Tagged: osama bin laden

American Bloodlust in the Age of Interventionism

Pittsburgh Steelers running back Rashard Mendenhall felt the brunt of public outrage back in May of 2011 when he decided to weigh in on a matter of American foreign policy. Clearly disgusted with the jubilant nature of celebrations following Osama bin Laden’s death, Mendenhall took to twitter to voice his dissatisfaction:

“What kind of person celebrates death? It’s amazing how people can HATE a man they have never even heard speak. We’ve only heard one side…”

The condemnations and denouncements began soon after, littering the sports press with attacks on Mendenhall, pinning him against the broader American public and eventually causing him to lose his well-valued endorsement with Champion sportswear. He received attacks from fans, sports owners, and fellow football players, most notably Michael Vick. In attempting to clarify his remarks, Mendenhall wrote on his personal blog that he was reacting solely to the “amount of joy” following an event of murder:

I don’t believe that this is an issue of politics or American pride; but one of religion, morality, and human ethics. In the bible, Ezekiel 33:11 states, “Say to them, ‘As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways!…”. I wasn’t questioning Bin Laden’s evil acts. I believe that he will have to face God for what he has done. I was reflecting on our own hypocrisy. During 9/11 we watched in horror as parts of the world celebrated death on our soil. Earlier this week, parts of the world watched us in horror celebrating a man’s death.

Obviously, such a Christian nation as the United States could not tolerate actual Christian thoughts or examinations in evaluating murder. Therefore, Mendenhall was subjugated to the whim of public anger.

The broader effect of this episode, negative flak and all, perfectly conveys just how entrenched the desire for bloodshed and violence is in American society. Citizens gathered at the White House, in Times Square, and across the United States, and openly celebrated the death of a human being. The fact is that the tragic events of 9/11, brought on by foreign occupation and meddling, have somehow justified the American populace to embrace news of mass deaths and assassinations, cheered on by war-hungry executive and legislative branches.

Such bloodlust has been a routine triumph for state-induced patriotism, almost always leading to a bump in the public opinion polls for the American Presidents who commit these actions, simultaneously justifying billions, if not trillions, of dollars in military spending. Congressional leaders and war profiteers monopolize the television talk shows and newspaper editorials, praising the death of the singular individual as another “key moment” in the ever-expanded Global War on Terror. The pattern is laughably recognizable.

With that in mind, 2011 has proven to be one of the bloodiest years in American interventionism. As far as civilians are concerned, over 3,000 Iraqis have been declared dead, 3,500 in Afghanistan, 2,000 in Libya, and countless more in the drone attacks in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. Since the invocation of the “Global War on Terror” in 2001, over 8,000 American soldiers have been killed on various battlegrounds across the world. 2010 was the year in which more American military personnel committed suicide than were killed in action. The collateral damage exists on both sides.

The most high-profile killing occurred in Yemen, when an Unmanned Air Vehicle, a drone armed with hell-fire missiles, dropped a payload on Anwar Al-Awlaki, an American citizen born in New Mexico, who the Obama administration had labeled the “Chief of External Operations”of Al-Qaeda. The administration never produced a shred of evidence which connected him to specific attacks, but his purported “ties” to terror groups seemed enough to warrant his murder. The only effort produced by the Obama administration was the release of a memo citing legal authority to assassinate an American citizen, mirroring George W. Bush’s own memo to justify torture of terrorist suspects. The reaction from the American public followed the official government line, although skeptical voices, such as Presidential Candidate Ron Paul, dissident Noam Chomsky, and reporter Jake Tapper questioned the assassination without due process.

Al-Awlaki was not the only one killed, however. The co-editor of the Al-Qaeda magazine Inspire, Samir Khan, another American citizen was also killed in the same attack.

Less than a month later, Al-Awlaki’s son, 16 year-old Abdel-Rahman Anwar al-Awlaki, also an American citizen, was also killed by a target drone attack, demonstrating the Obama administration’s utter disregard for human life. In this case, however, the news was kept quiet, keeping the celebrations confined to the drawing room of the Department of Defense, the cubicles of so-called “terrorism experts” at neoconservative think-tanks, and the conference rooms of weapon manufacturers.

