America, A Hostage To The Greedy Corporate Giants?

Capitalism generally refers to an economic and social system in which the means of production are all or mostly privately owned and operated for profit, and in which investments, distribution, income, production and pricing of goods and services are determined through the operation of a market economy. It is usually considered to involve the right of individuals and groups of individuals acting as “legal persons” or corporations to trade capital goods, labor, land and money.

[Wikipedia]

Does that mean making profits at the expense of common people, at the expense of social well welfare?

These “legal persons” or corporations have no right to influence matters of social welfare & governance. But the big corporate in the US are doing exactly that. Why these privately owned companies should be allowed to ‘buy stakes’ in the government? Why should their money be allowed to influence the policies of the government? Is the government to be blamed since these businessmen only mean ‘business’? These businessmen have infiltrated the government to such a level that the national interest seems to be the last thing in their minds.

Why is it so that that only a few companies are allowed to bid for the reconstruction work in Iraq & Afghanistan? These companies have either contributed to the Democrats or the Republicans in the recent past – with some contributions amounting up to a million dollars. [Rebuilding Iraq -- The Contractors]

Isn’t it an ‘auction’ of the government policies? Doesn’t that mean that the government would listen to the one with the greatest wealth? Why should they the social welfare of the people be a hostage to the greedy intentions of these corporations?

Why was the decision to block California’s attempt to impose tough emission limits on car manufacturers taken even when the experts from the Environment Protection Agency were in favor of it? Why did EPA’s chief Stephen Johnson overrule his experts’ advice even though there was nothing wrong with proposal submitted by California?

EPA staff members told the Los Angeles Times that the agency’s head, the Bush appointee Stephen Johnson, ignored their conclusions and shut himself off from consultation in the month before the announcement. He then informed them of his decision and instructed them to provide the legal rationale for it, they said.

“California met every criteria … on the merits,” an anonymous member of the EPA staff told the Times. “The same criteria we have used for the last 40 years … We told him that. All the briefings we have given him laid out the facts.”

The reason – car representatives met Vice President Dick Cheney to put forward their case as to why California shouldn’t be allowed to go ahead with it plan to tough emission limits. Cheney accused of blocking Californian bid to cut car fumes

The tragic death of seventeen year-old Nataline Sarkisyan is another example of common man being crushed under the greedy ambitions of these corporations. These industries only like to see their profits swelling, social welfare isn’t a priority to them. Then why are these companies being allowed to carry on with their businesses? Why these companies aren’t forced to be responsible to the common man, to the voter in addition to their stakeholders?

Capitalism was meant to create a free market, a system in which the power isn’t concentrated in the hands of a few. But today the real power to make, alter & manipulate government policies lies in the hand of a few wealthy people who put their materialistic aspirations ahead of the social wellbeing of the common man. The question here isn’t about the usefulness or success of Capitalism but about the effects it has on democracies when the wrong people are given the power to use it as a tool for their personal gains.

Blair’s gone, Abe’s gone, Howard’s falling – Why not Bush ?

Blair went, John Howards ratings dropped & now Shinzo Abe has resigned. The reasons are different & diverse in each case but the one common thing due to which these men had to go through tough times in their political careers was supporting the Iraq war.

Initially the parliaments of Britain, Australia & Japan gave approval to their leaders to support the war on Iraq but as the time passed & the lies were uncovered about the basis of the war the public who elected these leaders started questioning their decisions. The decision to go to war & its subsequent handling played an important role in the exit of Tony Blair. John Howards’ political career has been plagued by the talks of his resignation. Like in Blair’s case, his own cabinet members want him to go. The support to America cost Abe his job. Apart from numerous scandals it was Abe’s adamant resolve to provide resources (to fight war on terror) to USA that contributed to the development of circumstances which led to his resignation.

Blair’s own party members starting opposing him accusing him of blindly following Bush & pushing Britain into an unnecessary war. He lost popularity among the general public, his party lost seats in elections. Although Abe’s exit can be attributed to many reasons but one of them was that he continued to support America. After the exit of Junichiro Koizumi the Japanese people had expected their new Prime Minister to get the country out of the unpopular war but since they didn’t see the that happening Abe’s popularity dropped to under 30%. He was already under pressure due to the series of scandals involving members of his cabinet & his obstinate attitude towards his decision to provide support to the American Armed forces worked like a catalyst in his fall.

Most have gone or forced to leave expect the man who is actually responsible for all this. He lied about the intelligence about the WMDs, his administration officials (particularly Secretary of Defense) miscalculated the dangers the military might face & now he is continuing that war against the general consent. And upon that he’s now (allegedly) planning to attack Iran.

