Though brilliant in its simplicity and the ability to convey the scope and scale of this ongoing disaster, the presentation understates the long-term costs of this latest war. In addition, it provides no means to identify the parties that brought us to this perilous point.
It was Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz who in Congressional testimony assured us Americans that the war in Iraq would cost no more than $50 billion, that it would be quickly over, that we would be welcomed, and that the costs would be recovered from the sale proceeds of Iraqi oil.
As with the intelligence fixed around this same goal, none of what Wolfowitz said was true. For perspective, consider that the total securitized federal debt was $900 billion in 1980 when a “fiscally conservative” administration came to power (Reagan-Bush I).
When they left 12 years later, the debt was $4200 billion. Though the accumulation of debt slowed slightly under Clinton, the total eight years later (in 2000) was $5600 billion. It now exceeds $12,000 billion. Within a decade, the ANNUAL interest payments–including the interest on funds borrowed to wage wars in Iraq, Afghanistan (and Iran and Pakistan?) will exceed $700 billion.
And that’s before the cost of the next “surge” or the one after that. For anyone who does not yet comprehend the source of this peril, please review the analyses on Criminal State where you can order Guilt By Association, the first release in the Criminal State series. Chapter Six chronicles the financial HOW of the warfare now being waged on the U.S. by an enemy within.
This sophisticated treason runs deep; its core is found in a shared mindset that took decades to imbed in the national psyche. From the perspective of mental manipulation, there’s little difference between displacing facts with beliefs in Iraqi WMD, ties to Al Qaeda, etc. and the imbedding in the national mindset of “consensus” beliefs that induced us to put our faith in the infallibility of unfettered financial markets.
Both are frauds. Both induced a targeted population to freely embrace forces that systematically imperiled their freedom. Both required lengthy pre-staging and sophisticated orchestration. Is it possible that both mega-frauds trace to a common source? Here’s a clue: What financially sophisticated subculture within an elite subculture within an extremist subculture granted nation-state status has a multi-century history of inducing targeted nations to incur debt in order to advance a nontransparent geopolitical agenda?
Hint: this is not the first time that a nation has been induced to economic ruin by those who profit on the machinations of international debt. Who — precisely who — benefits from the “special relationship” that the U.S. has with Jewish nationalists (aka “Israel”)?
What — precisely what — is the benefit to U.S. interests from this entangled alliance with militant Judaism? If the ongoing conduct chronicled in these analyses is not treason, what — precisely what — is?
An accurate accounting would include the opportunity cost savings. But for this special relationship, what would have been the costs in blood and treasure?
But for this entangled alliance, what would be the condition of U.S. national security? But for the duplicity of those profiled in these commentaries, what would be the prospects for peace in the Middle East? But for the U.S. recognizing an enclave of extremists as a legitimate nation state in 1948, what would have been the condition of international affairs in the post-WWII era? But for this “state,” would the end of the Cold War have segued seamlessly into a Global War on Terrorism?
But for the expansionist agenda pursued by those the Joint Chiefs of Staff portrayed six decades ago as “fanatics,” would the U.S. have become the target of terrorists?
How much longer can the global community afford to tolerate the behavior of Zionist extremists in the heart of the predominantly Muslim Middle East? At what point does the international community coalesce—in the interest of peace—to disarm nuclear-armed fanatics posing as a legitimate nation-state? But for the behavior of these fanatics, would the Middle East now be faced with a nuclear arms race? Would the world now be faced with this threat if John F. Kennedy had succeeded in 1963 in forcing international inspections of Israel’s Dimona reactor?
Would the U.S. have this entangled alliance with an extremist enclave if Attorney General Robert Kennedy and Senator William Fulbright had succeeded in 1962-63 in forcing the Israel lobby to register in the U.S. as what it is: a foreign agent? The “but for” costs are clearly in the trillions of dollars. Remember the post-Cold War “peace dividend”? I leave it to others to calculate the human costs of an ill-advised and increasingly perilous relationship attained by deceiving and manipulating Harry Truman, a Christian-Zionist president. At the very least, this special relationship cost this nation the global goodwill amassed during WWII.
As the U.S. sinks steadily deeper into debt, it appears that this relationship cost us not only our credibility but also our credit standing. To put some historical perspective on this loss of standing, keep in mind that the U.S. was home to half the world’s productive capacity in the post-WWII era, assuring that our bonds would be “gilt-edged” for decades.