File spoon-archives/anarchy-list.archive/anarchy-list_2001/anarchy-list.0111, message 322


Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:23:06 -0500
From: Chuck Munson <chuck-AT-tao.ca>
Subject: Re: kandywhore or bust


danceswithcarp wrote:

> > BTW, Carp, the taking of Kabul is not the end of the war.
> 
> I don't beleive it is. I think it's just the beginning.   Somewhere along in
> here is where it will all get sidetracked into areas that will make the
> bombing campaign look like the good old days.
> 
> > The U.S. seems
> > to be disturbed that the Northern Alliance went ahead and took Kabul.
> 
> I don't know if they're wirried or not.  There's so much double-speak and
> mudification going on I don't know what to believe. 

Not only are they worried, they are pissed. The last thing they wanted
was the Northern Alliance in control of Kabul and most of Afghanistan.
This is a PR coup right now, but when everybody finds out what the NA
are like, well, you can kiss the spin patrol good bye.

Or, whatever they call it at the Pentagon "Office of Message
Development."*

* that's is the actual title

> For instance, I find it
> hard to believe they werre surprised when the taliban in the north
> collapsed.   I mean when you use B52s and B1s with dozens of Big Bombs on
> regular troops in the field you are going to cause some Major Casualties.
> Khe Sahn proved that.  People tend to think Khe Sahn was a waste.  What it
> really was, was the greatest battles of attrition since the Russian Front in
> WW2.   *Thousands* of NVA troops just disappeared in the B52 Arc Light
> strikes.  One recon patrol found the gear of an entire battalion of troops
> laid out for inspection, except the troops were all dead.   That kind of
> firepower on the taliban should not have had a surpise result and I'm not
> sure it did.

Whatever.

> > Bush and company still have plenty of time to fuck things up worse and
> > they are facing a severe economic downturn at home.
> 
> It doesn't matter in The Big Political Spectrum.   The WTC attack made
> almost anything possible by Bush etal.   The economy was tanking before the
> WTC attack, BUT...now it's the terrorists' fault, not GWB's.  

Sorry, but this will be another hard sell. Everybody knows the economy
tanked before 9/11. Everybody knows that Osama Bin Laden isn't
responsible for the dot-com crash. People are smarter than you give them
credit for.

>He has
> converted himself inot a War President and that is a hard thing to counter.

Yes, difficult, but not impossible.

> Plus, the video part of the war is now over.  The veil of secrecy is coming
> down and all the american public will know is we're "winning."  Occasionally
> there will be a military show trial of one of the El Kabong and that's all
> the public will want.  I said early on that the american people will not
> settle for an eye for an eye; they will approve blood-payback for the WTC
> from now until 2020.

They'll settle for payback until they start worrying about their
paychecks. Thanks to the American TV spectacle, 9/11 will eventually
move out of people's awareness.

> Seriously.  The 2nd and 3rd wirld has been so marginalized by the new
> Bush/Blair/Putin cabal that the U$/UK/Russian axis can act pretty much
> anywhere with immunity from serious repercussion.  The GWB/Putin allaince
> takes China right out of the game.   Shoot, China will be offered a little
> piece of the action just out of charity.

Hah, this has got to be the worst foreign policy analysis I've seen
lately. What have we learned in the past few months? The U.S. can spend
billions on joint strike fighters, smart bombs, and the CIA, but they
can't put 2 and 2 together when some foreign national takes flight
training classes and doesn't want to learn how to take off an land. The
lesson we've learned is that the U.S. state is not all powerful. If
anything, it's a big fuckup with lots of expensive toys.
 
> Meanwhile, the left yaps about "globalization" and "exploitiation."   Sure
> they're bad, but, hey, George has got his war on; that makes the
> anti-globalization argument look pro-whoever the U$ is fighting against.
> That's what's got to be gotten across;  the left has been outflanked.
> Whatever gains were made in Seattle or Washington are gone.  The last WTO
> meeting was in Qatar and no one knew about it.  There was no chance to
> confront the evil.

Sorry, Carpo, but we haven't been outflanked or outfoxed. This movement
is international and was causing Empire some serious problems last
summer. The capitalists can't keep running for ever. They've foolishly
decided to hold the WEF meetings in New York City.

What a bunch of fucking morons.

If anything, the anti-globalization movement is more relevant than ever.
Now the attention of all Americans are on all things global. It won't be
too difficult for them to figure out that things like the WTO are going
to screw them.
 
> Watch, the next "mobilzation" against the Wirld Bank/WTO on the east coast
> of the US will backfire. There will be video of the black bloc and there
> will be NO rallying to it; it will be condemned by every public news orifice
> in existence because the pro-war sentiment has taught the corpprate news
> lackies that _anything_ that smacks of sympathy to forces opposed to "good"
> fighting "evil" must be "evil" unto itself.

Whatever, Carp. You really don't understand the big picture on this and
I'm not going to explain it to you. You've drawn your conclusions and
are just waiting to see them confirmed.

> No one has to listen to me.  I can't force that on anyone.  But I wirk
> (WIRK?) in middle-america and not in the political wirld of the east coast.
> This is not a shallow support for the blood-letting; it is real and if the
> anarchist/anti-globalization crowd isn't careful they will set themselves
> back farther than "anarchy by deed" did.

I'm not worried about that. You forget that we have millions around the
world that have our back.

Americans are not as bad as you paint them to be.

> Maybe tommorrow I'll feel differently; these feelings do come and go.  Right
> now though, anything that opposes the war will not fly.  Period.  This is
> not the 1960s and this is certainly not vietnam.  Using on J-Star
> survelliance plane gives the U$ the abiltiy to track a single person on the
> ground.  There is no vegetation cover in Afghanistan.  Whoever hides in
> caves will be detected and destroyed; we won't even see the bodies, they'll
> be buried where they live.
> 
> As far as creating new "terrorists?"  Naw, not after the islamic wirld saw
> all of those pictures of celebrating afghanis.   The U$ and company can now
> kill them far faster than they can spring up.

Really? How many terrorists has the U.S. killed? They've killed a bunch
of Taleban and hundreds if not thousands of Afghanis, but I see very few
dead terrorists, other than the ones who died on 9/11.

No there is very little vegetation cover in Afghanistan, but remember
Carpo that this is an *international* network of terrorists.

I think there is more vegetation cover in Florida.

<< Chuck0 >>

Infoshop.org    -> http://www.infoshop.org/
Alternative Press Review -> http://www.altpr.org/
Practical Anarchy Online -> http://www.practicalanarchy.org/
Homepage -> http://flag.blackened.net/chuck0/home/

INTERNATIONALISM IN PRACTICE

An American soldier in a hospital explained how he was wounded: He said,
"I was told that the way to tell a hostile Vietnamese from a friendly
Vietnamese was to shout ‘To hell with Ho Chi Minh!’ If he shoots, he’s
unfriendly. So I saw this dude and yelled ‘To hell with Ho Chi Minh!’
and he yelled back, ‘To hell with President Johnson!’ We were shaking
hands when a truck hit us." 

(from 1,001 Ways to Beat the Draft, by Tuli Kupferburg).

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005