Just like Abe, Bush’s party too faced defeat in the mid-term polls & lost the control of the Congress. Just like Blair, Bush’s own party members are opposing his policies & many want him to draw a time table fro withdrawal of the troops from Iraq. Bush also had his share of scandals & controversial bills. The wire tapping bill, Alberto Gonzales case & the Scooter Libby case are just a few to name. Bush’s approval ratings too are at a record low & aren’t much different from those of Shinzo Abe.

I don’t see Democrats making any significant difference, but I do see everybody people saying that Bush’s policies are wrong & that he should be impeached along with his deputy Dick Cheney. The thing that I’m unable to understand is that how can the general public re-elect the man who made wrong policies & decisions & how could the Congress keep supporting his policies even when it seems clear that he got it completely wrong – and not just on one ground.

Bush asked the Congress for its approval for going to war & the Congress obliged, the people gave him another chance but now the people aren’t happy with him so it seems absolutely fair that he resigns without facing more criticism.

Iraq War: Has America Compromised Its Security For Oil & Israel?

Most people would agree that there were much better ways to tackle the ‘Iraq Problem’ and I believe the same. But I don’t believe that the Bush administration has learned anything from their experience in Iraq. Nonetheless it would be in US’ own interest if they don’t repeat their mistakes as far as the Iran issue goes.

It’s strange how easily (in comparison to US’s ‘endeavor’ to solve the Iraq crisis) the European Union tackled Libya & worked out a compromise whereby both the parties got somewhat equal benefits. Libya had acquired the nuclear technology which could have given them a nuclear warhead in a matter of few years. The EU offered Libya incentives which were vital for sanctions stricken country & they got a positive result in matter of few months.

One would argue that Muammar Gaddafi was much easier to deal with as compared to Saddam Hussein but USA & its allies could certainly have done better with some more diplomacy. But may be Bush noticed that there wasn’t oil to be had in Libya so he wasn’t much interested in any ‘adventures’ there.

Same was the case with North Korea. The Communist nation had apparently acquired the missile technology by which it could have hit America’s west coast but still North Korea was ‘overlooked’ and Iraq was attacked although it hadn’t had tested any missiles for quite a few years (no doubt Saddam had missiles that could have reached Israel). It is another thing that Bush couldn’t have attacked North Korea even if he had wanted to since China & Russia would have objected to any military action in their ‘backyard’.

But Iraq was a ‘natural’ target – having world’s third largest oil reserves & a major Arab power against Israel. The reasons were strong & the prize of a then looking sure short victory were more than excellent. Dossiers with fake intelligence were made – one even saying that Saddam could get his missiles ready in 45 minutes to attack Israel. Countries with dubious past records relating to terrorism (Pakistan & Saudi Arabia) were made allies and Iraq was prioritized over the war against Taliban & Al Qaida in Afghanistan.

Things didn’t go as planned in Iraq. Al Qaida, who wouldn’t have dared to step in Iraq has Saddam been the in charge, are now running the ‘show’, filling minds & hearts of people with hatred & abhorrence for their own fellow citizens. US military is suffering more than it has since the Vietnam War. But still Congress is happily financing the war thinking that the oil would come soon & a victory would silent the enemies of Israel.

America has put itself in a very difficult state wherein neither can it leave Iraq nor is it finding any headway in suppressing the growing violence. A troop withdrawal now would be an even harder blow for the already weakened image of America and it would lose any hope of getting a part of Iraq’s vast oil reserves add to it the danger of the militants getting control over the oil fields driving oil prices to unbelievable levels. Not to mention the view shared by many analysts that the overall terror threat has greatly increased.

Maybe in the coming years Bush would look back & realize his mistake of the way in which he tackled Iraq but I think that would be expecting a bit too much from him.

Congress & Voters Slept While Bush Destroyed America

No offence but it has been four years since the start of one of the most unpopular wars in the history & still nothing has changed. Initially there were thousands opposing the war but as the time went by the number grew to millions. Now almost the whole nation is opposed to the war but still nothing is being done to undo one of the biggest & bloodiest mistakes in US history.

George W. Bush fooled every one, be it his fellow citizens who had trusted their commander-in-chief or the allies who saw him as a friend. Bush & his administration told lies upon lies to make up a false case against Iraq by accusing it of sponsoring terrorism against the United States. Bush talked of Iraq’s Liberation but today Iraq is being plagued by the presence of militants that countries like Syria & Saudi Arabia are sending in to attack the US army.

Had Saddam been in power today we would have never allowed any insurgents coming from Saudi Arabia or Syria to step into his country with Iranian weapons in hand & spreading terrorism. There are more militants in Iraq now than they were before & now Iraq is a bigger threat to US interests than ever before. Earlier there was a man who was feared by all but now that Saddam has gone and the efforts of the US government to bring peace & order to the region have failed, the insurgents have cast the web of terror over Iraq which has engulfed the Americans as well.

