Fascisme nog steeds niet begrepen in de VS en de EU

Beste bezoeker lees het volgende opiniestuk van Umair Haque. Hierin legt hij uit dat de VS geen snars begrijpt van fascisme: de opkomst en het grote gevaar van fascisme zoals we dat in Duitsland, Italië, Spanje en aantal Latijns Amerikaanse landen hebben gezien.

Moet wel opmerken dat wat mij betreft de VS al een fascistoïde maatschappij is, neem de omgang van de politie met de gekleurde en zeker met de zwarte minderheid in de VS. Dan is er nog het frustreren van het kiesrecht voor gekleurden, die veelal niet eens kunnen stemmen als ze daartoe gemachtigd zijn (en aan die machtiging wordt ook nu weer flink geknaagd)...... Wat voorts te denken over het inperken van vrouwenrechten (zoals voor abortus en anticonceptie) in een aantal VS staten....... 

Lees en geeft het ajb door, ook hier begrijpt men niet welk gevaar de fascisten vormen voor onze toch al lamme democratie..... Hoewel wij de les bij wijze van spreke aan den lijve hebben ondervonden, zie je ook de neoliberale partijen als VVD, D66, CDA (in feite ook neoliberaal), PvdA, CU en SGP meer en meer uiterst rechtse of beter gezegd fascistoïde denkbeelden omarmen, zie alleen al hoe men met vluchtelingen en hun kinderen denkt om te kunnen gaan.......... 

De CU sputtert nog wel wat op het gebied van vluchtelingen, maar deze hypocriete partij blijft wel achter  het inhumane waardeloze kabinet Rutte 3 staan, een kabinet waar het zelf aan deelneemt...... Sterker nog: dit kabinet kan niet zonder de steun van de 'Christen'Unie.....

Ook het etnisch profileren in de VS en hier, is feitelijk een fascistische vorm van politie-inzet......

Bovendien is het neoliberalisme uiteindelijk goed beschouwt niets anders dan een fascistisch gedachtegoed! Daar is Haque het overigens niet mee eens, gezien het artikel dat hieronder is opgenomen. 

Verder stelt Haque dat de hang naar fascisme niet in de grote steden is te vinden, echter daar ben ik het niet met hem eens, zie alleen al de neonazi parades in diverse grote steden in de VS. 

Hooguit kan je uit het stemgedrag buiten de grote steden in de VS als meer rechts bestempelen dan in de grote steden, waar uiteraard het discriminerende gedrag tegen de gekleurde minderheid in die gebieden extremer is dan in de grote steden, ook al schiet de politie in de VS meer gekleurden neer in de grote steden van de VS.....

Vergeet verder het gevaar niet van de steeds verder toenemende macht van grote bedrijven die met een beroep op duurzaamheid intussen de wereld verder verrampeneren en de volksgezondheid ondergeschikt houden aan het maken van (mega) winsten....... Waar dit bedrijfsleven graag foute regimes steunt en van de VS regering eist dat consumenten zo min mogelijk te vertellen hebben over o.a. voedselveiligheid...... Ook hier is dit te zien, al helpen onze politici daar graag aan mee, neem het TTIP handelsverdrag*, een verdrag waarmee de consument wordt gereduceerd tot een lastige klant die zich vooral niet moet bemoeien met voedselveiligheid en zaken als genetische manipulatie....... Verder is het een feit dat het bedrijfsleven in Duitsland het prima deed in aanloop van WOII (vanaf 1933) en de eerste twee jaren van die oorlog...... Sterker nog: zonder het grote bedrijfsleven was Hitler (en de NSDAP) waarschijnlijk niet zo machtig geworden........

Lees het volgende artikel van Umair Hague en oordeel zelf: 

umair haque

vampire. Sep 3

What America Still Doesn’t Understand About Fascism

What Happens When a Rich Society Suddenly Becomes a Poor One?

Today, I read, as you probably did, that Steve Bannon is to keynote the New Yorker’s Ideas Festival. LOL — it should go without saying that’s a pretty good indication that a society is out of ideas. Yet I can almost hear the reasoning in the New Yorker’s offices. Their problem is that American thinkers have no real explanation for fascism — just fairy tales — and that leaves you with…the fascists. Or maybe they just wanted to stoke controversy and make money (I’d give them more credit than that, but I digress.)

