WHY WE FIGHT moviemaker Jarecki a disgusting leftwing shit.
The RSF Group
he was on charlie rose few weeks back. rose asked him about US wars
since WWII. jarecki, of course, thinks WWII was a good and necessary
war because US fought and defeated three rightwing nations. but,
jarecki is critical of all the wars--real and cold--since then cuz most
of them involved communist nations or 'anti-imperialist' third world
nations.
when charlie rose asked him if the korean war was worth it, jarecki's
answer was it's still not clear. today, north korea is one of the most
closed, murderous, oppressive, totalitarian, and dangerous nations in
the world. south korea is one of the most successful among the recently
developed nations, with advanced economy and genuine democracy. yet,
jarecki still doesn't know if the korean war was worth it. yes, this
is how leftists think. they are so anti-american and anti-capitalist
that even when american influence and capitalism succeeds beyond
anyone's expectations, they refuse to see the truth.
and vietnam war would have been worth it too if US would have won.
today, south vietnam would be a prosperous democracy, what with its
talented and highly cultured populace. but, communism took over and
turned the whole nation into one of poverty, oppression, and misery.
and we know what happened to cambodia.
like all leftists, jarecki seems to think all evil originates and
emanates out of the US. never mind that the korean war, vietnam war,
and the cold war were defensive on US's part. stalin swallowed up
eastern europe and banished all freedoms. he had all opponents of his
power either shot or imprisoned. and there were powerful communist
parties in western europe following WWII.
china fell to communism and became virulently anti-american.
communists started the korean war. and they started the vietnam war by
insisting that vietnam had to united under communism. US wasn't
against unification of vietnam but rightly thought that as communism is
an evil ideology, an entire people shouldn't have to fall under its
shadow.
US fought communists around the world cuz communists were the
aggressors. for jarecki to say US shouldn't have fought is simply to
say that US should have allowed communists to take power whereever they
wanted to, even in the US if that day should come.
but, let's look at the record of what happened to nations that came
under US influence and Marxist influence. would anyone really prefer
to live in north korea over south korea? or, castro's cuba to
pinochet's relatively open and pluralistic chile?
if we do have a problem with the military-industrial complex, it's
mainly because the communists and lunatics like hussein have made it
all too easy for hawks to argue for war.
also, the military industrial complex was the creation of democrats,
not republicans. and it was created in its war against nazism and
japanese militarism. when it was used against the ultra-right, the
liberals were so cozy with it--after all, it was all about big
government. but, once the ultra-right was defeated and the enemy became
the soviet empire and red china and other crazy leftwing lunacies
around the world, alot of pink liberals began to argue that it was all
so unnecessary.
but, in truth, the military industrial complex safeguarded US allies in
western europe and parts of asia like japan and south korea and
taiwan--all successful thanks to US influence and protection.
and, it was the most instrumental weapon in defeating the soviet union
and the cold war. are those good things? a sane person would think so.
but, leftists are actually pissed that US won the cold war. they think
that even though the USSR was deeply flawed, it still represented a
higher ideal than the capitalist/conservative US. it's like how
chantal ackerman and jonathan rosenbaum are more saddened by the fall
of communism--expressing their 'profound jewish sadness'--than happy
for the liberated people who now have some say in the destiny of their
lives. these puritanical leftists fear that the people of eastern
europeans will choose mindless consumerism over pure ideals of marxism,
the ideology of the leftwing jew.
but, all sane people know that despite the flaws in the
military-industrial complex, US military has defeated scumbags of both
right and left, and have given great many people freedom and new
opportunities. if not for us, kuwaitis would be sucking hussein's dick
right now. and though iraq war has gone sour, the kurds and shiites are
free, no longer living under the iron heel of hussein and his retardo
relatives.
if i were a kurd or shiite, i'd say US military-industrial complex is
my savior. yeah, its bombs are nasty but let them fall on the scum
nations of the world.
