The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have yielded bitter, bitter fruit. American lives have been lost and damaged. Civilians caught up in seemingly endless trauma. Treasuries emptied. The US military fundamentally transformed by privatization with attendant risks and conflicts that go straight to the heart of democratic values. Of all the bent truths, lies, and rationales to support military engagements in the past decade, the justification that had most traction with the American public followed the line: we are fighting there so we don't have to fight, here.
The question to ask, now, and an appropriate one for the sober thinking on Memorial Day, when we commemorate the sacrifices made to protect our freedom, is this: if we have lost -- and lost means ongoing military engagements without conclusions -- does that mean that the fight will be brought, here, to America?
The answer isn't clear. But the process of mixing covert with domestic intelligence has brought deep changes. Surveillance and its prerogatives are driving down the ladder into law enforcement and government in ways that would have mystified and challenged the Founding Fathers.
The fact is that the United States is only partially in control of our national security. That is the effect of globalization. The collateral damage, including the financial crisis that is not a depression and not a serial recession, envelops wide swaths of the American landscape. And it turns out that the places most impacted are also principal feeders of our volunteer armed forces; a matter of necessity.
On the one hand, there has been no repeat of the organized terror that brought down the World Trade Towers. On the other hand, the American public does not know all the disasters that have been avoided by covert operations here and abroad. The biggest risk -- a weaponized climate that could severely disrupt crop cycles -- is moving on its own timetable.
We can't predict the future with specificity, but the political class can do a much better job of assessing and mitigating risk. To its credit, the military and its top strategists are far ahead of civilian life in these matters.
Still, we have so much to be thankful for; including the liberties within reach of all thanks to the sacrifice and hardships endured by the military on our behalf. But make no mistake: in ways that might not have been predicted, the fight we sought to avoid is already here.
The question to ask, now, and an appropriate one for the sober thinking on Memorial Day, when we commemorate the sacrifices made to protect our freedom, is this: if we have lost -- and lost means ongoing military engagements without conclusions -- does that mean that the fight will be brought, here, to America?
The answer isn't clear. But the process of mixing covert with domestic intelligence has brought deep changes. Surveillance and its prerogatives are driving down the ladder into law enforcement and government in ways that would have mystified and challenged the Founding Fathers.
The fact is that the United States is only partially in control of our national security. That is the effect of globalization. The collateral damage, including the financial crisis that is not a depression and not a serial recession, envelops wide swaths of the American landscape. And it turns out that the places most impacted are also principal feeders of our volunteer armed forces; a matter of necessity.
On the one hand, there has been no repeat of the organized terror that brought down the World Trade Towers. On the other hand, the American public does not know all the disasters that have been avoided by covert operations here and abroad. The biggest risk -- a weaponized climate that could severely disrupt crop cycles -- is moving on its own timetable.
We can't predict the future with specificity, but the political class can do a much better job of assessing and mitigating risk. To its credit, the military and its top strategists are far ahead of civilian life in these matters.
Still, we have so much to be thankful for; including the liberties within reach of all thanks to the sacrifice and hardships endured by the military on our behalf. But make no mistake: in ways that might not have been predicted, the fight we sought to avoid is already here.
2 comments:
Gobbledygook!
Craig Pittman's story about the DEP permit should also be required reading as it calls into question any environmental permit issued by FDEP since Scott took office and any future permit issued. In Miami, I fear for Biscayne Bay, the Everglades, and all natural areas. Don't Expect Protection from Scott's DEP.
Post a Comment