Monday, December 14, 2015

Dec. 14: The U.S. needs Canada's help! (Trudeau's first, real test.)

Today's Irving press is thin, and full of bizarre stories, like the one telling us that people buy Christmas trees at this time of year. Who woulda guessed? In all of section A, the only story is on the back page, the story of boy who looks four years old, but is ten. He has a rare illness. He can't stand. He's in constant pain. And he'll die young because the New Brunswick government refuses to pay for the medication he needs. They say it's too expensive.

(You'll be happy to see the story that premier Gallant is going up in the polls. He's such a nice man.)

The medication is very expensive – which reminds me that we need a thorough probe of our medicinal industry. To withhold this medication means pain and death for a child. We have a government that lavishes gifts and privileges on the very wealthy, that lets them off taxes, that licks their boots. If some of our wealthy wanted a much, much larger sum, say $100 million to build a hockey rink, the popular premier Gallant would run to kneel at their feet, and lay down buckets of money.

But what can you expect? New Brunswickers are used to being treated like dirt. So they'll certainly accept this killing of a child.
The editorial writer has the predictable reaction to the climate change agreement. We'll develop shale gas. Shale gas is good for you. Yes. And I'll bet that's just what the ever-popular Gallant will propose.
Good column by Norbert. There's an interesting one by Alec Bruce about democracy in general.
There are four pages. Count them, four, on Canada&World. None of them is worth reading.
On C4, Jerrica Naugler has a short but excellent column on the subject of Christmas gifts.

There are stories circulating in reliable sources that the U.S. has quietly asked Canada to take a larger role in Syria – by carrying out reconnaisance flights. Let's see now….

The U.S. has 1,400,000 military personnel, over 1,000,000 reserves, 13,000 aircraft, and the biggest navy in the world. It has been at war with somebody almost every year since 1775. That makes it, perhaps, the most experienced nation at warfare in the world. It is also the most expensively equipped in the world.

And it has not fought anything that could be called a successful war since 1945. With full support, equipment and training from the U.S., the 'rebel' army it created in Syria as been a loser from the start. It then claimed to be fighting the much smaller army of ISIS. And it has had no effect on ISIS whatever. In fact, ISIS became stronger than it was at the start. (-though the Russians have done it tremendous damage in just weeks.)

Okay, the U.S. never tried to beat ISIS. It was using ISIS to beat Syria, a country to U.S. has been trying to take, without success, for years. ISIS has no navy or air force. Syria is a small country whose army today numbers maybe 80,000. It's air force is small.

In order to beat it, the powerful U.S. is calling on Britain, Germany and France (along with Turkey) – and now Canada to help it. (Italy wisely said no. ) It has also make it clear it would welcome more NATO participation.

Um – gee – does the most powerful nation in the world need that help to take on a small country already exhausted by years of war? And why make this a NATO issue? What does this have to do with NATO?

Well, given its record for the last 70 years, the U.S. probably does need help. But there's more to it. This is not a war against Syria or ISIS. It's a war against Russia. And the U.S. is sending a signal to Russia that NATO ( maybe including Canada) is behind it. We're not simply being asked to send six pilots to fly around taking pictures. We're being asked to join in a world war against Russia – and perhaps China.

I'm sure the U.S. hopes there won't be such a war. It hopes that Russia (and perhaps China) will back down. We're being asked to take a huge risk for our good friends, the American billionaires who want to control the world.

Putin won't back down. Over the past twenty years or so, Russia has built itself back to world power status. But if it backs out of Syria, it's game over for Russia. As for China, it experienced over a hundred and fifty years of western domination. We never hear about that. But it has left deep and bitter and humiliating memories of what the very wealthy of the west are like. It is not going to back off.

There is a good book on the depth of that humiliation called “Wealth and Power”. Currently $10 at the Chapters store in Moncton.

American foreign policy has been a financial. Military, and human disaster since the 1950s. That's because it has fallen completely under the control of its financial bosses. Taxpayers have coughed up spent several trillion dollars on wars which not only failed to achieve any purpose, but which have made it impossible to serve its own people. While weapons makers got the trillions, much of it by corruption, the American people are nearing depression level poverty. The wage gap in the U.S. is now the worst in the developed world. (You won't find any of this in the Irving press, even though there are many signs of the same in Canada.)

No. Russia and China won't back off. They well know that backing off would be the end for them.

As well, Putin has proven himself a very adept leader. For years, he has tried to keep the heat down even as Bush and Obama were working to raise it. In short, big money doesn't equal brains.

And what will Trudeau do? I don't know. This (not the Paris conference) is his first big test. (Canada's role at the Paris conference was no big deal.) The sell to us will be that our presence in the skies over Syria would be a peaceful one, just taking pictures. In fact, it would be an act of war that is illegal under international law. Putin is smart. He made his entry into Syria legal. But we are caught up in the myth of American Exceptionalism. We have God's permission to ignore laws. That's what happens when we are run by big money without either brains or morality.

By the way, it's not clear to me how we're going to massively overhaul our society to slow down climate change while fighting a World War (and fracking). Fixing climate change is not just a simple job like sewing a patch on. It called for massive, profound, and quick changes, and it calls for them all over the world.

What's worrisome about the Paris conference is that it set goals – but there's no enforcement mechanism. That's not a solution. It's just a wish. The oil industry has done close to nothing about climate change for the last 20 years and more. On the contrary, it has propagandized us to think it isn't happening. I don't think it's going to change.

Our news media have been very little help. The Irving press is certainly no exception. We have not been told what we needed to know. Ever wonder how a clown like Trump can be a leading candidate for president? The whole Republican offering is a disgrace, and Hillary is as bad as any. Two things have caused this.

One is the rising power of big business in politics. Many people realize that – but they don't realize it very much. Their reaction, then, is simply to blame the politicians. So they turn to a Donald Trump – not so much because they admirer his policies but because he expresses their anger. American democracy is collapsing. We now move to (and are already in) the stages of anger, violence, and final collapse.)

I found this next one interesting. It's an attack on patriotism by an American military officer. (I don't oppose patriotism – except when it's used as a tool to manipulate us.) This one is long, but worth a read.

A reader sent me the following one. It's by Alastair Crooke, a highly respect diplomat and analyst. (No. It's not Alastair Cooke, the journalist.)

The next source, also from a reader, tells about the origins of one of the guns used in the Paris killing. The source is Russian, so this is a Russian point of view. But, in my experience, it doesn't lie.

Another one from a reader. Against the source is Russian. But I saw his happening up close for many years in Quebec and Ottawa.

And, at last, a bit of good news. It's about left-wing Jews in the U.S. And it's another phenomenen that I experienced in Quebec.

Do you find these blogs too long? (Nobody has said so. But I've wondered about it.)

1 comment:

  1. Alec Bruce may have been pointing that cannon, as in two birds with one stone, at another impediment to democracy. Could Alex be taking nips at the hand that feeds him in the form of concealed innuendos? Just a thought.
    Oh, the length of the blogs are just fine by this reader.