indeed, US military industrial complex was instrumental in bringing
down milosevic and liberating the albanian people of kosovo. it was
instrumental in saving israel. it was instrumental in sending a
message to scum all over the world that if they get too cocky, US may
kick ass. indeed, it was our failure to intervene in rwanda that led
to a whole bunch of negroes slaughtering another whole bunch of
negroes. that's some bad shit.
and, though somalia intervention went bad cuz of ingrate negroes, we
were still able to get food into the country and end the famine.
and, we should do some bashing in sudan. i say we should go in and make
darfur and southern christian sudan separate nations since the muslim
rulers of sudan have been shitting on darfurese and christianese.
so, jarecki is a fool. he may be partly right about the tremendous
influence of the military industrial complex on congress and such. BUT,
when we see the american military in the context of world politics,
it's the most necessary force in maintaining peace and order. all
regions of the world where US military power is most entrenched have
been the safest and most free, ensuring stability and business and
harmony. look at the pacific rim. look at western europe where US had
been stationed since WWII. heck, germans have done better with the US
military than their own military.
it's regions where soviet influence spread that have seen the worst
strife, oppression, and violence. just ask polacks how things were
during the iron curtain yrs.
ukraine is a mess right now but during the soviet era, over 7 million
died as a result of communism.
look at middle east where soviet power had been widespread than US
power from 50s to 80s.
and why did hussein of iraq get all cocky? cuz he didn't think
americans were so tough. we had to show we were tough to make his ass
behave.
and why did the taliban and alqaeda attack the US? cuz they thought
americans would pussy out and not have the guts to fight. and leftists
like moveon.org would like to oblige. yes, we are all so guilt-ridden.
we are all a bunch of neo-imperialists. yes, we are all of bunch of
pussies like rosenbaum and jr jones who obviously can all their info
from rags like the nation and the farts of noam chomsky that disgusting
lowlife self-loathing jew and champion/apologist of the khmer rouge.
but, let's have some real history lesson here. gaddafi used to be a
punk. but, when reagan shot those missiles into his compound, he
started to behave. if clinton had used american military might against
north korea, that miserable regime would have been history. but, our
inaction had led that scum regime to survive and even make nukes.
indeed, the US military has been one of the most restrained in the
world. since WWII, US has been involved only in a few wars considering
its tremendous power and all the troublespots around the world. there
were many instances where US could have intervened to protect US
interests or to safeguard freedom. after WWII, US should have
intervened in eastern bloc cuz stalin went back on all his promises and
making eastern europe into his private fiefdom. US did nothing. and
later, US did nothing during the hungarian uprising. US did nothing
when soviet tanks rolled into czechoslovakia. meanwhile leftwing jew
rosenburg sent atomic secrets to the soviet union. the radical-jewish
complex worked for the soviet military-industrial complex which was a
far far bigger factor in the soviet economy and politics than its
counterpart in the US.
though leftists portray US as a bully nation since WWII, US mainly did
nothing militarily when anti-american or pro-soviet leaders came to
power in many third world nations in the middle east, africa, and
india. considering the immense power of the US military, US has been
extremely reluctant to go to war. US hesisted till the last moment in
korea. US didn't want the war in vietnam to escalate. US didn't even
want to take the war to north vietnam whereas chinese, USSR, and north
vietnam wanted to carry the war into south vietnam and cambodia. US
simply wanted south vietnam to be left alone and given a chance at
freedom. the war was escalated by the north and by chinese and soviet
aid. US was not aiding the south to attack the north. but, the
chinese and soviets were aiding the north to attack the south. the war
was escalated by the commie north, and the US had no option but to to
defend its ally and its regional interests--for peace, pluralism, free
markets(the basis for political freedom), and coca cola.