And now, on the morning of the 20th of October, 2011, the American bloodlust returns to fruition. Early indications are that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was killed by Libyan rebels. Though more than 65% of the American public were initially opposed to any American intervention in Libya, more than $1 billion was spent, and it was never officially approved by the U.S. Congress, the American sentiment will surely be one of celebration. The media elite will continue to push the flawed story that Gaddafi was responsible for the Lockerbie bombing (disproved by the documentary The Maltest Double Cross-Lockerbie), subverting the truth and relegating it once more only for a concern only for historians, not present popular opinon.  

The stories told over the next few days will surely attempt to justify the billions spent, the thousands of lives lost, and the pronounced need for more military spending, as is always the case. The public will be swooned to the supposed “power” of the Obama doctrine, and the majestic capacities of American interventionism will reign once more. Forever lost to history will be the quite friendly relationship the U.S. had with enjoyed with Libya once trade was re-opened. In fact, Wikileaks cables revealed that many U.S. Senators enjoyed several state-sponsored visits to Libya, hosted by Gaddafi himself. The biggest American proponents to remove Gaddafi from power, McCain, Joe Lieberman, and Senator Lindsey Graham, were also the first ones to embrace him just a few years ago, as they all traveled to Libya. McCain even tweeted his meeting with Gaddafi back in 2009. A post I did a few months ago also reveals the many state visits to Libya enjoyed by many world leaders, the very same who claimed Gaddafi was a “tyrant” no longer fit to rule, and were the first to commit planes and bombs to the African nation. As Rashard Mendenhall so intelligently stated, we should revisit our own “hypocrisy“.

Going forward, the official reaction of the American government is best explained by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, one of the most hawkish individuals in public office. Speaking to Fox News, Senator Graham stated plainly what the role of the United States in Libya will be in the next few years: “there is a lot of money to be made, a lot of oil to be drilled“. Alas, another coup supported by American arms succeeds. The world’s policeman once again polishes its badge and gun, and calls it a victory for the American way.

As millions far from these lands die under the American flag, far from the protections of constitutional republicanism, the broader populace should recognize the future implications of the constant meddling in foreign nations, where the world is a witness to the crimes of our government. History is the driving force of the Israeli/Palestinian issue, and it will continue to be one to condemn the United States federal government in the eyes of those who live elsewhere.

Historian Edward Gibbon once theorized that the decline of the Roman Empire was rooted in the “moral decay” of Roman society. As death, carnage, and assassination become universally embraced, tolerated, and openly celebrated in this country, perhaps the decline of the American Empire is closer than any may expect.

The Mystical War Against Terrorism

On April 22,1971, a young Lieutenant named John Kerry came before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, being the first Vietnam veteran to testify before Congress on the subject of ending the war in which he served.

He appeared on behalf of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), a group of over 20,000 former military servicemen who collectively called for an end to the military operations and atrocities in Vietnam.

Lt. Kerry gave a prepared speech, eloquent and precise, poignant and riveting. He spoke of the crimes of the American soldiers committed in Vietnam, the mystic veil of communism which had justified such killing and destruction, the lies of the American executive which directed these immoral actions, and the convergence of all said injustice to yield the most grave mistake which had just then become realized to the majority of the American public.

That was another war and another era.

However, the hubris of the present cannot overcome the lessons of history, especially as they repeat so easily within one generation. The false events which led to the Vietnam War, beginning in the Tonkin Gulf in 1964, have now become openly accepted as acknowledged government lies in order to fuel war.  Upwards of up to 58,000 American servicemen and almost 4,000,000 Vietnamese, Laotians, and Cambodians lost their lives over the span of a few years, caused by deliberate manipulations and deceptions committed by those holding the reigns of American foreign policy at the time.

And now, close to forty years later, where does the policy of the United States of America stand? The answer is quite brazen and beyond belief. Instead of the words Vietnam, jungles, and communists, it has become Afghanistan, deserts, and terrorists. The ever-malicious monolithic force still “threatens” the very core tenants of American freedom and democracy, even as those very ideals are skewed and curtailed in order to combat that same evil.

