Letter: War on Terror fueled by oil
Yes, Mr. Prosence, the attacks on Benghazi were designed for you to conclude the war continues. These attacks are allowed to happen in fact to continue hostilities because the wherewithal of warfare remains the largest sector of our economy, although, I disagree that fly-by Obama is weak on terrorism. Seems to me he’s weak on upholding the Constitution. His gangster-like extrajudicial executions via drone we shouldn’t have asked if he’s a real American, rather a Blood or a Crip.
Our arms contractors are quite pleased of your prognosis their War on Terror will outlast the 100 Year War, because the spoils are so much greater now that industrial expansion has been bought at the point of a gun for the better part of 200 years, in our sector of enriching the few. Or as Alexander Hamilton put it: protecting the opulent from the masses.
However the War on Terror isn’t fired by religious fanaticism but the hard, cold reality of cash flow — should we say oil. As you should remember but find it easy to forget (towing one of two party lines) that our allies bin Laden (and the Mujahedeen) were pissed at the U.S. establishing permanent bases in Saudi Arabia during the first official Gulf War. You remember the one where we essentially told our disobedient dictator Saddam he can invade Kuwait, so we can bitch-slap him with liberation and sanctions, until we can find events horrific enough to Americans to justify regime change.
Although soldiers from the ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have confessed we’ve been really the strong arm of the Saudis’ form of religious expansionism rather than the oversimplfied and propaganda-ready Sunni-Shiite duality (that keeps Iranian oil from depreciating the market without the Shah), the architects of such prosperity gained by many more years of piling up dark-skinned corpses thank your myopic opinion.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.