Jimmy Carter And US Imperial Suicide: We Are Going Bankrupt

Civil War memorial in Troy, New York

May 3, 2008

Elaine Meinel Supkis

As the US empire tries to sail the Seven Seas on a sea of red ink, we are sinking. Our empire is growing but it is also dying at the same time. All empires that go into debt for military reasons, all empires that shove military costs off into the future, die. They can't do this for very long. This is classic imperial rot. And our empire is very rotted. Today, a small newspaper does the most unusual: they interview Jimmy Carter. He is increasingly cynical about things...about time! He laments the fact that life and death issues are not debated during Presidential elections anymore. Well, I say, we talk a lot about death! Namely, the more warmongering a candidate is, the more likely they will win our elections thanks to our media that is owned by a small handful of people who want us to spend all our money overseas in fruitless wars on behalf of people who are bankrupting our nation in trade and finances.

John Nichols: Interview with Jimmy Carter

There is an intensity to this documentary that is not usually associated with someone a quarter century out of the White House.

Jimmy Carter: This was my 24th book and I've been on book tours on just about all of them and this is the first time that there has been that degree of intensity and drama and unpredictability -- almost an urgency. I wanted to meet as many critics as I could and ... it turned out to be quite a remarkable journey.

Nichols: Early in the documentary, you refer to U.S. media coverage of the Middle East as "abominable" and entirely lacking in objectivity. Did you see yourself as doing battle with the media on the book tour?

Jimmy Carter: I was presenting a point of view that the American media rarely has a chance to cover. It would be almost inconceivable for any member of the House or Senate, Republican or Democrat, or any person campaigning for president, Republican or Democrat, to make the statements that I've made concerning the plight of the Palestinians or Israel withdrawing to its 1967 borders with modifications or things of that kind. So this was a new opportunity for them to cover the Mideast issue from a completely -- I'd say almost "unprecedented" -- perspective.

Nichols: Do you think you moved the political debate forward?

Jimmy Carter: Oh, no. It would be amazing for me to hear any candidate for president even mention it -- even begin to address these issues in a serious way.

Nichols: It is accepted today that a former president may, if he is willing to take some hits, say bold things about the Middle East but that candidates for president can't. Isn't that our crisis?

Jimmy Carter: That was one of the reasons I wrote the book -- and it is the reason I continue to talk about these issues. I saw a complete dearth of any sort of substantive debate. For six years, now seven years, there hasn't been a single day of substantive negotiations between Israel and either Syria or the Palestinians. I wanted to precipitate some movement on the peace process and also bring the issue to the forefront. In other countries, by the way -- and I go to Europe, I've been to Ireland and England and other countries in Europe lately -- there is a pretty intense debate. But over here: zero.

One of the most forbidden topics in America is who owns and runs our media. We know that our media has been heavily consolidated in the last 25 years and this process of moving all our media into just 5 hands continues. And the uttermost top secret piece of information is who are these people, what religion are they and do they have an agenda? Even in this interview, the former President who dared to try to do something about the ugly mess in the Holy Land, neither he nor his interviewer dares talk about this. They express wonder about how Jews in Israel may debate these issues but NO ONE is allowed to do this in the US. Why is this, we should wonder.

Israel gets boatloads of US taxpayer dollars in order to run their lovely military dictatorship. The US has funded many, many dictators across the planet. It is a wonder that the nation that boasts about being a democracy has this blood-stained pro-right wing dictator record. But it is not a surprise. We see clearly in this present election cycle how 80+% of America can be against the present status quo, 65% can be against our wars and a huge hunk of voters want to retract our empire. Yet the only two candidates who will be left standing will be two warmongers who are all gung ho for starting WWIII over the issue of US 'domination' of Muslims in the Middle East via military might.

Do Americans really want to nuke Iran? Hillary does! When she bared her bloody fangs and said she would annihilate all the humans including every single child in Iran if Iran strikes at Israel, did the media go nuts and attack her? Or did they praise her? Are we having a debate about how far we should go in support of 'allies' even if they want to start WWIII? Or are we debating flag pins, Obama's preacher's attitude problems or the likability of Mc Cain who wants our empire to spend trillions more dollars patrolling the planet?

Nearly never do any articles talking about our 'obligations' mention the costs. The news about our wild military spending are kept separate. Even as the bill shoots upwards nearly as fast as the Derivatives Beast is growing, there is little comment about this in the mainstream media. Even as our budget deficit this year has tripled over last year's budget, there is no mention of THAT when discussing military spending. The illogic of our present system whereby the US patrols the planet FOR OTHERS while paying nearly the entire cost, this is certainly NOT debated.

