Ah well, destabilising the Middle East and North Africa did achieve its goal of protecting the European beach-head in Palestine; but the agents of destruction are now about to pay for that achievement. Or, rather, their citizens are. The end result will probably be the Greater Israel of Zionist dreams – in effect, a Jewish Caliphate with no fixed borders. It will flourish, as long as it has the support of every Western politician willing to commit to Big Brother’s perpetual war – and willing to take responsibility for a few million displaced persons...
The process has already cost the Western nations their moral reputation; what virtue is there in democracy, if its politicians engage in the wholesale slaughter of civilians? The demise of the international human-rights experiment is a bonus for their leaders. The eventual total cost will include their demographic balance, as we read in all our daily newspapers. Slaughtering civilians in faraway lands is morally corrupt: most of us presumably know that from our personal upbringings. It’s a tragic truth, though, that most citizens of the guilty nations take the matter lightly, and feel no shame for the blatant atrocities done in their names.
After all, we’re at war, right? And, as our politicians and their corporate sponsors regularly explain to us, war excuses atrocities of all kinds. Human rights almost never triumph over tribal and national rights. The dominant precept is my country, right or wrong – “my country” being “my” politicians and their sponsors.
The chief opposition party in Britain has just elected a leader who actually does subscribe to the concept of international human rights, and who believes that there is no moral virtue in wars of aggression. That’s a refreshing stance, although those factors wouldn’t have played much of a part in his election. The British MSM predicts that his principles rule out any chance of his becoming Prime Minister. What kind of retard is this man, to be against wars of aggression? God help us!
Unfortunately, human rights have been a passing fancy. Anybody who believes in them can never become Prime Minister – or President, in nations that don’t have Prime Ministers.
For some time now, all but a few of Europe’s politicians have been obedient minions of US emperors. They jostle to out-do each other in harassing America’s designated enemies, with scant regard for the interests of their own constituents. Thus, the chaos of Europe’s current invasion by refugees landing on Mediterranean shores in the tens of thousands, and swarming across the hinterland. Blowback, indeed, from NATO’s military interference in their homelands.
But wait! Why should the citizens of NATO nations be punished for the crimes of their leaders? Isn’t that collective punishment? Don’t we have the right to elect sociopaths, without accepting responsibility to take care of their victims? If the psychos whom NATO citizens elect – and re-elect ad nauseam – if they hand our tax moneys over to the military-industrial complex instead of to their victims, what’s that to us? After all, that’s what politicians do, in a corrupt system.
In a corrupt society, the only electable politicians are corrupt ones. Vice feeds upon vice. A society that consents to wars of aggression, and the destruction of civilians’ homes and livelihoods, must expect at least some of the victims to come calling. I mean, surely!
Should the reluctant hosts demand that their politicians divert some of their war-budgets to providing the innocent victims with food and shelter? Or should they (the hosts) toss them back in the sea, and vote for ever more brutal military adventures?
One way or another, people have to pay for their fun activities. When their fun involves destroying homes and lives, the payment can turn out to be a heavy one. Our children and grandchildren will curse us for our idea of fun.