In the first century A.D. the Roman historian Tacitus wrote "Solitudinem fecerunt, pacem appelunt," translated as "they have created a wasteland and call it peace." He was describing the devastating Roman campaigns against the German tribes under the first emperor Augustus in which all the men capable of carrying weapons were slaughtered and the remainder of the population was sold into slavery. It was the Roman way of waging war, complete destruction of a foreign enemy to serve as a warning against challenging the might of the Caesars.
We Americans have inherited the imperial mantle and are the new Romans. For the policymakers in Washington, nearly all of whom have never served in the military, war is an abstraction, like moving chess pieces around or looking at graphs in a power point presentation. But for the thousands of American soldiers who will die because of the bad decisions made on Capitol Hill and in the White House it is deadly serious. America’s high tech generals have developed a way of waging videogame-like war using drones and hellfire missiles, but taking and holding the ground below is a job for the infantry, and they are the ones facing death from roadside bombs and suicide bombers. On Tuesday alone seven more Americans died. In light of the recent celebration of Memorial Day, it is right that we should remember those who die every day because of the lies and deceits of our leaders in Washington. Rest assured, one day soon the US will be out of both Iraq and Afghanistan and will be hated and reviled by the Iraqi and Afghan people. The Americans who have died will have truly died for nothing.
The imperial hubris of the policymakers allows no challenge to the world’s only super power and no check on its behavior. To those who still expect a better America to come out of the Barack Obama Administration I would note that the only change has been for the worse. There should have been alarms going off nationwide back in January when the Administration announced that it had authorized the CIA to kill selected American citizens overseas who are suspected of being involved with terrorism. Emphasis on suspected, with no due process. Instead of screams of outrage over the trampling of the Constitution there was only silence from Congress, the media and the public.
A handful of news stories two weeks ago illustrate very well the new imperialism practiced in Washington and plumb the depths to which we have sunk as a nation. The proposition that the United States has a mandate to strike anywhere and at anytime where it perceives a challenge to its interests is unquestioned in the media and within the government and it is a right that is pursued with complete recklessness and virtually no accountability. The first story involves the first Obama Administration National Security Strategy Assessment. The assessment has a lot of good touchy feely language about how the US will no longer be the school bully, but it stresses that the White House will do whatever is necessary to make America secure, whatever that means. It includes "We are now moving beyond traditional distinctions between homeland and national security. This includes a determination to prevent terrorist attacks against the American people by coordinating the actions that we take abroad with the actions that we take at home." In other words, the war on terror (which is an expression that the wordsmithing Obamas are careful not use) is to become a seamless operation that will be everywhere and at all times and forever. It is George W. Bush’s long war wrapped in different language.
The second story, in The Washington Post, describes how the White House and National Security Council are drawing up plans to attack Pakistan if a significant terrorist incident occurs in the US and can be traced back to militants in that country. "The US military is reviewing options for a unilateral strike in Pakistan in the event that a successful attack on American soil is traced to the country’s tribal areas…" is the way it’s described in the Post and it would only be carried out if it is determined that "the ongoing campaign of CIA drone strikes is insufficient." This response is reported to the one of the "severe consequences" that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned about in the wake of the aborted Times Square bombing. The article concedes that the Pakistanis might not exactly be pleased and it would "risk an irreparable rupture in the US relationship with Pakistan." It would also likely kill a large number of civilians as US intelligence on Pakistani tribes is not exactly well developed. If the objective is to make more terrorists rather than less it would, however, work just fine. It would also be yet another military assault on a country with which the US is not at war. The Post report came out on May 29th and there has hardly been a squeak elsewhere in the mainstream media, which suggests that everyone thinks it to be a nifty.
A similar story in the New York Times a few days earlier detailed how the US Central Command is expanding clandestine operations "to disrupt militant groups or counter threats in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and other countries in the region." The new directive also permits "reconnaissance that could pave the way for possible military strikes in Iran." While Washington has regarded Iran as hostile for some time, it was most recently seen trying to prop up the Somali government, even giving arms to its supporting militias. Arms that were frequently then sold to the Islamists. And Saudi Arabia is a close ally. It must be reassuring to know that being a friend to the Americans does not necessarily cut you any slack. And, again, nary a peep of complaint about the Times story. Business as usual for the American Empire to have its special ops warriors dropping in at various places at various times to wreak havoc.