But Bush isn’t the only one to be blame. This all could have been stopped four years back when Bush was preparing the false case against Iraq branding it as the home of international terrorism. Osama Bin Laden is currently sitting thousands of miles away on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border but still there are more American troops in Iraq than in Afghanistan.

Four years back there was a sudden change in American policy, bringing Laden to justice became secondary to the invasion of Iraq – nobody stopped him. The Congress happily funded the war (& is still doing it) dreaming about the billions of gallons of oil & seeing USA emerging as a major power in the Middle East which would have been beneficial to Israel as well.

America trusted this man not once but twice but I still fail to see the basis of this trust. The man never got in the first place – nobody cared to speak (the result of which the world is witnessing). But the surprise of the century was the re-election. It is completely beyond the understanding of a human mind why would the American people vote for Bush. It is astonishing that Bush actually won the second election even though millions opposed his policies. I would certainly want to know the reasons on basis of which people voted for Bush.

In every debate, the candidates talk about getting the troops out & ending the war but what have they done in the last four years. Nobody did anything to stop Bush from going to war or taking irrational decisions. How can a president justify important decisions like going to war by saying that God came to his dream telling him he was doing the right thing. If this is the way Bush takes decisions we should pray that he never sleeps because it would be disastrous for the whole world if Bush gets a dream of ‘his’ god telling him to nuke Russia.

It’s Payback Time For Bush

Tony Blair has resigned and now he’s off to the Middle East, hopefully to solve the Israel-Palestine issue. Blair was successful in bringing peace to Northern Ireland and he seems to be the right person to find a way out to improve the ever degrading situation.

Blair ended up getting this job due to his allegiance to President Bush. The ‘Bush Affect’ earned him foes in his own party; popularity rating dropped, questions were asked not just about his decision to take Britain to war but also domestic issues like health care.

Blair who was once called the ‘new face’ of Britain now carried a tarnished one himself. Blair represented the new & young of Britain when he came to office ten years ago. But it’s astonishing how one decision can blemish one’s legacy. Bush asked for support and Blair obliged not knowing where this ‘friendship’ would take him.

Now it’s Blair time. Blair has always wanted and worked for solving the Middle East Crisis and bringing peace to the region and its people. He was one of the first leaders to propose the two-state solution. Blair has shown that he has the will & the patience to work out peace when the world has lost hope & most leaders try to avoid the hard work.

Tony Blair will do any thing & everything to bring peace to the Middle East so that he could make a name for himself in history. He would certainly see this as an opportunity to cleanse his tarnished image. For this he would demand complete support from President Bush and it would be difficult for Bush to say no to him since Blair gave him full support in the War against Terrorism.

Blair might even force the President to rethink his policies and go slow as far as sanctions on the Palestinian people are concerned. Blair has made it clear that for him the common people come first and that he wants the people of both sides to feels safe & secure.

Bush made Blair change his policies and it would be interesting to see if Blair succeeds in doing the same to Bush. The positive thing for Bush, however, is that he has no legacy to be proud of or to work upon so no risk of it being tarnished.

Why This Sympathy For Saddam?

Poor innocent Saddam Hussein paid with his life for standing up against the barbaric activities of the western powers. The hero of the Middle East is no more, eliminated by the cruel US Administration. Are these people out of their minds? Why, just why is the execution of the former Iraqi dictator being protested? Was he a saint or something?

People are burning US flags around the world for absolutely no justifiable reason. What is the reason of these protests and the condemnation? None cross my mind at least. What good deeds did Saddam do during his tenure? What humanitarian work did he do? The answer to all these questions is easy. Saddam did nothing which could prompt the masses to protest or condemn his execution.

So just why would you feel sorry for a man who killed his own people, massacred hundreds. The man used chemical weapons on his own countrymen, got hundreds executed without even giving them a free trial. His atrocities destroyed numerous families and made thousands of children orphan. His barbaric activities forced millions of Iraqis to leave their motherland and were forced to live like refugees in other countries. Majority of those who were executed in the Dujail massacre ever even saw the court rooms. There are numerous cases on which Saddam could never be tried.

Saddam Hussein was responsible for the in invasion of Kuwait. He also tried his hands in making nuclear weapons in which, fortunately, he failed. The list of his atrocities is endless; still these people have come out on the streets in protests as if they are being sponsored by some multinational companies which will give them money for each slogan they chant against the US President and for Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein did get a free and fair trial and was handed over the verdict by an Iraqi judge.

The Indian government too came into action quickly. The majority ruling party, Congress, termed the execution as ‘unfortunate’. Keeping in mind the fast approaching elections in many states, the government is trying out everything to keep certain sections of the society on their side. Their statement seems completely illogical. India itself has numerous convicts waiting to be executed. Indian courts still hand over the Capital Punishment in some exceptional cases.

The people who are protesting Saddam Hussein’s execution should go back home and get the facts right.