Let’s take the fairy tales Americans tell themselves about fascism — there are three — one by one, and then discuss what really causes fascism (and why American thinkers are completely unable to get it, even at this late stage). You can skip this part if you want the less nerdy stuff.

— Fascism is caused by identity politics. This is what Francis Fukuyama suggests in his new book — and I’d say he should be ashamed of himself, if it weren’t so funny and laughable. I decide to be a gender-nonconforming them, not a he anymore, and you respond by…cheering on Mexican babies as they’re put in camps? LOL, you see why I think American thinkers don’t know how to think anymore? It’s not just childishly absurd — it’s a grotesque form of victim-blaming, that obviates freedom or liberty in any genuine sense, every bit the equivalent of saying “well, you shouldn’t have worn that dress...!”

— Fascism is a cycle, a backlash against “too much liberalism.” This seems to explain things — but it doesn’t. What is “too much liberalism?” When we have healthcare? Or just sewers and pipes? Does that mean that human beings are doomed to be fascists? This is a kind of theology of individualism — not really an explanation for fascism.

— Fascism happens when white people are afraid of becoming a minority. This explanation is trotted out regularly by American pundits. But whites in Sweden are in no danger of becoming a minority — yet extremism is in second place there, in the upcoming election. That’s true in Italy, Poland, Hungary, and Russia, too. So this theory is obviously false — it can’t explain the global rise of fascism even a bit.

These three explanations lead to what I call the meteor strike theory of fascism. Since we have no real explanation, it becomes a random event, a kind of natural catastrophe. But if it’s a natural catastrophe, then we have no control over it. And if we have no control over it, then maybe the best we can do is…invite the fascists to headline our festivals. As a way to negotiate and bargain with them. Does that make sense?

Now. Let us try to look at all the above from another perspective. Not the one of what we believe, but simply what we know. What do we know about how America has changed over the last thirty years?

80% of Americans now live paycheck to paycheck. 70% have less than $1000 in savings. 70% expect their kids to live worse lives. Life expectancy is falling. Real incomes are shrinking. Suicides are skyrocketing. Depression and loneliness are soaring. The old can’t afford to retire, and the young can’t afford to start families. The middle class has imploded, and the ranks of the poor have swollen. What does all this really say?

America is a rich country that effectively became a poor one — in the space of a generation. Is it any surprise that this sudden, unexpected, historic collapse would massively, catastrophically destabilize society — and give rise to fascism?

(Perhaps you object. The mistake many Americans make is to think that flat-screen TVs and microwave ovens somehow make them better off than people in poorer countries. They don’t. People in Pakistan and Chile can afford those things, too. Poverty — the experience of deprivation — is a truer thing that not having a flat-screen TV. It’s about living at the edge of perpetual ruin, which is something that most Americans now face daily)

How might a society plunging from riches into poverty destabilize into fascism, precisely? The social bonds in a town or community get blown apart. People turn to fascism for belonging. The sense of optimism and faith in the future people have is destroyed. They turn to fascism for hope again. All the good jobs are gone. People seek scapegoats to blame for their miseries — the very ones they’ve barely learned to tolerate living next to. Life is a frightening thing now — people seek the soothing, comforting words of a demagogue.

You must work harder every year, just to keep your head above water — the demagogue is the only one who tells you this is wrong and unjust, while elites don’t seem to notice or care much at all. You never expected to be poor — yet here you are. Suicides and illnesses and drug use have come to surround you. Everything seems broken — towns, communities, cities, bonds, families, jobs, livelihoods, careers, even people. In the end, you turn to fascism to restore all the things you feel have been taken away from you — trust, meaning, purpose, belonging, optimism, opportunity, fairness, dignity, pride, and strength.

Those things are what poverty is really made of, and the new poverty that Americans face isn’t just financial — it’s made of all the elements of a decent life. In hard terms, poverty of human, intellectual, social, emotional, and civic capital, to name just a few.

