Apparently we have boots on the ground in Yemen now. Sorry, I meant advisors (another meaningless bit of Newspeak, much like the word “terrorism”, or the compound “safe haven”).
Obviously it isn’t as important for the American public or the world to know that we’ve got “boots on ground” (which by the way, IS what wins wars or prolongs them) in Yemen as it is for them to be continuously kept in a state of fear about ambiguous external threats like the convenient underwear bombers and their sophisticated tactics plastered all over our TV screens (I don’t own one, this is for dramatic effect). And besides, the troop presence in Yemen is probably minimal — we do not need a full scale force to apprehend terror suspects under the new strategies of the Obama administration. During the Bush years if the administration deemed someone a threat they would physically capture them and send them away to be tortured in some place like Guantanamo so that government pundits can spew legalese jargon about it not being subject to international law. Under the Obama administration they are not pulling any punches, as we’ve seen and as it has been legally codified, if they don’t like someone they can and don’t hesitate to just fucking assassinate them. I digress. My point here is that this is another example of US military aggression abroad that will more than likely destabilize yet another region in the world and as a result of that allow for more radicalization of militants, Islamist or otherwise, who will want to kill Americans. In this way the pretext for military aggression and interventionism is self-propelling, an Ouroboros — the perfect eternal return of global warfare.
It seems to me that the Orwellian idea of permanent warfare being waged in the interest of national security (and of course this could be described a number of ways, I’m sure you get my meaning) is becoming, or already has become a reality in our march toward corporate globalism and endless state sanctioned terrorism abroad and at home.
In Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World Revisited” he theorizes that as the methods for control in a scientific dictatorship become more advanced and effective the need for violent coercion will become obsolete. I do not know where we stand today between the violent state waging war endlessly and total domination in the way that Huxley describes but the path we’re on is clear.
I do not want any more blood on my hands.