Lately, I hear the gossip about "the lies." It says the American government lied to the public in order to bring Bush's
I read one written by an American socialist. You will see, almost immdiately, how devious the arguments for and against the conduct of the war are, but no argumentation seems as simple as a killing of defenseless people is by the so-called liberated technology, as if it were to reflect the technical easing of life and death. If the anti-war argmuent is to contitue its initial vision and momentum, however, it is necessary to keep the conceptual line of principle straight against the war; a sheer abstract negation of domination and power is not enough to break through this objective context of delusion. In this regard, I appreciate the attitude of Pravda.ru, the Rusian thinking, which seems more comprehensive of the perspective whole than on the petty issue of lies; the Russian proverb says, "One can't see the forest for the trees."
Having so stated, I feel necessary to point out two major elements regarding to the nature of this war and the American occupation in
1) the fear of nuclear threat, which is international, not the threat of the communist domination any more.
2) the militarization of Capitalist system for the security of the status quo.
From the first follow a couple of consequences:
a) the fear and anxiety pervades to the consciousness of all peoples, borderless and boundless: hence the globalization and the sanctification of the Superpower technology.
b) this bloody conflict or the "war" is not to protect the American soldiers. It would be absurd, even fictitious to assume a victory free of American casualties in such a violent occupation. The world has heard the Commander in Chief saying, "Bring them on," and it sounded as if the violent occupation were a mere training of military masochism. Let it be clear that these soldiers of 160, 000 well equiped men and women are not there in Iraq to exercise on a fake target of a military training (as if the Iraqis happened to be), but they mean to kill and destroy and are meant to be killed by oath and by command. Therefore, it matters little whether the Saddam Hussein's regime had the weapons of mass destruction or not. It is not the objective on which the American-led war can be judged yes or no depending upon the casualties as the critics are falsely led to pacify the unpacified whole. Being international in character, the concept of the war itself invites all peoples to judge based on facts. To judge the war is to judge its concept, not the American people who are not identical with the concept as the ruling clique would have it. For it stands on this deceptive particularization of the universal fear in an irrational form of "the war on terrorism", just as the false identity of society and individual is coerced upon the world by the globalization of the industrial society.
Just for the sake of argument, suppose the invasion forces have indeed discovered the WMD in
In this way, however, the alien world is made virtually nonexistent, or else it is likened to the Self of American Power, as the system of one gigantic analytical judgment, in which the like proceeds knowing itself only through like, like the rules of democracy and freedom. Thereof the conceptual efforts against the war, the voice lending to suffering would have been useless and sacrificed. In either case, the result would be the same world that would have enjoyed the sanctified rhythm of destruction and production as it does now. In which the outsider, the alien, even in thought no longer counts, even where its existence suggests the transformation of what is merely given for a leap. But as the blindness of this war indicates it however self-unconscious, precisely because of it, the unlike (e.g. the Muslim culture) would be prehistoric, undisciplined and finally identified with the terror of evil power as the threat to peace and security of the like, i.e. the ratio of the status quo, for which the world has designated the Superpower. This particular setting is however no more than the product of particular interest, from which reason escapes. This means the rise of militarism, which seems accompanied by the stagnation of economic power as if to rescue it from sinking. For instance, Japan as the world economic power that is to change its uniform to a formidable military power in