The parallells to My Lai/Song My and countless other war-time atrocites (the Holocaust, anyone?) are way too strong to ignore. It seems that almost all warfare since the dawn of time has hinged upon de-humanification of the enemy and subsequent slaughter of non-combatants. A leads to B which leads to genocide and ethnic cleansing. Easy as that.
And for what?
What did the Third Reich actually gain from waging war on their neighbours? How did killing six million jews, twenty million soviets and millions of gypsies, disabled and retards actually help the nationstate of Nazi Germany prosper? What did they gain from occupying large parts of western Europe, stretching their military all over the continent? Why did Saddam (and Turkey) insist on not giving the kurds their own state and instead expend billions of hard-earned dinars on keeping a resistant people in check? Why doesn't Putin simply walk away from Chechnya? Why did the US step into Vietnam after the French gave up and called it a day (as an outside observer, being neither a yank nor a frog, it's pretty obvious the French are a lot smarter about picking their battles than the US.)? What is Israel doing in Palestine? How about the former partly ethnically cleansed republic of the remains of what was once known as Yugoslavia? Rwanda? What's with Sudan, right fucking now?
What's in it for the aggressor?
For one, they get a lot of problems. They have to keep the occupied peoples quiet, ie post large military forces there to keep them down. A resistance to occupation is as natural as day and night. Northern Ireland, say no more. This drains the economy of the invader and puts significant stress on their own population once the "us or them" rhetoric wears off. Is it to get at natural resources? Maybe, but historically those don't directly lead to genocides, large land grabs or occupations - they are targeted military operations like Rommel's in Africa and the first Gulf War. And it doesn't have to be oil, it can easily be water like with the Golan Heights. So what else can prod national leaders to whip up a frenzy and take up arms against their neighbours?
In some cases, it's a convenient way to rally the people around yourself and create a climate for pursuing an agenda - like the second Gulf War. So why exactly did Argentina try to take the Falklands? And why did Maggie want them back? Strategic values? Please. Let's go to war over a bunch of sheep and a lighthouse. Yeah, good idea!
What The Fuck Are They Thinking?
Are they thinking, at all? I just don't know anymore... If we get the politicians we deserve, I wonder what the fuck we could have done to deserve these. Some days I'd like to just nuke the whole fucking planet and let it do a hard reboot.
I mean, it's not like the germs and cockroaches would do worse than us.
Gaia #> shutdown -r now