Bring It Back Home
Sudhama Ranganathan, 29.03.2011 20:31
President Obama addressed the nation last night on why the United States is helping out in Libya. He admitted this nation could not always help out where freedom, liberty and democracy were threatened or where there were humanitarian issues, but that in some cases we could. It was his assertion this was one of those times. He also acknowledged the humanitarian effort would be limited in scope, limited in timeframe and not popular with all people back home.
In a region where the average American has been vilified by so many as people that just want to exploit the resources of nations and care nothing of the plight of the people in those places, it is obvious something has changed. Over here they have conversely been viewed by many, sold on the idea by the most powerful and widely watched of the mainstream media outlets, as a region rife with people hateful of us, that are as likely to become terrorists as they are to get a job and if given the chance would create Muslim extremists states that would develop evil weaponry and blow us off the face of the earth… AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!! Perhaps we both have viewed each other through glasses tinted by others and sold to us as good for us, safe and if nothing else entertaining.
However, when the average Joe’s in the region rose up for change it was not for more religion in government. They did not demand caliphates (lol). They did not say “we want to overthrow our government because we need a government run by Al Qaeda or some such terrorist organization.” They did not demand their governments work harder to bring down America or that they would be overthrown if they did not.
Of all the things they had the nerve to say they wanted it was… democracy? But from the years of watching the most powerful of the mainstream media outlets with the most viewers people might believe the opposite was going on. Nope. Apparently young people and others across the region felt that way for a long time and thanks to social networking sites, a real belief in change and courage, once the spark was made there, was sufficient tinder region-wide to set off a blaze still burning brightly.
The fact that crazy ranting moonbats passing themselves off as journalists were wrong in their far flung assumptions once again is no surprise. They were wrong in Arizona for example. Arizona’s undocumented workers were never responsible for a statewide rise in crime as all stats show while the numbers of undocumented American workers rose before there recession hit the crime numbers were simultaneously dropping. ( http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/arizona%E2%80%99s-punishment-doesn%E2%80%99t-fit-crime-studies-show-decrease-arizona-crime-rates)
In fact, though the question’s been asked many times and still never answered, why is it people that stereotype and blame all Muslims for terrorism because of 9/11 don’t feel the same way about people fitting Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichol’s description? Not that they should, but are we applying one measure for all or are certain people exempted from negative stereotyping?
There is something else that has not been discussed. If this nation has been in that region to protect national interests and elsewhere in the world, like Europe, Eastern Asia, Southeastern Asia and the Asia Pacific Rim, why when democracy was called for were so many generals, especially retired ones, claiming that had nothing to do with American national interests? Why were the most powerful and widely watched news outlets claiming removing the dictators could be bad for American national interests? Why now criticize President Obama for supporting a humanitarian crisis which makes sure people fighting for freedom do not suffer widespread massacres and tribal ethnic cleansings? This carried out by a dictator that, unlike the rest in the region, America has no leverage with.
During the lead up to the Iraq War these same generals, news pundits, journalists and analysts from the most powerful and widely viewed news sources used the exact same reasons to go into Iraq. The only difference is that America will not be in the lead here as the president points out. The difference is this is limited to humanitarian aid, and the same big companies that got to go in and reap vast sums from Iraq, hiring mostly non-Americans, under the protection of the American tax funded military, don’t stand a good chance of to getting to get in on it.
If they do it would be blight on the whole premise of humanitarian aid and bolster what the stereotype of us has been in that region. It would say President Obama was a man not of hope but of corporate cronyism and everything he campaigned against in 2008. It would say he is a hypocrite of the worst sort. Thus far, though his administration made blunders in the beginning, he came around to what was right and has truly kept up his end and the good fight.
Perhaps what needs to be discussed is how there are hardly any collective national interests overseas for average Americans. What they are really referring to are corporations headquartered in America with locations overseas and protecting them. Protecting the money is the objective in other words. If the US military is being used as security guards for these people well that must mean they contribute significantly to us, and would, due to their lopsided level of tax revenue contributions, be them paying their own way, right?
Let’s look at some of the biggest American overseas interests, many located in that very region seeing turmoil now, and find out just how big those tax contributions they make are. According to a release from a member of the US Senate here is a little taste, “Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits in 2009. Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings. Over the past five years, while General Electric made $26 billion in profits in the United States, it received a $4.1 billion refund from the IRS.
“Chevron received a $19 million refund from the IRS last year after it made $10 billion in profits in 2009. Boeing, which received a $30 billion contract from the Pentagon to build 179 airborne tankers, got a $124 million refund from the IRS last year. Valero Energy, the 25th largest company in America with $68 billion in sales last year received a $157 million tax refund check from the IRS and, over the past three years, it received a $134 million tax break from the oil and gas manufacturing tax deduction. ConocoPhillips, the fifth largest oil company in the United States, made $16 billion in profits from 2007 through 2009, but received $451 million in tax breaks through the oil and gas manufacturing deduction.” ( http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2011/03/ten_giant_us_companies_avoidin.html)
So in the end the average American Joe is picking up the tab. The people they won’t allow to organize into unions, the people they want to give them corporate welfare and those they say they are serving by being in the region are picking up the tab. These same companies made a mockery of the founding fathers by tricking the Supreme Court into accepting corporations as being the same as individual human beings. (Ever met a corporation that caught a cold, broke a bone, passed a kidney stone or had to undergo chemo therapy?)
There are between 700 and 800 US military bases and installations world wide and for what? To protect these guys? They don’t even pay their way. They don’t even help pay to fix the roads that they use to transport their goods on so they can make money back home. They can hire private security to protect them over there, and lord help them with that, but it’s not a national problem.
This nation can pull out all troops from Iraq now. Iraqis can do what they have to find their own way. I mean the longer we stay there the more average Americans pay and they even are starting to ask us to pay for damage sustained from the war (thanks George). ( http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/17/us-iraq-usa-damages-idUSTRE71G2T820110217) So now that’s going to come out of grandma and grandpa’s retirement fund?
We can close down at least half our bases and bring home more than half our troops over the next two years or sooner. When the generals complained they let the cat out of the bag. We are there for money yet it is not our money, just the rich guys’ money and they want you and me to pay for it. The politicians covering for them get huge donations from them to pass laws that force us to pay taxes to protect rich guys that don’t pay any taxes at all.
Laws can even be passed to make the black ops budgets, now completely classified, transparent to Congress to see what private contractors are hired for such work, how many of them there are and how much they get paid. Let’s stop hemorrhaging the money and bring it back. Do something truly patriotic and bring it back to the USA. The future of American kids depends on it.
To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.