In the words of the young, sage Lt. John Kerry, who testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971, we find an eerie parallel to the grievances and realities of today. Wars continue to rage in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya. Small bands of mercenary contractors, intelligence operatives, and predator drones carry out attacks and drop bombs in Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan. Close to 2,500,000 civilians, 6,000 American soldiers, and 1,000 coalition troops have lost their lives in total since the United States began its vast re-colonization of the Middle East less than ten years ago. American soldiers are left to continue tour after tour of active combat duty, leading to a permanent army of psychologically-damaged young men and women who wear the stars and stripes upon their back, and the memories of death and suffering upon their conscience. All undertaken in order to combat yet another mystical enemy; that of terrorism.

The testimony given by Lt. Kerry not only flawlessly described the atmosphere and circumstances of the 1970s Vietnam struggle, but it so lucidly and perfectly embodies the global imperial struggle which defines the United States of America in the current year 2011.

Listen to the words of future Democratic Senator John Kerry, paying special heed to the mentions of Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos. Replace these states (italicized) which experienced past American intervention and conflict with the plethora available in present times.

Such will illuminate the current struggle which is the Mystical War Against Terrorism.

(Transcript from the Fulbright Hearing)

Mr. Kerry: I would like to talk to you a little bit about what the result is of the feelings these men carry with them after coming back from Vietnam. The country doesn’t know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence, and who are given the chance to die for the biggest nothing in history; men who have returned with a sense of anger and a sense of betrayal which no one has yet grasped.

As a veteran and one who feels this anger, I would like to talk about it. We are angry because we feel we have been used in the worst fashion by the administration of this country.

In our opinion, and from our experience, there is nothing in South Vietnam, nothing which could happen that realistically threatens the United States of America. And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom, which those misfits supposedly abuse, is to use the height of criminal hypocrisy, and it is that kind of hypocrisy which we feel has torn this country apart.

We are probably much more angry than that and I don’t want to go into the foreign policy aspects because I am outclassed here. I know that all of you talk about every possible alternative of getting out of Vietnam. We understand that. We know you have considered the seriousness of the aspects to the utmost level and I am not going to try to deal on that, but I want to relate to you the feeling that many of the men who have returned to this country express because we are probably angriest about all that we were told about Vietnam and about the mystical war against communism.

We found that not only was it a civil war, an effort by a people who had for years been seeking their liberation from any colonial influence whatsoever, but also we found that the Vietnamese whom we had enthusiastically molded after our own image were hard put to take up the fight against the threat we were supposedly saving them from.

We found most people didn’t even know the difference between communism and democracy. They only wanted to work in rice paddies without helicopters strafing them and bombs with napalm burning their villages and tearing their country apart. They wanted everything to do with the war, particularly with this foreign presence of the United States of America, to leave them alone in peace, and they practiced the art of survival by siding with which ever military force was present at a particular time, be it Vietcong, North Vietnamese, or American.

We found also that all too often American men were dying in those rice paddies for want of support from their allies. We saw first hand how money from American taxes was used for a corrupt dictatorial regime. We saw that many people in this country had a one-sided idea of who was kept free by our flag, as blacks provided the highest percentage of casualties. We saw Vietnam ravaged equally by American bombs as well as by search and destroy missions, as well as by Vietcong terrorism, and yet we listened while this country tried to blame all of the havoc on the Vietcong.

We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them. We saw America lose her sense of morality as she accepted very coolly a My Lai and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate bars and chewing gum.

We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting anything that moves, and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of Orientals.

We watched the U.S. falsification of body counts, in fact the glorification of body counts. We listened while month after month we were told the back of the enemy was about to break. We fought using weapons against “oriental human beings,” with quotation marks around that. We fought using weapons against those people which I do not believe this country would dream of using were we fighting in the European theater or let us say a non-third-world people theater, and so we watched while men charged up hills because a general said that hill has to be taken, and after losing one platoon or two platoons they marched away to leave the high for the reoccupation by the North Vietnamese because we watched pride allow the most unimportant of battles to be blown into extravaganzas, because we couldn’t lose, and we couldn’t retreat, and because it didn’t matter how many American bodies were lost to prove that point. And so there were Hamburger Hills and Khe Sanhs and Hill 881’s and Fire Base 6’s and so many others.