This is probably the main reason I supported both Ron Paul and Kucinich for President: both men, from opposite ideological ends of the spectrum, talked quite rationally and clearly about the greatest danger to American sovereignty and power: our wild misspending on military while seeing little to no gain in trade or other areas. If the US taxpayers were paying for all this, we would hear howls of rage. But Bush showed us that we can spend wildly and not notice the bill if we just pass it off to everyone we are protecting. They, in turn, will LEND us money. Just like the US lent money to the British empire as it was going bankrupt.

The US 'crisis' is pretty obvious: all our allies want free protection and they also want to make a profit off of our imperial costs. This is making them richer. Ethnic groups that are benefitting from all this want it to continue and are using vast sums of money in our election systems and information systems to insure that this flood of free lunches continue to roll out onto their dining room tables. Whether they be Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, Saudi or especially European and Israeli diners eating our economic futures, they want this delightful feast to continue forever.

It is literally life and death for the US to yank the tablecloth off and take all the dishes, knives and forks as well as the wine glasses away. Either our 'allies' give us an annual budget of at least $300 billion a year or we quit. Instead, Jimmy Carter wants to have 'peace' in the Middle East via the US paying ALL the bills. His stupid 'peace' has cost us so far, over $100 billion in today's dollars, funding all the parties at war there! We give Egypt and Israel multiple billions a year! And they do NOT want this largess to end! And it won't end. Ever. Except if we go bankrupt. Is this worth bankruptcy?

HELL NO. A bankrupt empire disintegrates. History is very, very stern about this. Once they go bankrupt, even the capital isn't safe. Usually, the core of the empire falls apart. We see this in England as Wales and Scotland join the Irish Catholics in breaking away from the dying empire's last remnants. England's financial woes are worsening. England still spends a good hunk of money on its fading military system. A system that is not keeping England intact as a country, by the way. As voters vacillate between Tweedledum Labour and Tweedledee Conservative parties, nothing essential changes. Except for one thing: England's debts grow. The bankruptcy of the British empire isn't finished just yet.

Secret Bush "Finding" Widens War on Iran

By ANDREW COCKBURN

Six weeks ago, President Bush signed a secret finding authorizing a covert offensive against the Iranian regime that, according to those familiar with its contents, "unprecedented in its scope."

Bush’s secret directive covers actions across a huge geographic area – from Lebanon to Afghanistan – but is also far more sweeping in the type of actions permitted under its guidelines – up to and including the assassination of targeted officials. This widened scope clears the way, for example, for full support for the military arm of Mujahedin-e Khalq, the cultish Iranian opposition group, despite its enduring position on the State Department's list of terrorist groups.

Similarly, covert funds can now flow without restriction to Jundullah, or "army of god," the militant Sunni group in Iranian Baluchistan – just across the Afghan border -- whose leader was featured not long ago on Dan Rather Reports cutting his brother in law's throat.

A rule of thumb in history is this: all empires seek to break up all other empires and break apart all other countries. This is classic 'divide and conquer.' The latest push in the most dangerous areas has been the West trying to break apart China. China's rulers are far too powerful to let this happen. CHINA IS SOLVENT. The Europeans hope to pretend their present EU system is an empire but it is utterly weak with virtually no military powers and the only thing holding them together is their Zollverein [German for toll free trade]. China is an empire, not a collection of feuding ethnic or language groups.

Russia, when it went bankrupt, was dismembered by the West as well as its own populations. Now that it is solvent, it is growing more powerful again. The key here is the word, 'SOLVENT'. No empire survives bankruptcy as an empire. They collapse and split into splinters. The US is frantically spending trillions of dollars in order to either splinter apart many nations or dominate nations so they can't consolidate power. Only the costs of this is going to cause the US itself to fall apart when we go bankrupt. Think the Northeast US will continue sending tax dollars to the south if we go bankrupt? Of course not. If Canada is solvent, the Northeast will petition to join the Canadian alliance. Just for example. Bankruptcy has many potent powers! We barely understand them!

The US grew even during the Great Depression, as an empire, because our GOVERNMENT was solvent. The dying European empires nearly destroyed our economy when they all slid off the economic cliff after WWI. They then attacked each other in WWII. Germany tried to consolidate all of Europe even though Germany was bankrupt. This failed. This was due to the bankruptcy: Germany had to loot everyone they conquered and this led to resistance and in Russia, amazingly powerful resistance. The military domination failed, utterly. The ONLY reason Russia didn't overrun all of Europe was simple: the US was SOLVENT and had the resources to come all the way over to Europe and take half of it.