The final story from two weeks ago is about accountability, or lack of it. It described how twenty-three Afghan civilians riding in three vehicles were killed in error due to "inaccurate and unprofessional" reporting by a team of drone operators. The drone operators were located in Nevada. The story recounts how "Two children were spotted near the vehicles, but the drone operators reported that the convoy contained only military age men." Bear in mind that the people in the vehicles were not seen doing anything threatening, which leads to the presumption that in Afghanistan you can apparently be shot on sight if you are a military age male riding in a vehicle. In this attack, both women and children were also killed. And to those expecting that those who carried out the devastating and completely unwarranted attack might be severely punished, think again. Four officers were reprimanded and two others disciplined. In the age of empire carrying out orders, whatever the consequences for some poor bastard on the ground, is a good enough defense.
Four stories I would rather have not read. How did we get into this nightmare? I wish I knew and if it were only a nightmare someday we might wake up. There is no longer any hope that Obama will reverse course on any of this. Perhaps, like the Roman Empire and the British Empire more recently, the United States will just run out of money and manpower and will retire from the international stage. I have to believe that the world will be a better place when that finally occurs.
Read more by Philip Giraldi
- Terrorizing Through Lawfare – May 23rd, 2012
- House Passes Stealth Legislation – May 16th, 2012
- A Tipping Point for Israel – May 9th, 2012
- Ron Paul Gets One Wrong – May 2nd, 2012
- Washington Felons Fret Over Hanky-Panky in Cartagena – April 25th, 2012





Johnny in Wi.
June 10th, 2010 at 4:11 am
Dr. Girardi: This is horrendous. How did our country fall so low? What if anything can we do to get out of this nightmare? I see no one on the horizon who could change things for the better. It looks like we are heading to another world war and no one knows it, but our elites.
MoT
June 10th, 2010 at 5:33 am
And to think that there are those who are INCENSED whenever any video reportage of said atrocities ever sees the light of day. To such morally maladjusted robots it's considered "verboten".
Debbie(aussie)
June 10th, 2010 at 6:19 am
"If the objective is to make more terrorists rather than less it would, however, work just fine" After all this time, doesn't one have to conclude that , that is the case. War for the enrichement of some! Why can not more people see!! Talk about frustrating.
Thanks for a great round up Philip.
mark green
June 10th, 2010 at 6:46 am
Philip Gerardi makes many excellent points. His observations confirm the worst. The basic problem is not this administration or that one (Bush, Clinton, Obama); it's our entire ruling establishment, including our vaunted 'free press'. Our ruling class worship at the alter of Empire, are warm to aggressive war, and are committed to ruling the world. Expect more wars. America may be in decline, but the arrogance of our elites is still on the rise.
maidhc
June 10th, 2010 at 8:56 am
How did we get into this nightmare?
The answer is Kristol Clear…
See "The Source of America's Wars" for more details:
http://palestinechronicle.com/view_article_detail…
pwi
June 10th, 2010 at 10:37 am
It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.
Niccolo Machiavelli
john
June 10th, 2010 at 11:16 am
The fifth story is of course the sanctions is spite of the fact that Brazil and Turkey offered a road toward negotiations. It is now obvious that these santions are just a smoke screen so that America and Israel , when they attack Iran, can say they exhaused all attempts at a peaceful settlement. I'm afraid Bibi Obama and the American Knesset have already decided to expand the war into Pakistan and Afganistan. I can only hope that the U.S. suffers a complete economic collapse to save itself from the madness of its leaders.
ghouri
June 10th, 2010 at 12:01 pm
I have expressed my viewes that America is no more super power but an international terrorist. A super power has a code of conduct, they think twice before taking any military action. The question is what for American,s are dieing and killing inniocent citizens of other countries.
I do believe CIA has become a notorious organisation with double face e.g. they help so called Taleban and kil them. All the CIA agnent rulers were killed and as a nation we have the same problem with PPP they have sold out to american,s but think we are living nation and knows to react and die for our land. I think if army does,t know our army then is biggest mistake and I hope and will that American,s attack then see the results.
war is always unjust because of lack of wisdom and failure of the policies. The american,s should think what they have lost. Their Judiciary system is worst in the world, education policy, defence policy health policy etc. are not for a common man.