Now, if the theory is correct, we’d expect to see fascism rising in places where all the above is true — where poverty in all these forms has risen, where all these real “capital deficits” have grown. Where are those places? They are not places that have always been poor — but of downward mobility. And that’s precisely what we do see. American fascism isn’t rising in inner cities — but in Rust Belt towns, in exurbs, in third-tier cities, in the regions where people expected easy, comfortable lives, like their parents and grandparents — but instead, are ending up elsewhere, and can’t understand why, or what to do about it all. Bang! The fascist spark is lit by the implosion of the middle class.

The fascist isn’t the prole — he’s the frustrated bourgeoisie. The one whom capitalism promised to make a capitalist — but only did it to sell him on capitalism. It had no intention of ever making him a true capitalist, like Bezos, Gates, or Buffett — why would it? Capitalism isn’t there to make him rich, it’s there to make them rich. So the prole turns to tribalism, hierarchy, and predation, then, for the power and riches and comfort he was promised — and still hungers for.

So now our theory goes something like this. Capitalism promised proles bourgeois lives — it was the best marketing trick in history, perhaps. But all it ever really wanted to do was to squeeze the proles — and maximize profits. Those disappointed would-be bourgeoisie, who are now poorer than ever, enraged, losing trust and faith in the system, living at the edge, turn to fascism. They band together into tribes of the pure— so the prole, if he can’t be a real capitalist, a true bourgeois, can at least be powerful enough to prey on the weak. The sudden, jabbing sting of poverty, the feeling of being empty, hopeless, weak, damaged, forgotten, abandoned, becomes a sense of of belonging, meaning, purpose, safety, security, and strength. Now he is someone again.

So the disappointed prole turns to fascism to restore precisely the things that capitalism took away from him — what it was impoverishing him of while he wasn’t looking. But that means that he is at the mercy of tribal logic, in all its fearfulness and cowardice and stupidity, too. The rage that should be directed at capitalism is pointed at scapegoats. The anger that should be directed at those above him is aimed below him. The contempt he should have for the rich is turned into scorn of the poor. The disappointment he should have in greed, egotism, and self-concern instead turns to a vengeful resentment of the smallest differences. He imagines that he is history’s great victim, persecuted by malign forces, hunted, and hounded — and so everything becomes an existential battle, in which only the strong survive, and must act pre-emptively, to eliminate their enemies. Self-preservation means that the price of survival is to become a predator. Nobody will ever make him poor again — he will make sure of it, by making everyone else less of a person at all.

Predatory capitalism degenerates into fascism, by creating the glittering expectation of riches, but the shattering reality of poverty. Enraged, embittered, aggrieved, people turn on their neighbours, colleagues, friends, and peers, preying on the weak, to gain back the very things capitalism took away from them — even as it promised them dreams of bourgeois wealth. If it can’t live like the bourgeois, as capitalism promised, the tribe will take whatever it can, by more vicious means, not to be poor in these ways ever again. Democracy itself begins to wither and die. Society shrivels. Norms and values are ripped apart. Everything seems to shatter.

The world has seen all this before. This was the story of Germany in the 1930s, almost exactly. A rich society which had suddenly become poor. A middle class imploding. People turning on their friends and neighbours. The tribe seizing for itself what capitalism had promised — but never had any intention of delivering. In more and more violent ways. Led by a demagogue. Who made people feel strong and powerful and hopeful again. Bang! Fascism.

That story is being retold in American today. America can’t quite bring itself to believe it. It is too busy telling itself fairy tales and fables. That is why Steve Bannon can headline a festival of ideas — LOL — while a nation seems to think fascism is the equivalent of a meteor strike. Fairy tales, my friends, do not help you, in the deep, dark night, when the monsters judder and screech. They are only there to lull us asleep.

Umair
 August 2018

Leadership News Politics Economics Life

=========================================

* Sinds Trump aan het bewind is, zijn EU ambtenaren en politici bezig met een peperdure lobby in Washington om het TTIP verdrag alsnog getekend te krijgen, let wel: de EU is een volksvertegenwoordiging en niet een bedrijvenvertegenwoordiging!