Germany, of course, was split into many pieces and a great number of them were given to other countries and the heart of the empire was cut in four pieces. See the picture? This is the fate of all failed empires.

The US is furious that Iran might grow in size and power due to our pathetic war that is bankrupting us. Iran is biding its time, toying with us. Iran knows we are doomed. They can read the news just like any intelligent persons. They know the US costs are reaming out our economic systems. We are accumulating debts at an astonishing rate. They know that when we go bankrupt, far from dictating to them, who runs the Middle East, we will be too busy fighting each other to see who will get stuck with the costs of dealing with our bankruptcy. Time, in other words, is on Iran's side. And the temptation of the US is to strike at Iran and ANNIHILATE them now when we still have some power left. And Iran worries about this. So do the Israelis! They know their free ride is going to have a very nasty end. The fury of American taxpayers when they learn that we will have to die here of hunger or disease in order to deal with the huge bills we accumulated while trying to dominate the Middle East for Israel and Europe and Japan, well...it will be ugly, to put it mildly.

So why can't the US media speculate about this possibility? Why can't we discuss fascism in Israel and the Jewish community's schizophrenic attitude about ethnic cleansing [namely, if they do it it is OK but if Germans do it, it is evil]? Anyone daring to mention this is hammered by the media and then locked out. For example, up until last month, the New York Times allowed me to make comments. Ever since I broached this topic, talking about Carter and asking the Times to interview him, I have been totally banned.

Iraq's Shiite clerics deeply divided on militia crackdown

hiite clerics offered sharply different visions Friday in the showdown between government forces and Shiite militias — one predicting that armed groups will be crushed in Baghdad and another calling for the prime minister to be prosecuted for crimes against his people.

The contrasting views — given during weekly sermons — showed the complexities and risks in the five-week-old crackdown on Shiite militia factions. The clashes have brought deep rifts among Iraq's Shiite majority and have pulled U.S. troops into difficult urban combat in the main militia stronghold in Baghdad.

But Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, shows no indication of easing the pressure on groups including the powerful Mahdi Army led by anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

Iraqi and U.S. forces are pressing deeper into Sadr City, a slum of 2.5 million people that serves as the Mahdi Army's base in Baghdad. Al-Maliki also is seeking to increase leverage on Iran, which is accused of trading and arming some Shiite militia groups.

The US has been seeing its deaths soar again. But this makes nearly zero news in the US. ABC TV will do one 'happy news' story about Iraq or our happy soldiers coming home and then more happy soldiers being shipped out while nearly never mentioning the dead. This is classic propaganda. The US can militarily crush the Shi'as but what will this buy us? Eternal happiness? Or a swifter bankruptcy? And are the Shi'ite leaders who are 'divided' on this on our side? Or are they cynics playing us for fools and hoping to string us along until we go. Then they will, since they already have ethnically divided the nation, declare their alliance with Iran and shove the Sunnis out the door? The history of ethnic warfare is very strict about this: of course, they will do this. We will have bankrupted our nation for nothing at all. Just as we destroyed the gold standard so we could dominate Vietnam and Southeast Asia only we lost everything there, too. We are still carrying debts from that mess.

And it launched two great evils: infernal inflation and our trade deficits.

Keeping troops overseas isn't as trouble-free as McCain says

Sen. John McCain's Democratic rivals have tried to portray him as a warmonger because of his comment that "it's fine with me" if U.S. troops remain in Iraq for 100 years.

Widely ignored is the rest of McCain's quote: A 100-year stay is fine "as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed." And, McCain noted, "We've been in South Korea, we've been in Japan for 60 years."

That's true, give or take a few years. But neither case is a ringing endorsement of extended U.S. military deployments on foreign soil.

On the Japanese island of Okinawa — where most of the Americans have been based since World War II — countless rapes and other crimes committed by U.S. troops have embittered the populace.

"The hatred of the U.S. in Okinawa is palpable," says Chalmers Johnson, president of California's Japan Policy Research Institute. "They've been living next door to young, arrogant Marines who believe it's a sexual playground."

And to many South Koreans, the long American presence in their country is a reminder of tacit U.S. support for a series of ruthless despots.

No one loves an occupying force. When I lived in Germany after WWII, years after the war and while Russia still menaced West Germany, I noted that few Germans likes our military! They just did not like them! Period! Americans wouldn't hear this. But I did. This is because I spoke fluent German, look like Hitler's ideal German Fraulein and have a German name! So everyone assumed I was German. And didn't hold back at all. Just like I know how the Jewish community thinks. I lived deep inside that for many years.