JoaoAlfaiate
June 10th, 2010 at 2:23 pm
It's pretty well known that drone strikes kill mostly civilians and this article provides additional confirmation. But think about it: drone strikes are good for almost everybody. The US manufacturers and their shareholders make money. The operators have a job and enjoy the illusion of being at war although their prey have less chance that Bambi when he walks in front of a deer stand. And the drone strikes help the insurgency as more victims mean more hatred of the empire and more recruits. The only bad results are for the dead and maimed civilians and the US taxpayer. Four out of six ain't bad!
EFM
June 10th, 2010 at 3:02 pm
They don't fear you, they hate you and want revenge. Stop killing their loved ones, interfering in their politics, and punish your criminals from the presidents to the soldiers and there will be peace.
NewandExciting
June 10th, 2010 at 6:17 pm
In a nutshell, it's fear Debbie. There are so many people in America convinced in an Islamist boogeyman and if you try to wake anyone up from this delusion then you are obviously a self-hating american that wants the terrorists to win or are 'naive.' The threat from radical Islam has been so blown out of proportion that it is next to impossible to have a rational discussion about it. To filch unrepentantly from Frank Herbert, 'Fear is the mind-killer' and the peoples minds have been slain by their fear. It's to the point where many are willing to turn a blind eye to the encroachment of individual liberties here and abroad if only it will make them safe from the terrorists.
E. A. Costa
June 10th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
"How did we get into this nightmare?"
Well, actually it is Capitalism, which leads to Finance Capitalism, which leads to Imperialism, which leads war and colonialism (in the US case neo-colonialism actually) which leads to collapse.
Lenin's "Imperialism: The Highest Stage Of Capitalism" has a detailed analysis of the mechanics, including monopoly and banking cartels, but it is still a skeleton. The soft tissue has never been analysed in detail but it includes terminal incompetence, mass murder, increasingly Disneyeque propaganda, and, in a long list, lawyers–lots of lawyers.
Now I know the name Lenin causes hysterics on the Right, just as Marx does, but Lenin has the mechanics down cold.
If you wish to understand the psychological aspects Veblen and Marcuse are pertinent.
On the other hand, inviting any American, Right or Center, and even Left, to read Deleuze's and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus, which in the later chapters is especially good on the role of "money", is to invite total incomprehension or self-examination which for the naively unaware and unphilosophical borders on nervous breakdown.
Anti-Oedipus was indeed written in a mode toward exactly that effect.
One aspect may ring a bell–once every desire, and every person, has been commoditized, and all value expressed in a monetary system that is two-tiered, including one aspect that is market price and another that is debt-credit, alienation, systematicrepression, and schizophrenia is inevitable, as is a society of incompetents, pathological liars, psychopaths, and hypocrites.
Old Rebel
June 10th, 2010 at 9:31 pm
Lenin's "solution" did not decrease state violence; it increased it. The Soviet Union invaded Poland (twice), then conquered Eastern Europe, and waged war against its own people.
pwi
June 10th, 2010 at 10:02 pm
Hatred is gained as much by good works as by evil.
Niccolo Machiavelli
Hacklheber
June 10th, 2010 at 10:41 pm
"The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality" by Ludwig von Mises
The classical expression of the clerks’ conceit and their fanciful belief that their own subaltern jobs are a part of the entrepreneurial activities and congeneric with the work of their bosses is to be found in Lenin’s description of the “control of production and distribution” as provided by his most popular essay. Lenin himself and most of his fellow conspirators never learned anything about the operation of the market economy and never wanted to. All they knew about capitalism was that Marx had described it as the worst of all evils. They were professional revolutionaries. The only sources of their earnings were the party funds which were fed by voluntary and more often involuntary – extorted – contributions and subscriptions and by violent “expropriations.” But, before 1917, as exiles in Western and Central Europe, some of the comrades occasionally held subaltern routine jobs in business firms. It was their experience – the experience of clerks who had to fill out forms and blanks, to copy letters, to enter figures into books and to file papers – which provided Lenin with all the information he had acquired about entrepreneurial activities.
