Sunday, November 09, 2003

The presidency and a defense of the war

How many days has it been since the war in Iraq started? Was it April of 2003? Since the war has been over, can we now call it the Occupation of Iraq by American forces? Or how about, the Bush war in Iraq so that Bush Jr. can be re-elected?

I wonder what is going on in Bush's head with respect to the war in Iraq. Granted, he was disturbed (as shown in television) with the destruction of the World Trace Center and the damage done to the Pentagon. He was also probably deeply perturbed that the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania was meant for the White House. But anyone who becomes the President of the United States should have already come to grips with the possibility of death. How much do you want the power to be President? Would you give up your life?

Each president I have seen has aged dramatically while occupying the White House. I look at it as a way in which the President is paying for the sins of the United States. It's just like the old tribes who choose a king who will rule for a period of time. After his rule, usually one year, he is sacrificed to the gods and a new king is chosen. It's the same thing with the presidency. You die figuratively if not literally while occupying the White House.

I can not see whether or not Bush Jr. will be reelected. However, what I see is that he is following the same pattern that his father did. Hell, he is even trying to finish off what his father started.


And how about that war? You know what, I might not like the fact that we are in Iraq, but I do realize that this is good/great for business and the economy. The structure of capitalism is predicated on the stimulation of businesses by government. What better stimulus is there than a war? Sure, sure, there can be technological fronts, but the manufacturing centers just are not up to date with respect to technology. We still need the steelworkers and the farmers and the middle of America to be doing something or else the economy will go into a recession in the United States. Want proof? Just look at how the California economic downturn has affected just about everyone in Asia.

And I will give another perspective on the war. Ever since man and woman came into conciousness in nature, it has been a fight and a war for survival. Now that we have nation-states, it will still be a war. Don’t blame the United States for the fact that we are technologically advanced and can kill people by pressing a button. I’m sure that if some other nation state could kill people by pressing a button, they would do it too. Oh, wait, China does it to Tibet. Russia does it to Chechnya. Take it to a country level, the Philippine military kills the poor. That thread also runs in the African continent where instead of a government sponsored murder, there is instead a tribal inspired mass murder. (Of course, there is the troubling double-speak which is used by the US government such as Secretary of War Donald Rumsfeld (“We are not in Vietnam.”).

Peace is the period between wars. War is the period between peace. Conflict is inevitable because humans desire and want things. The only question is whether or not you will be the victim or the oppressor.

The only way I see that the world will come together is if some alien descends from the sky and wants to communicate with earth. You can be assured that the earth will suddenly organize a world government who will have to deal with those aliens.

No comments: