----- Original Message ----- From: "Dwayne Monroe" <idoru345 at yahoo.com>
Chuck Grimes wrote:
So, for Kerry this means that not only does he have to have a plan to get out of Iraq immediately, but he also has to dismantle the entire Bush War on Terror and creat a new policy framework to deal with terrorism. The current policy and its system is not a fixable system and not a fixable policy.
It is fundamentally flawed (besides being completely beyond any legal civilian, military or international review mechanism) and will therefore only generate massive abuses (crimes) at every level from meaningless conflicts, slaughters, and human rights abuses, to massive contractor frauds and scams.
========
Yes, this is exactly right.
This is the thing progressives (or anyone paying real attention) must demand of Kerry if he replaces Bush -- the complete dismantling of the 'War on Terror' apparatus which is built upon the cosmically insane notion the United States can prevent the possibility of a tactic -- terrorism -- being used against it through some eternally applied combination of aggressive actions.
================================
As the 'war on terror' is nothing more than a rhetorical kludge grafted onto the already existing bureaucratic-technologic apparatus of the Cold War paranoia state, demanding that Kerry to take on all the weapon[s] manufacturers, the academic complex that creates the engineers and officer corp for Thanatos etc. as well as getting the Realist IR establishment to cash in their TIAA-CREF retirement packages so that a different diplomatic paradigm can emerge over the next 20 years means that the US citizenry would want to substantially feminize the political economy.
>From one perspective, Lynndie England is a manifestation of the success
militarism has had in deconstructing post WWII feminism. How do we
deconstruct that deconstruction and in the process *construct* a
postRealist-postMachismo foreign policy?
Just asking.
Ian