Lenin correctly distinguishes between the work of the entrepreneurs on the one hand, and that of “the scientifically educated staff of engineers, agronomists and so on” on the other hand. These experts and technologists are mainly executors of orders. They obey under capitalism the capitalists; they will obey under socialism “the armed workers.” The function of the capitalists and entrepreneurs is different; it is, according to Lenin, “control of production and distribution, of labor and products.” Now the tasks of the entrepreneurs and capitalists are in fact the determination of the purposes for which the factors of production are to be employed in order to serve in the best possible way the wants of the consumers, i.e., to determine what should be produced, in what quantities and in what quality. However, this is not the meaning that Lenin attaches to the term “control.” As a Marxian he was unaware of the problems the conduct of production activities has to face under any imaginable system of social organization: the inevitable scarcity of the factors of production, the uncertainty of future conditions for which production has to provide, and the necessity of picking out from the bewildering multitude of technological methods suitable for the attainment of ends already chosen those which obstruct as little as possible the attainment of other ends, i.e., those with which the cost of production is lowest. No allusion to these matters can be found in the writings of Marx and Engels. All that Lenin learned about business from the tales of his comrades who occasionally sat in business offices was that it required a lot of scribbling, recording and ciphering. Thus, he declares that “accounting and control” are the chief things necessary for the organizing and correct functioning of society. But “accounting and control,” he goes on saying, have already been “simplified by capitalism to the utmost, till they have become the extraordinarily simple operations of watching, recording and issuing receipts, within the reach of anybody who can read and write and knows the first four rules of arithmetic.”*
Here we have the philosophy of the filing clerk in its full glory.
E.A. Costa
June 11th, 2010 at 2:15 am
Hilarious.
Hint: debt credit produces nothing.
Just the opposite. And you don't need Marx to tell you that–both Thomas Aquinas and Ezra Pound emphaasize same.
Nor does "competition".
Indeed, the only area in which the Capitalist values "competition" is among those comoditized as labor.
And by the way, Lenin did use markets.
And no, not only are the Chinese Communists not Capitalists, like Lenin they use markets and know Finance Capitalism inside out.
E. A. Costa
June 11th, 2010 at 4:03 am
You realize, of course, that Poland joined the NAZI's in their attack on Czechoslovakia?
Or wasn't that in Big Brother's history?
Or that Stalin offered to join Britain and France in guaranteeing Poland's security but the Poles refused the Soviets permission for the Red Army to cross Poland to meet the NAZI's on their own ground?
E. A. Costa
June 13th, 2010 at 2:24 am
"Herewith he [Polycrates] plundered all, without distinction of friend or foe; for he argued that a friend was better pleased if you gave him back what you had taken from him, than if you spared him at the first…."
Herodotus
Peaceful_Idiot
June 16th, 2010 at 9:04 pm
Mr. Giraldi,
I enjoy your articles and this is OT, but I read something I found interesting and wanted to share since it involves your AmCon interview with Sibel Edmonds. Have you seen this recent article on Salon?
Alan Dershowitz endorses a Republican
From the article:
So the official line is that Schakowsky is not "sufficiently devoted to Israel". Which made me think of the recent flotilla attack, and how a result has been the souring of Israeli and Turkish relations. Which made me think of your interview with Sibel Edmonds in which she mentioned Schakowsky as possibly having been compromised by Turkish agents.
AmCon Interview:
So Israeli pirates slaughter Turks, souring Turkish relations with Isreal. Then, in a completely unrelated coincidence, Alan Dershowitz throws Schakowsky – an obviously pro-Israel Jew – under the bus for not supporting Israel. Schakowsky happens to be a member of congress that Sibel Edmonds fingered as possibly being compromised by agents of the Turkish Government.
Could there be trouble in paradise? Is this is a sign that the Turkish-Israeli honeymoon may be coming to an end?
Peaceful_Idiot
June 16th, 2010 at 11:35 pm
Just speculation on my part, but it seems as if it's a pretty simple story…
Schakowsky has been compromised by both Israeli and Turkish agents. Maybe they've got dirt Maybe it's the stuff Ms. Edmonds was talking about, maybe something else, maybe nothing but Ms. Edmonds claims that Schakowsky may have been compromised?
Regardless, relations have soured between Israel and Turkey, and the Turks could use their hot lesbian love tape to compromise Schakowsky's "devotion" to Israel. All this stuff about J Street and blah blah blah is just a lie.
Cast Lead and now the flotilla attack have caused relations between Israel and Turkey to go south. Rep. Schakowsky, who – according to Ms. Edmonds – could possibly be blackmailed by agents of the Turkish Government, i.e. she may not be "sufficiently pro-Israel". Therefore it's time for her to go….
Seems simple enough.