A Convenient Little War?

I wrote this Monday January 6. Posted Thursday the 9th. Interesting to see that developments have followed right along these lines so far...

“Where reason ends, violence begins.”  - author unknown

I was doing some research to see how the parties fall on the event of making war – it turns out they are pretty much the same. As a country we have been at war – constantly – under presidents of both parties. The Democrats have actually started more wars than the Republicans. However, it is the use and length of wars as political instruments that interests me here.

The most recent being the most convenient example, I am looking at the pointed political use of the game of war being played in the Middle East in structuring and running our country.  This is evident in the ignition and re-ignition of hostilities in the middle east that were the hallmark of the Bush eras and passed on to subsequent presidents to deal with as a convenient resource or a rancorous recurrence, depending on how they are viewed and used. Whenever needed, there is always a convenient diversion and popularity boost to be found in promoting, escalating or deescalating overseas violence to become the great and wonderful protector and leader of the American people and preserve their way of life. And that is exactly what a number of American Presidents have done in our very human and foible-filled past.

While all the patriotic hoopla and rhetoric of this effort goes on, no one seems to mind or notice national debt tripling into billions and trillions, companies and executives fattening on war budgets garnered from tax revenues, and piddling little items at home such as racial and gender equality, the relocation of jobs to tax free countries to line already rich pockets at the expense of American workers, loosening of environmental protections. burgeoning medical costs, an overrun drug industry, increased hate and violence at home, and now, hopefully, impeachment.

Who would impeach a President so obviously posturing heroism rhetoric and cowboy actions? “Imminent Threat” is a powerful and unconfirmable term being used liberally by an administration with a reliable history of untruth. And in truth, Mr. Trump is following a long and successful, though possibly distasteful, line of multiple presidents who have used overseas incidents to create domestic support. A nice little war is a political management tactic, an economic booster and a great distraction. “Collective fear stimulates herd instinct and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd.” - Bertrand Russel, Unpopular Essays. A convenient little war, or the threat of it, is a great way to solidify a voting base and a great way to beef up support for turning a blind eye to clear misuse of power. More and direct information on the impeachment charges was being released as Trump ordered the attack on Soleimani in Iraq. 

In a recent NY Times "On Politics" article Lisa Lerer points out Mr. Trump’s appealing to both hawkish and isolationist arms of the Republican Party in his most recent strike hard and pull back tactics. More evidence of the use of this move to consolidate his base and distract and divert the American people with the threat of war. I was bemused this morning as I read her article offering these views in the NY times: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/08/us/politics/trump-iran-republicans.html

Authorizing an inconsistently over-scaled covert strike to incite an international incident to consolidate a base at home – a suspicious use of power? Borderline misuse? But legal, all legal. Yeah, we’ve got that. Right here. Made in America.