EU beschuldigt GB van spionage inzake Brexit.......

De EU beschuldigt Groot-Brittannie van spionage inzake de onderhandelingen met de EU over de Brexit. Zo zou GB via een hack door het Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) aan negatieve EU kritiek op May's Chequers Plan voor de Brexit zijn gekomen..... Dit is uiteraard gunstig voor de Britse onderhandelaars......

Annie Machon, die het hieronder geschreven artikel publiceerde op Consortium News, noemt nog een voorbeeld en haalt bovendien de dappere klokkenluider Katharine Gun aan die een aantal zaken naar buiten bracht en daar bijna voor werd veroordeeld.......

Zie welk smerig spel wordt gespeeld door de Britse overheid. Echt bewijs voor de Britse hacks zijn er niet, maar gezien alle smerige zaken die GB heeft geflikt, is het zeer waarschijnlijk dat GB inderdaad ook in de Brexit onderhandelingen zich weer van één van haar smerigste kanten (heeft laten en) laat zien.......

Ongelofelijk dat ook de Britse regering een grote bek heeft over Russische manipulaties, waar NB geen flinter bewijs voor is, terwijl het zichzelf bezighoudt met manipulaties middels het hacken van zelfs bevriende naties en dat al ver voor er van een Brexit sprake was, ja zelfs al voor de aanslagen van 911...... Ga maar eens na wat dit betekent voor de omgang met landen als Rusland waar de Britse regering vijandig tegenover staat.......

Have British Spies Been Hacking the EU?

August 17, 2018 at 10:50 pm

Written by Consortium News

The European Union has accused British intelligence agencies of disrupting Brexit negotiations—creating a new public dispute that could poison further an already toxic situation.

(CN Op-ed) — Just after midnight on Aug. 16, I was called by LBC Radio in London for a comment on a breaking story on the front page of The Daily Telegraph about British spies hacking the EU. Even though I had just retired to bed, the story was just too irresistible, but a radio interview is always too short to do justice to such a convoluted tale. Here are some longer thoughts.

For those who cannot get past the Telegraph paywall, the gist is that that the European Union has accused the British intelligence agencies of hacking the EU’s side of the Brexit negotiations. Apparently, some highly sensitive and negative EU slides about British Prime Minister Theresa May’s plan for Brexit, the Chequers Plan, had landed in the lap of the British government, which then lobbied the EU to suppress publication.

Of course, this could be a genuine leak from the Brussels sieve, as British sources are claiming (well, they would say that, wouldn’t they?). However, it is plausible that this is the work of the spies, either by recruiting a paid-up agent well placed within the Brussels bureaucracy, or through electronic surveillance.

The Ugly Truth of Spying

Before dismissing the latter option as conspiracy theory, the British spies do have experience. In the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003, the United States and the United Kingdom were desperate to get a United Nations Security Council resolution to invade Iraq, thus providing a fig leaf of apparent legitimacy to the illegal war. However, some countries within the UN had their doubts (including France and Germany), and the U.S. asked Britain’s listening post, GCHQ, to step up its surveillance game. Forewarned is forearmed in delicate international negotiations.

                     

                          Katherine Gun: Threatened with prosecution.

How do we know this? A brave GCHQ whistleblower named Katharine Gun leaked the information to The Observer. For her pains, she was threatened with prosecution under the draconian terms of the UK’s 1989 Official Secrets Act and faced two years in prison. The case was only dropped three weeks before her trial was due to begin, partly because of the feared public outcry, but mainly because her lawyers threatened to use the legal defense of “necessity”—a defense won only three years before during the case of MI5 whistleblower David Shayler. Tangentially, a film is being made about Gun’s story this year.

We also have confirmation from one of the early 2013 Edward Snowden disclosures that GCHQ had hacked its way into the Belgacom network—the national telecommunications supplier in Belgium. Even back then, there was an outcry from the EU bodies, worried that the UK (and by extension its closest intelligence buddy, the U.S.), would gain leverage with stolen knowledge.