We have to be adults. We have to grow up. I used to tease the Chinese for calling me names behind my back. As the White Bone Demoness, I laughed at this characterization for it is rather close to what I really am. But the Chinese used to try to show contempt in various ways and I would corner them and confront them when they did this. I am talking about tone of voice, type of greetings, whispers behind my back, etc. One has to be on one's toes when dealing with people! The US has been so anxious to be everybody's friend and guardian, we stupidly turned ourselves into everyone's fool and chump. GADS. Talk about stupid. Nothing irritates me more than this. No one respects a chump, a fool, a person that is easily cheated. They show contempt. And we act contemptuous as we strut around the world while everyone disses us and sniggers at us.

Japan despises us:

Johnson, the Japan expert, thinks both Iraqis and Japanese are too dependent on American troops. In the case of Japan, which pays the United States about $2-billion a year to defend it, the Japanese have received the benefits of the world's most advanced army with few of the responsibilities.

"They've gotten used to a free ride," Johnson says. "I've had senior Japanese say to me, 'I'm scared to death you might leave because it's been so long since we've made our own decisions about security or anything.' "

Japan has been frantic to negotiate things so we BORROW money from Japan and then, in turn, patrol Asia for Japanese interests. If Japan needs oil from Iran, they will buy it even as the US aristocrats who run our government demand a boycott of Iran. We have no allies. We have leeches of varying degrees. This is what kills ALL empires in the end. The psychotic need to keep allies that are destroying the home base leads to bankruptcy. The inability to understand the difference between a good business relationship and outright military occupation of masses of people who seethe with hatred: this is the difference between a global economic power and a dying military empire. The instant an empire must go outside of its own banking and taxation system to fund wars, it is doomed. NO empire has ever survived this.

The $2 billion the Japanese toss contemptuously at the US is so tiny amount of money when compared to our huge Pentagon budget, it doesn't even come close to paying for one month, nay, probably only one WEEK of patrolling Asia with all our aircraft carriers, troops and spy systems! This sum is not even 1% of our military budget! Running our bases in Japan aren't covered by this sum. Much less, paying for the excess sailors, pilots, soldiers. Or replacing our stocks. Or building our equipment. How much does ONE jet cost us? Half a billion dollars? And an aircraft carrier: we are talking well over $5 billion each. Running these things around Asia to defend Japan: $200 million a year each. The costs of protecting oil from the Middle East as it is shipped to Japan is part of our military costs which we do NOT get ANY compensation from Japan.

The US budget deficit has ballooned as our military costs and obligations have grown and not one Japanese taxpayer is being billed IN THE FUTURE for all this! We have 9 Nimitz class air craft carriers. So they cost us about $45 billion. Running them costs us $9 billion a year. Our European and Japanese allies give us less than $5 billion for this service. Ergo: the US taxpayers are footing a $54 billion enterprise and all our supposed allies are giving us only 10% of the overhead costs. This doesn't include the cost of all of our very, very expensive jets that use these carriers! So I would guess the true cost is really nearer to $100 billion. And our allies give us around 5% of the costs. And Israel takes the cake in that we give THEM money.

06.20.07: Bush pledges to increase US funding to Israel

In a White House statement issued following Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's visit to Washington, President George W. Bush pledged to increase US military aid to Israel over the course of the next decade.

An American team will land in Israel in July to finalize the deal. Israel currently receives an annual $2.4 billion in military aid.

"I am strongly committed to Israel's security and viability as a Jewish state, and to the maintenance of its qualitative military edge," said Bush in the statement.

Olmert and Bush met in private for a lengthy three-hour meeting in the White House, focused on the ongoing negotiations to increase US aid to Israel. *snip*
The deal Bush seeks to finalize would commence in 2009 and would remain valid for 10 years. Olmert's office declined comment on the specific amounts being discussed.

This 'aid' will cost US taxpayers an extra $24 billion unless AIPAC twists the arms of all of our Congress people and the President who will be installed by the US media. It probably will be much, much higher. This is on top of the US patrolling the Middle East and dying in many wars there in order to keep Israel happy. Since this news article, Condi Rice 'negotiated' [HAHAHA] a deal with Israel that has upped the ante to $30 billion.

Rice agrees $20bn arms deal with Arab states

Saudi Arabia is likely to glean the vast majority of the US investment outlined in the $20bn deal, while the US's other essential allies - including Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates - are also likely to be given arms upgrades worth a sum which the White House said has yet to be decided.

