war lies from the Ministry of Truth?

[Ian Livingston]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGC42gUSOZY


On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 8:28 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:

> Obligation to perceived morality.  Red line in the sand crossing
> consequences.
>
> I predict the response will be symbolic, perfunctory.  Reluctant, thus
> measured.
>
> David Morris
>
>
> On Tuesday, August 27, 2013, wrote:
>
>> Who or what is obliging the President of the US to act against the
>> interests of his country, David?
>>
>> LK
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: David Morris **
>> Sent: Aug 27, 2013 7:03 PM
>> To: "kelber at mindspring.com" **
>> Cc: "pynchon-l at waste.org" **
>> Subject: Re: war lies from the Ministry of Truth?
>>
>> His intentions might not be willing.  They might be obligatory.
>>
>> There is no gain for the US in this war.  That's why Obama has been so
>> reluctant to arm the rebels or to act in any other military way.  This is
>> obvious.
>>
>> On Tuesday, August 27, 2013, wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There's nothing secret about Obama's intention to get the US involved in
>>> Syria - it's a matter of open discussion, with the situation escalating by
>>> the hour. As the Washington Post put it yesterday:
>>>
>>> "President Obama is weighing a military strike against Syria that would
>>> be of limited scope and duration, designed to serve as punishment for
>>> Syria's use of chemical weapons and as a deterrent, while keeping the
>>> United States out of deeper involvement in that country's civil war,
>>> according to senior administration officials."
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/kerry-obama-determined-to-hold-syria-accountable-for-using-chemical-weapons/2013/08/26/599450c2-0e70-11e3-8cdd-bcdc09410972_story.html
>>>
>>> What a curious explanation for bombarding a country -- one wracked by
>>> civil war, its citizens oppressed, murdered, and in flight -- with
>>> long-range missiles: "punishment." Not: "it will save lives," or "it will
>>> pave the way to negotiations (not that I personally think missiles can ever
>>> do that, but still ...)" The goal is "punishment." I agree absolutely with
>>> Joseph that Obama and Co.'s motivations have little to do with the
>>> interests of the Syrian people (who will apparently be unscathed by the
>>> "limited" rain of bombs upon their country, or if scathed, will presumably
>>> prefer being maimed and killed by US bombs over their own government's
>>> purported chemicals), and are of no use to the American populace as well.
>>> And it's become abundantly clear that the rebel forces are not, as a whole,
>>> pillars of democracy. So why send in the cruise missiles? It's great for
>>> military contractors, that's for sure. Or an extremely expensive (in terms
>>> of lives, money and political instability) to "send a message" to Iran.
>>>
>>> Laura
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>
>>> From: David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> If you think Obama secretly wants to get the US involved in Syria, then
>>> I suggest your logic is akin to the Egyptians who think we are secretly
>>> allied with the Muslim Brotherhod.  No matter what the US does in Syria,
>>> its interests would be better served by NOT doing.  Most everybody can see
>>> that reality, but some would like to ignore it.
>>>
>>>
>>> David Morris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, August 27, 2013, Joseph Tracy  wrote:
>>>
>>> Anyone else wondering about the convenient setting up and crossing of
>>> the chemical weapons red line in Syria. Those photos of children who look
>>> like they are holding their eyes closed make anyone else a bit nervous?
>>> Anyone else smell a little yellow cake, some WMD, Gulf of Tonkin? Why
>>> should we trust the people who start these wars, and then go to extreme
>>> lengths to prevent the truth of what they do from being known? Haven't they
>>> lied every  time?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What makes it ok to kill children in a drone strike, or to endorse
>>> Saddam's use of nerve gas against Iran but wrong for the Syrian government
>>> to " defend itself" .  We sell every weapon known to man except nuclear, ok
>>> Israel's use of white phosphorus,  use cluster bombs, depleted uranium.
>>> Isn't Killing civilians just wrong? Shouldn't we start by cleaning our own
>>> house?  Is the US government the one in a position to scold and set things
>>> right after the debacle in Iraq?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Why is it that we are only deeply concerned about the human rights of a
>>> people when we want to go to war with them or starve them?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is there really some massive groundswell of US citizens desperate to
>>> intervene in a civil war in Syria?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is Obama really  the superman of truth, justice and the American way
>>> whose only problem is the nefarious use of kryptonite by evil republicans?
>>>  Stay tuned for the next exciting episode of American militarism on the go!
>>> We spy on you because we love you. It's for your own good.
>>>
>> ******
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130827/35870963/attachment.html>