So, yes, it is perfectly feasible that the UK could have done this, even though it was illegal back in the day. GCHQ’s incestuous relationship with America’s National Security Agency (NSA) gives it massively greater capabilities than other European intelligence agencies. The EU knows this well, which is why it is concerned to retain access to the UK’s defense and security powers post-Brexit, and also why it has jumped to these conclusions about hacking.

Somebody Needs to Watch the Watchers

But that was then, and this is now. On Jan. 1, 2017, the UK government finally signed a law called the Investigatory Powers Act (IPA), governing the legal framework for GCHQ to snoop. The IPA gave GCHQ the most draconian and invasive powers of any Western democracy. Otherwise known in the British media as the “snoopers’ charter,” the IPA had been defeated in Parliament for years, but Theresa May, then home secretary, pushed it through in the teeth of legal and civil society opposition. This year, the High Court ordered the UK government to redraft the IPA as it is incompatible with European law.

May: Breaking up is hard to do.

The IPA legalized what GCHQ previously had been doing illegally post-9/11, including bulk metadata collection, bulk data hacking, and bulk hacking of electronic devices.

It also gave the government greater oversight of the spies’ actions, but these measures remain weak and offer no protection if the spies choose to keep quiet about what they are doing. So if GCHQ did indeed hack the EU, it is feasible that the foreign secretary and the prime minister remained ignorant of what was going on, despite being legally required to sign off on such operations. In which case the spies would be running amok.

It is also feasible that they were indeed fully briefed, and that would have been proper protocol. GCHQ and the other spy agencies are required to protect “national security and the economic well-being” of Great Britain, and I can certainly see a strong argument could be made that they were doing precisely that (provided they had prior written permission for such a sensitive operation) if they tried to get advance intelligence about the EU’s Brexit strategy.

This argument becomes even more powerful when you consider the problems around the fraught issue of the border between the UK’s Northern Ireland and EU member Ireland, an issue about which the EU is being particularly intransigent. If a deal is not made, the 1998 Good Friday Agreement could be under threat and civil war might break out again in Northern Ireland. You cannot get much more “national security” than that, and GCHQ would be justified in this work, provided it has acquired the necessary legal sign-offs from its political masters.

Our Complicated World

However, these arguments will do nothing to appease the enraged EU officials. The UK government will continue to state that this was a leak from a Brussels insider, and publicly at least, oil will be seen to have been poured on troubled diplomatic waters.

Behind the scenes, though, this action will multiply the mutual suspicion and no doubt unleash a witch hunt through the corridors of EU power, with top civil servant Martin Selmayr (aka “The Monster”) cast as witchfinder general. With him on your heels, you would have to be a brave leaker, whistleblower or even paid-up agent working for the Brits to take such a risk.

So, perhaps this is indeed a GCHQ hack. However justifiable the move might be under the nebulous concept of “national security,” this event will poison further the already toxic Brexit negotiations. As Angela Merkel famously, if disingenuously, said after the Snowden revelation that the U.S. had hacked her mobile phone: “No spying among friends.” But perhaps this is an outdated concept—and the EU has not been entirely friendly to Brexit Britain.

I am just waiting for the first hysterical claim that it was the Russians instead or, failing them, former Trump strategist in chief, Steve Bannon, reportedly on a mission to build a divisive alt-right movement across Europe.

Annie Machon is a former intelligence officer in the UK’s domestic MI5 Security Service.

By Annie Machon / Republished with permission / Consortium News / Report a typo

Eric Prince (oprichter Blackwater en oorlogsmisdadiger) wil oorlog in Afghanistan privatiseren.....

De smerige en uiterst gewelddadige superpsychopaat Eric Prince, oprichter van privé terreurleger Blackwater, kreeg bij tv zendgemachtigde MSNBC de kans, zonder enige kritiek, zijn vuige oorlogspraatjes te spuien....... Prince wil de oorlog in Afghanistan overnemen van het Pentagon en belooft daarbij succes, een gedachte die goed viel bij het beest Trump, zeker gezien 'de resultaten' van de oorlog die daar de laatste 17 jaar zijn geboekt*. 

Volkomen terecht merkte Stephen Miles van 'Win Without War' op, dat Prince in Den Haag terecht zou moeten staan voor het Internationaal Strafhof (ICC), al geldt dit ook voor een fiks aantal politici en hooggeplaatste militairen, de CIA, NSA en ga nog maar even door....... 

