bombings, and the usage of controversial tactics such as Agent Orange and napalm generated backlash both domestically and internationally. Critics of the US philosophy argued that the pursuit of military victory disregarded the well-being and rights of the Vietnamese people, leading to immense suffering and loss of innocent lives. The philosophical debate revolved around the balance between pursuing strategic objectives and the ethical responsibility to protect human rights and preserve life.
The philosophy of the US war on Vietnam was multifaceted, drawing from Cold War ideology, geostrategic considerations, and moral imperatives to contain the spread of communism. The belief that Vietnam was a crucial battleground in the global struggle against communism, along with the geostrategic stakes involved, fueled US engagement in the region. However, the ethical questions raised and the significant human costs associated with the war continue to generate debate and introspection, highlighting the complexities and moral dilemmas tied to armed conflicts.
The present us cum Israel
Against Hamas is purely sn extension of the same philosophy. Here the actors are US, Israel, Iran, Tusdia, Hsmas, Islamophobia, anti-Muslim sentiment. Put the tight terms in my above essay and you will see where we are headed.
The US never learns from
It’s mistakes. The use of Agent Orange, carpet bombing ofvThe Vietnamese never achieved its objective
As we continue to reflect on the Vietnam War, it serves as a reminder of the need for critical examination of philosophical underpinnings and a deep understanding of the consequences of policy decisions. By doing so, we can strive to shape a future where conflicts are approached with greater care, empathy, and a commitment to peaceful resolution.
Labels: apartheid, cold war, communism, Gaza, genocide, geostrategic, global stability, Hamas, holocaust, ideological, islamophobia, Israel, Mohammed Ali, Palestine, Racket, US, Vietnam, War
Obama cried "Foul"! Interesting!
Barack Obama
President Barrack Obama's State of the Union speech was interesting in that it was full of contradictions.
He said he is phasing down the US military agenda abroad, whereas all he has done since is coming to the office is to ramp it up, continue the policies of the previous administration and show no direction in world politics, except rhetoric.
However the most glaring statement made by him was the criticism levelled at the US Supreme Court, which in its recent ruling, stated that Corporations had equal rights as individuals as to their role in election financing!
Obama may stand today for something different. He may have been supported by mass popular appeal.
That was because he had a great spin machine.
Let us look at the composition of the US Supreme Court today:
Chief Justice John Roberts
Associate Justices
John Paul Stevens
Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy
Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor
Do you note anything in particular?
The Roberts Court (2005–present) began with the confirmation and swearing in of Chief Justice John G. Roberts on September 29, 2005, and is the current presiding court.[58] The Roberts Court is seen as more conservative than the previous court.[59] Some of the major rulings so far have been in the areas of abortion (Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood,[60] Gonzales v. Carhart);[61] anti-trust legislation (Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc.);[62] the death penalty (Baze v. Rees,[63] Kennedy v. Louisiana);[64] the Fourth Amendment (Hudson v. Michigan);[65] free speech of government employees and of high school students (Garcetti v. Ceballos,[66] Morse v. Frederick);[67] military detainees (Hamdan v. Rumsfeld,[68] Boumediene v. Bush);[69] school desegregation (Parents v. Seattle);[70] voting rights (Crawford v. Marion County Election Board);[71] the Second Amendment (District of Columbia v. Heller),[72] and campaign finance (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission).[73]
Do you remember when Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito were appointed? 2005 and 2006!
These two radical fundamentalist Justices were appointed under the previous administration when Obama was in the Senate.
What was he doing then?
Although he did not support the appointment of these two people, what was he doing in the Senate?
When Bush had no 60 vote majority, did Obama stand up and filibuster these appointments? Did he lobby his fellow Democrats and convince them of his belief of what lay ahead with the appointment of these two people to the Supreme Court?
Obama showed no leadership then, just as today he is swinging with the wind!
Obama can cry foul today, but he was a short-sighted Senator jockeying his position to power when these crucial appointments were made.
The rest of the democratic world could see what lay ahead.
If the man had no vision then, can you expect him to have any different vision today?
Obama can cry "FOUL" all he wants, TODAY. But he is the one, by his irresponsibility and lack of courage of convictions, that made what occurred in the Supreme Court last week, happen!
Labels: Alito, Barrack Obama, Corporations, filibuster, Justice, President, Right, Roberts, Senate, Supreme Court, US, wing
Has the US already reached the Fascist Stage?
Posted on my Jacob's Blog, Jacob's Politics Blog, the Talk Show Ratings Blog and the Move the UN Blog.
Mike Malloy continues to head my ratings of Liberal Talk Show Hosts. Mike lives near Atlanta in Georgia and he and his wife, Kathy Bay, who is the Executive Producer of his show, put together their show every morning which airs on NovaM Radio, a liberal radio station from Phoenix, Arizona. I listen to him live, online, over the internet. Besides being a great host, Kathy is an outstanding producer, and boy, is she quick with suitable music and her comments.
I get up at 4 am every morning from Tuesday to Saturday to listen to Mike, as not only does he have a different view point from any other Talk Show Host, but in my seven years of listening to him, I have found him to be honest and in pursuit of the TRUTH.
His listeners are known as the TRUTHSEEKERS!
Many of us get together on the Democratic Underground Forum to share the experience of listening to Mike. It is a great community.
One caller to Mike's show today from New York really set my mind thinking.
Mike has been saying that America has already reached the Fascist State. Many disagree with him.
The caller said that, at this time of the year, there are many dignitaries attending the UN General Assembly, so security is normally at a height. However, what he experienced earlier this evening was totally unexpected.
The caller lives in a small suburban area of the New York where, in the back street, there is a good small restaurant. He had gone out for a walk in the evening. On his way home, several black limousines pulled up outside the restaurant.
Out of the last car jumped out several men in full riot gear, fully armed. They stepped all pedestrians even crossing the street. The people had to wait a full 10 minutes till the dignitary emerged from the car and was safely seated in the restaurant!
Does this happen in a democratic society?
I sincerely do not believe it can - not in any Scandinavian country.
Remember the killing of Olof Palme over 20 years ago. On February 28, 1986, the Swedish Prime Minister, leader of the Social Democratic Party was gunned down on a Stockholm street home from a cinema with his wife, Lisbet. as he and his wife were walking on the streets of Stockholm without any security personnel?
Has any such procedure as described by the New York caller been put into operation in any part of Sweden? NO!
I now tend to agree with Mike that the US, led by an imbecile, has entered the final phase of a Fascist State.
As another caller said, on Mike's show, that as she was at an US Airport with her toddler, there was an announcement that the day's terrorism alert was ORANGE and she and her toddler had to go through security checks where even the toddler had to remove his shoes for checking.
Fear Rules the US - and that is what Fascism is about!
Labels: Assembly, Fascist, General, New, UN, US, York
Fake Sheik...
Greg Palast gives the background of the marvellous work of investigative reporters and cameraman Rick Rowley and Dave Enders in his exposure of the "Fake Sheik" that shook the hand of George Bush and was then "terminated".
Greg Palast: Bush's Fake Sheik Whacked: The Surge and the Al Qaeda Bunny is a special investigative report from inside Iraq which is a MUST READ!
"Here's what you need to know that NPR won't tell you:
- Sheik Abu Risha wasn't a sheik.
- He wasn't killed by Al Qaeda.
- The new alliance with former insurgents in Anbar is as fake as the sheik -- and a murderous deceit."
More....
"The sheik wasn't a sheik. He was a fake. While proclaiming to Rick that he was "the leader of all the Iraqi tribes," Abu led no one. But for a reported sum in millions in cash for so-called "reconstruction contracts," Abu Risha was willing to say he was Napoleon and Julius Caeser and do the hand-shake thing with Bush on camera."
More...
But why should we complain as the (fingers stuck in ears, blindfolded monkeys) US taxpayers are being screwed by their Administration and their non-professional and politically compliant "army". Let them pay with their money and their lives if they are not going to fight to end their illegal invasion and occupation!
Labels: Army, Bush, Fake, hand-shake, illegal, invasion, non-professional, occupation, Sheik, taxpayers, US