in latin america, american wish was for latin nations to modernize,
become more pluralistic, and democratize. US didn't want to use
military might. but, marxists chose war, insurgency, and violent
revolution over reform, compromise, democracy, and peace. while direct
US intervention in latin america were minimal--guatamala and
panama--those were last resorts rather than first priorities. bush
didn't want a showdown with noriega. it was the pineapple face that
begged for war. and now hugo chavez is crusin' for a brusin'. but,
since the cold war is over, we won't intervene cuz the historical
context no longer makes it urgent. there is no danger of soviet
influence being implanted on latin american soil, just as after the
fall of nazism there was no danger of nazi influence being implanted on
latin american soil--maily thru argentina. so, we'll let chavez go on
with his clown act.
the main cry around the world is not 'US came and kicked my ass' but
'why didn't the US come and save my ass?' there are countless millions
of people around the world who would just love having US to come save
them from brutal tyrants or enemies. but, for the most part, US won't
do such cuz US prefers peaceful diplomacy, has little political or
economic interest in most of the world. also, americans don't want
their sons to get killed trying to save some crazy people of color.
and, even the iraq war was 12 yrs in the making after every peaceful
venture put on the table. US just hoped hussein would be overthrown
from within and the headache would just end. but, the asshole remained
in power and still posed a future threat if US were to pull out of the
region. so, US used 9/11 as an excuse to kick hussein's ass. and US
wanted the war to end right there and then. but, the insurgency is
under way and we're stuck.
and, US waited a long time before it entered the balkan war. any sane
moral judgment would suggest we waited too long and allowed too much
bloodshed. the fact is it was a last resort, not a leap in the war for
the hell of it to make the hawks get rich.
now, would jarecki say that the US military-industrial complex loves
and even encourages the insurgency in iraq cuz it's just another excuse
for more military expenditure? that seems to be the logic of leftist
thinking--that the neocons and US military industrial complex didn't
want a speedy victory in iraq. gee, maybe as in vietnam, the m-i
complex wants a long drawn out war which necessitates further huge
expenditures in the war effort. could it be that the US didn't send
enough troops to iraq just to the insurgency could thrive? that must
be it. it was not a failure of judgment on the part of the bush
administration. it was a calculated ploy to prolong the war so as to
fatten halliburton even further.
whatever the failiings of the military-industrial complex, at least it
wants to US to win or prevail. it's the marxist-radical complex in the
US that wanted US to lose the cold war.
and, i wonder about the judgment of a filmmaker who relies on guys like
gore vidal who insists FDR knew all about the coming attack on pearl
harbor but remained mum cuz he wanted to use the attack as the
backdoor entry into the european war. if that's the case, then far
more dangerous than any military-industrial complex is the wicked
machinations of politicians.
during the cold war, the left said communism was nothing to be afraid
of. ask anyone who lived under communism if he agrees. and now the
left is insisting that the radical islamic threat is no problem; it's
all just some fantasy cooked or provoked by the US military industrial
complex--in colllusion with oil companies. yeah, and hitler was just a
puppet of the german bourgeoisie, etc. according to leftist thought,
all evil in the world is rooted in the machinations of the
'bourgeoisie'. just how did this 19th century radical thinking survive
into the 21st century. why are 'progressives' such regressives?
US capitalism, rather being the villain around the world, is the
hottest commodity. every developing nation wants to US to invest more,
not less, in their economy. most people would prefer to live in dubai
or singapore than in taliban run afghanistan or north korea. let idiot
intellectuals like sally potter and rosenbaum fantasize in the safety
of their bourgeois comfort about the nobility of cuban communism and
the chinese cultural revolution.
RichA
out.
Clooney, etc, only appeal to the dregs making up the Academy and the
"old guard."
One day, a need breed will come and shake Hollywood out of it's
fossilized state.
-Rich
trotsky
> Let the hoary old Hollywood leftists screech until their dentures fall
> out.
> Clooney, etc, only appeal to the dregs making up the Academy and the
> "old guard."
> One day, a need breed
The need breeds are the worst. As opposed to Kielbasa, of course, which
is the wurst.