Now we are told that the men who fought there must watch quietly while American lives are lost so that we can exercise the incredible arrogance of Vietnamizing the Vietnamese. Each day…(Applause)

Each day to facilitate the process by which the United States washes her hands of Vietnam someone has to give up his life so that the United States doesn’t have to admit something that the entire world already knows, so that we can’t say that we have made a mistake. Someone has to die so that President Nixon won’t be, and these are his words, “the first President to lose a war.”

We are asking Americans to think about that because how do you ask a man to be the last man to dies in Vietnam? How do ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake? But we are trying to do that, and we are doing it with thousands of rationalizations, and if you read carefully the President’s last speech to the people of this country, you can see that he says, and says clearly: But the issue, gentlemen, the issue is communism, and the question is whether or not we will leave that country to the communists or whether or not we will try to give it hope to be a free people. But the point is they are not a free people now under us. They are not a free people, and we cannot fight communism all over the world, and I think we should have learned that lesson by now.


But we are here as veterans to say we think we are in the midst of the greatest disaster of all times now because they are still dying over there, and not just Americans, Vietnamese, and we are rationalizing leaving that country so that those people can go on killing each other for years to come.

Americans seems to have accepted the idea that the war is winding down, at least for Americans, and they have also allowed the bodies which were once used by a President for statistics to prove that we were winning that war, to be used as evidence against a man who followed orders and who interpreted those orders no differently than hundreds of other men in Vietnam.

We veterans can only look with amazement on the fact that this country has been unable to see there is absolutely no difference between ground troops and a helicopter crew, and yet people have accepted a differentiation fed them by the administration.

No ground troops are in Laos, so it is all right to kill Laotians by remote control. But believe me the helicopter crews fill the same body bags and they wreak the same kind of damage on the Vietnamese and Laotian countryside as anybody else, and the President is talking about allowing that to go on for many years to come. One can only ask if we will really be satisfied only when the troops march into Hanoi.

We are asking here in Washington for some action, action from the Congress of the United States of America which has the power to raise and maintain armies, and which by the Constitution also has the power to declare war.

We have come here, not to the President, because we believe that this body can be responsive to the will of the people, and we believe that the will of the people says that we should be out of Vietnam now.

We are here in Washington also to say that the problem of this war is not just a question of war and diplomacy. It is part and parcel of everything that we are trying as human beings to communicate to people in this country, the question of racism, which is rampant in the military, and so many other questions also, the use of weapons, the hypocrisy in our taking umbrage in the Geneva Conventions and using that as justification for a continuation of this war, when we are more guilty than any other body of violations of those Geneva Conventions, in the use of free fire zones, harassment interdiction fire, search and destroy missions, the bombings, the torture of prisoners, the killing of prisoners, accepted policy by many units in South Vietnam. That is what we are trying to say. It is party and parcel of everything.

Finally, this administration has done us the ultimate dishonor. They have attempted to disown us and the sacrifice we made for this country. In their blindness and fear they have tried to deny that we are veterans or that we served in Nam. We do not need their testimony. Our own scars and stumps of limbs are witnesses enough for others and for ourselves.

We wish that a merciful God could wipe away our own memories of that service as easily as this administration has wiped their memories of us. But all that they have done and all that they can do by this denial is to make more clear than ever our own determination to undertake one last mission, to search out and destroy the last vestige of this barbarous war, to pacify our own hearts, to conquer the hate and the fear that have driven this country these last 10 years and more and so when, in 30 years from now, our brothers go down the street without a leg, without an arm or a face, and small boys ask why, we will be able to say “Vietnam” and not mean a desert, not a filthy obscene memory but mean instead the place where America finally turned and where soldiers like us helped it in the turning. Thank you.