Prince is als directeur van Blackwater, na fiks wat smerige oorlogsmisdaden omgedoopt tot Academi (ha! ha! ha! hoe verzint hij het??) en is als zodanig één op één verantwoordelijk voor de moord en/of verminking op/van een groot aantal burgers in o.a. Irak en Afghanistan........ (waar men in de westerse reguliere media liever niet over spreekt....) 

Lees het volgende artikel van Jake Johnson, eerder gepubliceerd op Common Dreams en door mij overgenomen van Anti-War en zie hoe  de geesten in de VS langzaam maar zeker worden klaargemaakt voor oorlogsvoering door bedrijven als Academi...... Als dit gebeurt en er worden daarna bovendien warbots ingezet**, is het hek helemaal van de VS 'oorlogsdam.....' (een dam van ongeveer 5 centimeter hoog...)

Durden wijst op het steeds harder slaan op de 'oorlogstrommel' in mediaorganen als MSNBC, waar deze media oorlogshitsers als Prince en anderen hun gif laten spuien, oorlogshitsers die bijvoorbeeld aandringen bij Trump een volledige oorlog tegen Syrië te beginnen.... Terwijl i.p.v. de oorlog tegen de Taliban in Afghanistan te intensiveren met een psychopathisch huurlingenleger, deze oorlog eindelijk te beëindigen, totaal wordt genegeerd door die mediaorganen..... Een pleidooi onder andere gedaan door Stephen Miles van 'Win Without War', die kortweg stelde dat i.p.v. de oorlog te privatiseren, het beter is deze te beëindigen', een waarheid als een koe zoals je begrijpt.

He Belongs in the Hague’: MSNBC Slammed for Handing Erik Prince Megaphone to Sell War

August 17, 2018 at 10:07 pm

Written by Jake Johnson

(CD) — Amid reports that President Donald Trump is “showing renewed interest” in Blackwater founder Erik Prince’s plan to hand the war in Afghanistan over to a private army led by an “American viceroy,” MSNBC on Friday happily gave the notorious war profiteer a cushy platform to make his nonsensical and dangerous pitch to the president almost entirely unchallenged.

“Shame on MSNBC for giving Erik Prince a megaphone,” Stephen Miles, director of Win Without War, wrote on Twitter following Prince’s interview with MSNBC‘s Andrea Mitchell. “He belongs in The Hague, not spewing his warmongering for profit filth on television.”

Highlighting the failure of both the deadly “conventional” approach the U.S. has taken in Afghanistan over the past 16 years and Prince’s plan to continue the war for profit, Miles went on to suggest an option that—for obvious reasons—Mitchell and Prince both ignored, one that is virtually never aired on corporate media networks like MSNBC.

“What if—hear me out—instead of privatizing the war in #Afghanistan, we ended it,” Miles wrote. “Crazy, I know.”

Stephen Miles

✔@SPMiles42

What if - hear me out - instead of privatizing the war in #Afghanistan, we ended it. Crazy, I know. But, maybe... #EndEndlessWar

MSNBC @MSNBC

NEW: President Trump is showing renewed interest in a proposal by Blackwater founder Erik Prince to privatize the war, officials tell @NBCInvestigates. http://on.msnbc.com/2PfBbiq 

Erik Prince joins @mitchellreports now live on @MSNBC to discuss the details.

Watch Prince’s full appearance on MSNBC, during which the infamous mercenary was asked for his thoughts on Omarosa but wasn’t once seriously challenged on his “prescription for endless war“:

Prince’s appearance on MSNBC came shortly after NBC News reported that Trump is growing increasingly impatient with his own administration’s strategy and looking toward Prince—the brother of billionaire Education Secretary Betsy DeVos—for possible alternatives.

“When Prince’s plan had Trump’s attention in 2017, it had the backing of his former strategist Steve Bannon and the president’s son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner,” NBC reported.

In recent meetings, Trump “has pressed his advisers about Afghanistan progress” and expressed interest in Prince’s plan to privatize the war, NBC noted, citing anonymous administration officials.

