Remember 9/11.
We are victims on a colossal scale.
Never forget, not for 100 years, not for 1000 years.
Revenge is what Americans should all desire, rather, deserve.
Our revenge is not yet done, not for a long time yet.
The troops have a job to do.
100 years more in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, whatever.
Who is the scape goat, is of secondary importance.
Saddam is executed, but one goat is not enough.
There are still many, many goats left to kill before our well-deserved lust for revenge is nearly satiated.
This is the widespread appeal of John McCain. But also, McCain appeals to a certain group of more informed politically elite.
For the politically illiterate masses, McCain offers to people who identify themselves as victims on a historical scale, their greatest hope to slam the iron fist of revenge for a long time to come, onto the people and property of the Muslim middle east.
For the politically literate elite, McCain the warrior, is the WASP who is most likely of all candidates to successfully continue the program of the Project of the New American Century. The infamous neoconservatives Rumsfeld and Cheney and Perle are among the founders and signatories of the PNAC.
The central aim of PNAC is explicitly to fortify and extend a global US empire, as they would have it, by establishing and keeping the US military in the middle east, in an unstoppable bid for dominance of the single greatest concentration of the earth's limited remaining energy resources, and thereby achieve global dominance in general. The website of the Project for the New American Century is still available for all to see.
Hillary Clinton is the velvet-lined glove compared to McCain's iron fist, appealing to those who are concerned about that sort of distinction.
The two are different in presentation and tact, but remain similar in aim, because their actions taken and voting records on the use of military force attest to it.
"1000 Years for Revenge" is an ancient Muslim saying dating back to the middle ages and the Crusades. Apparently some of those people identify themselves as victims of the Crusades, and still do today.
To get your own information about it, you can look to Peter Lance's book titled "1000 Years for Revenge."
"100 Years" is a modern McCain slogan of his 2008 presidential campaign. The Project for a New American Century concerns 100 years.
The similarity of McCain's 100-years oath, and the 1000-years oath of certain -- but not all -- Muslims, are not merely coincidental.
Apparently there are enough Americans who identify themselves as victims, to elevatate McCain to the top of a mainstream political party.
Moreover, with one exception, that being Paul, all the presidential candidates of the Republican Party are running on the victim and revenge platform. And even plenty of leading members of the Democratic Party share in the victim and revenge thing, along with their masses of followers.
To the degree that mainstream cultures in the Middle East and the West both continue to identify themselves as victims on a historical scale, is the degree to which we can expect violent, nonspecific revenge to continue to be advocated by both the Middle East and the West.
We are all really victims, if you want to be, because in some point in our history, the history of whatever culture we identify most closely with from the past, we were attacked.
Get over it already.
Stop being the perpetual victim.
Stop the lust of aimless bloody revenge. Stop providing a cover story with mass appeal which enables radical, violent elites in both the East and the West.
When competing cultures both identify themselves as victims, wars and genocide accompany them.
Stop your own participation in the cycle of victims and revenge before it increases in amplitude and duration.
"Nazi leader Hermann Goering, interviewed by Gustave Gilbert during
the Easter recess of the Nuremberg trials, 1946 April 18, quoted in
Gilbert's book 'Nuremberg Diary.'
Goering: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some
poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that
he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece.
Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in
England, nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is
understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who
determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the
people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or
a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.
Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy the people have some
say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the
United States only Congress can declare wars.
Goering: Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the
bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them
they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of
patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in
any country."
Nuremberg Diary
http://www.amazon.com/...
The author, Gilbert, was an American intelligence officer who in his capacity as prison psychologist at the Nuremberg Jail had unlimited free access to the top Nazi leaders throughout their trial. He produced an invaluable book. With few exceptions, the top Nazis reveal themselves as ordinary men promoted to higher positions than their abilities merited, and willing to do or at least tolerate pretty much anything in order to hold onto them. What they say privately about each other gives a unique perspective on the interplay of personalities and motivations that produced the Nazi regime and its horrors.
-- Jonathan Marin, July 5, 2001, posted on Amazon.com book review