Month: February 2005

From orbiting lasers to metal rods that strike from the heavens, the potential to wage war from space raises startling possibilities—and serious problems

SHOULD THE UNITED STATES, or any nation for that matter, weaponize space? The answer depends not simply on the capabilities and limitations of proposed space weapons but also on the military objectives. The Rumsfeld commission laid out three objectives in which space weapons might play a role: to defend existing military capabilities in space; to deny adversaries the military benefit of space; and to attack adversaries from or within space.

The last objective is perhaps the most alluring: the prompt and deadly projection of force anywhere on the globe. The psychological impact of such a blow might rival that of such devastating attacks as Hiroshima. But just as the unleashing of nuclear weapons had unforeseen consequences, so, too, would the weaponization of space. What’s more, each of the leading proposed space weapons systems has significant physical limitations that make alternatives more effective and affordable by comparison.

Also, check out Noam Chomsky’s talk at MIT about this subject.

The democratic peace theory, which claims that democracies don’t wage war on each other, championed by pro-censorship “freedomist” R.J. Rummel, is littered with problems, perhaps most notably its shifting of definitions to the point that “democracy” seems mainly to mean “the United States government and its allies.” Since, categorically, the U.S. does not wage war on its allies or itself, and the favored way to get into the “democracy” club is to be assimilated by U.S. intervention, the “democratic peace theory,” at least as is advanced by interventionists, is really a formula for perpetual war. In making the world safe for imperial democracy, the U.S. government is more than willing to pressure, sanction, invade, bomb and occupy other countries in the world whose regimes the current administration does not like, and turn them into “democracies” – that is, governments about which our government feels comfortable, and, thus, will no longer wage war against.

To be a “democracy,” the regime must play ball with the U.S. (kind of like the Taliban did when it was a U.S. drug war ally and Saddam did when he was a U.S. anti-Iranian ally), and so R.J. Rummel considers Afghanistan to be one. “I’m willing to call it a democracy now. In any case, surely, the country has been liberated.” Call me cynical, but if the Afghanistan regime ever morphs into an enemy of the U.S. – as have former allies in virtually every major country in the Middle East, at one time or another, mostly thanks to U.S. interventionism – I very much doubt it will be praised as a “democracy” any more.

To the War Party, “democracy” may entail the warlordism of Afghanistan and is perfectly consistent with censorship, both here and abroad. But how do the democratic war theorists define war? Looking at Rummel’s Q&A, we see an obvious question with an interesting answer:
Continue reading “War is Peace, Democracy is Freedom”

A Turning Point for the Anti-War Movement?

One of the barriers to counter-recruitment activism in colleges and universities has been a set of laws known as the Solomon Amendments, which since 1997 has threatened campuses with the loss of federal funds if they ban recruiters and ROTC. A parallel law was implemented in 2002 to stop high schools from restricting recruiter access to students and student lists. Multiple lawsuits challenging the college-related law were introduced in 2003, and on November 29, 2004, the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that the Solomon Amendments violated the plaintiffs’ free speech rights (see also the district court victory in Burt v. Rumsfeld, the case brought by Yale). The Justice Department indicated that it will appeal the appellate ruling to the US Supreme Court, and has asked for a stay from the Third Circuit.

An interview with Tyler Gilbert, who recently went through basic training in the US military;

“They Called Iraqis ‘Ragheads'”

The guy who carried my tray was the nicest guy I met there. He was Islamic. His name was Thomas. He decided that he couldn’t kill people. He stopped eating because he had a dream one night that told him he was wrong for the military. They tried to force-feed him. They pulled him out of class, accusing him and another Muslim of being terrorists, just because they were Muslim. Eventually, the drill sergeant told me he went AWOL. I had never met anyone who was Muslim before, but he was the nicest guy I met there. In the platoon, they called Iraqis “ragheads,” and all sorts of racist shit. I was prejudiced too until I met these Muslim guys. My views of Muslims have totally changed.

One drill instructor said, “We’re in Iraq for a good reason. The news isn’t reporting the good stuff we’re doing there. The news is bullshit, they’re lying because they’re only saying the bad stuff about the Army.” They said we should all support George Bush. They were trying to brainwash us. One of the drill sergeants came back from Iraq training Iraqis. He was less gung-ho. He told us, “We’re stupid. We’re training them and then they turn around and fight us instead.”

I want to welcome two new additions to the Antiwar.com Blog:

Scott Horton has already started blogging. Scott is the host of Weekend Interview Show, which has frequently been featured on Antiwar.com, and a new author here as well.

Anthony Gregory is also joining the blog. Anthony is a research assistant at the Independent Institute and a frequent columnist for LewRockwell.com and The Future of Freedom Foundation, as well as Antiwar.com.

CNN reports:

Saddam Hussein’s half-brother, who was a personal adviser during his presidency, was captured in a joint Iraqi and coalition forces operation, Iraqi government officials said Sunday.

Associated Press explains:

Iraqi security forces captured Saddam Hussein’s half brother and former adviser, government officials said Sunday, dealing a blow to an insurgency that some Iraqi officials claim the former fugitive was helping organize and fund, perhaps from Syria.

Although CNN and many news outlets continue to push this story, the real story has emerged:

In an apparent goodwill gesture, Syrian authorities captured Saddam’s half-brother and 29 other officials of the deposed dictator’s Baath Party in Syria and handed them over to Iraq.

What will those insidious Syrians try next?!