As usually happens when Prince makes his periodic appearances on corporate news shows to tout his opportunistic, for-profit war plan, critics were quick to highlight his horrendous track-record and argue that his plan to privatize the war in Afghanistan would lead to even less oversight and more bloodshed.

Rep. Ro Khanna

✔@RepRoKhanna

As head of Blackwater, Erik Prince’s mercenaries committed multiple war crimes in Iraq and were convicted for their involvement in the Nissour Square massacre that killed 17 civilians. He deserves an investigation, not contracts to wage a private war in Afghanistan.

MSNBC

✔@MSNBC

NEW: Exclusive: President Trump is increasingly venting frustration about US strategy in Afghanistan, and showing renewed interest in a proposal by Blackwater founder Erik Prince to privatize the war, current and former sr. admin. officials tell @NBCNews. https://on.msnbc.com/2PfBbiq 

10:20 PM - Aug 17, 2018

• 2,347
• 1,094 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

Ron Wyden

✔@RonWyden

Cronyism on the battlefield. This is a prescription for endless war.https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/officials-worry-trump-may-back-erik-prince-plan-privatize-war-n901401 …

7:44 PM - Aug 17, 2018

Trump eyes Erik Prince plan to privatize U.S. war in Afghanistan

"I know he's frustrated," Blackwater founder Prince said of the president. "He gave the Pentagon what they wanted. And they haven't delivered."

nbcnews.com

• 254
• 180 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

David Rothkopf

✔@djrothkopf

Trumponomics: What’s better than an unwinnable war? An unwinnable war your political cronies can profit from on the taxpayer’s dime.

Ken Dilanian

✔@KenDilanianNBC

NBC News exclusive: Trump eyes Erik Prince plan to privatize U.S. war in Afghanistan https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/officials-worry-trump-may-back-erik-prince-plan-privatize-war-n901401 … via @carolelee @ckubenbc @joshNBCNews

6:51 PM - Aug 17, 2018 · New Jersey, USA

• 182
• 104 people are talking about this

Jeffrey St. Clair

✔@JSCCounterPunch

The fact that Reality Winner is going to be sent to prison for 5 years and Erik Prince is still walking free & poised to send his murderous mercenaries into Afghanistan pretty much sums up where we come to as a country...https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/officials-worry-trump-may-back-erik-prince-plan-privatize-war-n901401 …

6:36 PM - Aug 17, 2018

Trump eyes Erik Prince plan to privatize U.S. war in Afghanistan

"I know he's frustrated," Blackwater founder Prince said of the president. "He gave the Pentagon what they wanted. And they haven't delivered."

nbcnews.com

• 337
• 216 people are talking about this

By Jake Johnson / Creative Commons / Common Dreams / Report a typo

=======================================

* 17 jaar lang is de oorlog in Afghanistan gaande (...) en als de VS en de rest van de NAVO niet vertrekken uit Afghanistan, kan het nog jaren, of zelfs decennia duren voordat de oorlog is afgelopen.... Moet je nagaan: Afghanistan is door de Nederlandse regering (al onder Rutte2, dus onder mede hoofdverantwoordelijkheid van de PvdA) veilig verklaard voor de terugkeer van vluchtelingen..... Wat een enorme rotschoft moet je zijn, om alleen al iets dergelijks te suggereren..........

** Die warbots worden al ontworpen en klaargemaakt voor productie, waarbij een drone in feite al een warbot is, de menselijke vinger aan de knop van drones die worden uitgerust met kunstmatige intelligentie (AI) zal spoedig verdwijnen, daar te veel dronepiloten geestelijk doordraaien, nadat ze weer vrouwen en kinderen hebben vermoord, die niet eens verdacht waren..... Het is dan ook zo dat meer dan 90% van alle slachtoffers bij VS drone aanvallen niet eens verdacht zijn, inderdaad meestal vrouwen en kinderen (alleen al het vermoorden van verdachten is tegen internationale wetten en deze standrechtelijke executies, ofwel moorden, zouden moeten worden behandeld als ernstige oorlogsmisdaden!)