Obscenities

According to Secretary of State John Kerry, the supposed use of chemical weapons in Syria, according to him and many others at least, by the government of Syria is a "moral obscenity".

It certainly seems like there is a drum beat towards war. This war drum beats all to regularly in the world, and most definitely has become part of politics as usual here in the United States.  Which country or group should be or will be attacked has become a common theme for those who occupy the White House and seats in Congress.  And of course, none of the proponents of military violence claim any harmful aspirations.  Each and every one argues that violence and destruction are simply the only way to bring about peace, the Nobel Peace Prize winning president included.

Now let's talk a bit about obscenities.  Obscene is the fact that the situation with Syria is happening in similar ways as did the situation with Iraq.  Claims are made that there is certainty that the Syrian government used chemical weapons.  Weapons inspectors are now on the ground to verify if the chemical weapons were in fact used at the request of certain world powers.  Even though these inspectors are doing the job requested of them, those same powers are trying to argue that it is too late despite the fact that experts are denying that it is too late.  Experts are saying that they indeed will be able to make determinations about the use of those weapons.

Obscene is the fact that the government which rushed to start a war in Iraq based on claims of certainty and whose claims were absolutely and completely disproved, is willing to make claims of certainty that would likely lead again to military action before any definitive results have been announced.

Obscene is that the government which chose to create an unnecessary and illegal war in Iraq has not ever found it prudent to prosecute the people responsible for the deaths of an incredible number of innocent lives, both Iraqi and American.

Obscene is that there really isn't an outcry by the American public demanding to bring those criminals to justice.  If a president's administration chooses not to pursue justice in order to pretend that there is something about the office of the president that places those who have held that office above the law, then that kind of administration cannot demand the kind of respect that it would hope for.  That kind of administration cannot be expected to base it's decisions on what's right and wrong.  And that kind of administration which has decided to not prosecute those who lied about the reasons which started a war which turned out to be unjustifiable, cannot be trusted to act in a way any better than the other.

Had the Obama administration attempted to have the war criminals punished for their crimes, all of their claims about obscenities in Syria wouldn't be as obscene as they are now.  No. We should not be launching military strikes against Syria based on assurances by the Obama administration that there is no question that Syria's government is guilty of doing something that hasn't even been investigated fully.

In fact, it would be illegal for the United States to launch any kind of aggression against Syria without a Security Council resolution supporting action.  It doesn't matter if Obama's administration claims that it would be in the U.S' interest.  Where is it in the Constitution that it is in the U.S.' interest to violate international law?  Where is it in the Constitution that it is the U.S.' role in the world to be the enforcer.  When was it that the U.S. gained the right the be the sole arbiter of what's right or wrong  and when a war is OK?  Never.  It's simply that our military might coupled with an unmatched arrogance and some sense of divine right gives the person who holds the office of the presidency enough confidence that he or she, whoever it may be, can do whatever they want.

We really need to look into the true obscenities that are around us.

An Example For the World

   Bringing up the dirty aspects of the Bush administration often brings cries about old news.  In the sense that he is no longer the president it is.  But the unfinished legacy of war which he started goes on until this day so it isn't is still quite current.  The Obama administration decided to proceed with the policy of war in Iraq and Afganistan and lives are still being lost needlessly on both sides.  The legacy of death and destruction carries on with no foreseeable end. 
   Dick Cheney, who spearheaded candidate Bush's search for a running mate and found himself, was one of the most detestable figures in the crowd of many who worked in the Bush administration.  He has always been one of the most extremely cold actors who supported the most extreme policies that have earned the scorn of almost the entire world.  Unflinching in his forceful defiance of what is good and rational, he has no qualms about going on TV and speaking arrogantly about his support and direction of  actions that defy the collective conscience of humanity.
  He steps on the feet of former administration officials in the same arrogant manner that he stepped on the worries of the American people.  He says that he would do the same things that he did during his time as vice-president all over again if given the chance.  In his mind, he sees no wrong in torture, lying to the world to justify war, or maintaining secret prisons.  He leaves no apologies, none. 
   Knowing that he hadn't in the past cared too much for the truth, there is reason enough to wonder if what he has included in his new book is itself honest.  Colin Powell's former chief-of-staff, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, has already stated that the tales told by Cheney about his involvement in Powell's departure from the administration are not even remotely accurate.  Wilkerson describes Cheney's assertion that he himself had something to do with Powell leaving as "utter nonsense."  He says that from the beginning, Powell informed his inner team of his intentions of only serving one term.  Powell, in spite of the terrible mistakes he allowed himself to become a part of, suggested that the former vice-president & co. hadn't planned for anything after the fall of Bagdad.  This unnecessary tragedy should not have happened in the first place, but to think that they hadn't even planned enough to prepare for what they were causing is something that only made the situation worse.  It is scary thinking that such madmen were in control of the mightiest military machine the world has ever known. 
   Even former president Bush claims to have had sickening feelings upon learning that weapons of mass destruction weren't found in Iraq.  It is hard to fathom that he honestly didn't know this was the case beforehand, but at least he has the sense to recognize the disappointment of so many people who supported the war based on that very rationale.  Cheney though, still maintains that the United States did the right thing.  This delusional, arrogant man, according to Wilkerson is "the only person Cheney does not seem to find fault with is Cheney." 
   Isn't it time yet for this man, this cruel individual to be brought before the courts along with his cohorts?  Isn't it time for the good people of the United States to demand that he faces justice?  How long can these types of individuals be protected under the excuse that it is time to look to the future?  How can the United States pretend to want to learn from its mistakes if it isn't willing to face up to them?  When will the United States decide to set a good example, as it claims to be, for the world?