In addition, Egypt is to be given a further $13billion of military aid by the US after confirmation that its existing multi-million dollar arms deal with Washington would be renewed.

Ms Rice made it clear that the main reason for the deals was the growing influence of Iran in the region, whose President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has refused to stop enriching uranium which the international community suspects is designed to develop nuclear weapons.

"We have the same goals in this region concerning security and stability," the US Secretary of State said, during a stopover on the way to the Middle East in Shannon, Ireland.

The US 'gets' funds from the oil pumping despotic rulers in the Middle East via 'arms sales' to them. This fills the pockets of the military/industrialists and much of Congress as well as supporters of whichever warmonger gets to become 'President'. Of course, the tremendous costs to the American taxpayer beggars our nation and none of this negates our tremendous overhead costs. All of this is being shoved into the future via lending. And the lenders are the ones who are buying US government debts. Namely, the very same people we are protecting are billing us for this service! This is NOT money held by American tax payers who are supporting this imperialism. This is money held by the ALIENS we are protecting! And they get interest accrued so this is the best of all possible worlds for them: they get top notch military protection while at the same time MAKING A PROFIT! How good can it get?

Email this post

Culture of Life News Main Page

Comments

[mad mike]

how can a nation spend one trillion dollars "fighting" a war with two non-nations,such as iraq and afgahnistan, and not win?
because we aint supposed to.
do you readers really think that trillion is buying bullets and bombs and food for G.I.'s?
no, it is going into the pockets of corrupt gov-ment officials and the captians of industry and the commodores of finance.
they steal billions apon billions of dollars
and to avoid a possible revolt they send you six hundred bucks. it should be 6 thousand or 60 thousand bucks. because all their theft has devalued the currency that much.
and none,NO ONE (that is NO ONE) does anything. what a minit, some people are doing something. they are stealling more money. this happy cabbage, that elaine calls FUNNY MONEY(tm) is funny. because it is next to valueless. and we are all bought off with it. no one demands more.
like more or higher wages. or more or higher interest on savings.
but the big boyz get more. when the price of energy goes up. when the price of food goes up. when local property taxes go up. they get you money.
suppose the dollar tanks by 90%. me i would become a homeless strving hobo.
but take a rich guy , an ex gold-man-sacker,
such as whacky bernanke or punky paulisonor creepy corzine. they would still have millions of dollars. even if gasoline went to 5 or 6or 8 bucks a gallon. no problem. a loaf of bread to 4 or 8 bucks, no problem.
local property taxes double or triple, no problem.
these people hold the rest of us in such contempt and derision, we are like microbes.
democritus sed, "the man enslaved to wealth can never be honest".
oh,and of course, there is no limit to human greed and folly.(tm)

[Jim Smith]

Elaine,

Our Bank of Canada Governor, Mark Carney late of Goldman Sacks, says we WILL be solvent, so I can hardly wait for Northeast USA to join us! I see a beautiful home on Plank Road, Berlin for sale at a giveaway price, but am afraid to take the plunge before government health plan is in force. Oh well! It would have been nice. From your writings, people and business should be moving into your area, not out.

[Elaine Meinel Supkis]

I expect to be buried here on this mountain. The entire place bears my imprint, from the peak to the valley. It has a great view for my ghost and wandering about here, spooking people will be fine with me.

Mad Mike: 100% correct. Thanks.

[Jim Smith]

Elaine,

I am somewhat uncomfortable with your remarks re burial and your ghost, and note previous remarks re your long life, etc. Actually, you are a relative youngster and I would sincerely hope, have many long productive years ahead of you. Nobody is irreplaceable they say, but you are filling a vital role, are one-of-a-kind and therefore must stick around to see things through. It should be interesting.

[Elaine Meinel Supkis]

Jim, my godmother, bless her, lived to be 105 years old, she was born before the end of the Civil War. She died when I was a teenager.

She said, 'Tell everyone you are a lot older than you are and they will say, "Oh my god! I didn't know!"' She would tell people she was 120 years old just to see them blanche.

When she decided to leave, she wrote me this letter, 'If you don't come in another week, you might miss me.' I had to finish school and planned on visiting her by June 6th. She died a week after writing the letter and she wasn't sick at all. She just knew.

I told her once, 'I hope to live like you!' She said, 'You will go to many funerals first.' Another beloved friend who died at 101 years of age who was black and born down south in the 19th century, she said, 'All my life, I got to bake sponge cakes for other people's funerals. So don't bake any around me, OK?' This was when we lived next door. So my first sponge cake around Mrs. Lake was after she died.