Writing today in "the paper of record", Nobel-prize winning economist Paul Krugman reminds us:
"For those who know their 1930s history, this is all too familiar. If either of the current debt negotiations fails, we could be about to replay 1931, the global banking collapse that made the Great Depression great. But, if the negotiations succeed, we will be set to replay the great mistake of 1937: the premature turn to fiscal contraction that derailed economic recovery and ensured that the Depression would last until World War II finally provided the boost the economy needed."
I just had a great idea: we need a large war to kick-start the economy!!!!!
Hey, it worked for the great depression, so it should do wonders for this piddling little "flat economic growth" we got going on today. And today, we can learn from the lesson of history and go ahead a start the war right now instead of waiting through another ten years of grinding poverty!!
Imagine the benefits: full employment, Americans united with patriotic fervor and unity of purpose, HUGE corporate profits, concerns about deficit spending tossed aside at the prospect of "American exceptionalism" re-affirmed through empire-building, AND the chance to take out some obnoxious petty tyrant who badly needs to get his ass kicked. Can I quote Rumsfeld here? “It's a slam-dunk”!
Let's see: who can we pick on to restore America's economic might? There's Hugo Chavez. He is close by and widely reviled. I'm sure if we invaded Venezuela we would be greeted as liberators. Plus, they have oil!! There's Kim Jong Il: he is widely hated and nobody would lift a finger to help him. They are all Asian over there, so that would help with the whole “killing them is not so bad because they view life differently from us” thing. And he's got nukes which would make it an easier sell to the American people. The downside of a war with N. Korea is that after you've kicked them around enough, all you've won is a country whose main export is desperate poverty: not much of a prize. And of course, there's always Iran. They're Muslims, they don't believe in God, and that's enough reason right there for a war for those Herman Cains-types around the US. They are brown-skinned, so that fits with the whole “if you're white, alright, but if you're brown, you're goin' down!” crowd. And, we've got big military bases right next door and an army that's sitting on its hands looking for something to do. Plus, most of America is itching to settle a score with those middle eastern ingrates.for making our lives miserable during the last ten years. Iran looks like a win-win proposition.
I think it's settled: wars in Venezuela or North Korea probably wouldn't last long enough to give us the economic umfph we need. So it's Iran then.
with apologies to Tom Lerher
So long Mom. I'm off to drop the bomb.
So don't wait up for me.
Though you may swelter, down there in your shelter,
you can see me, on your TV.
While we're attacking frontally, watch O'Rielly and Hannity, discussing contra-punctually,
the cities we have lost.
No need for you to miss a moment
of the agonizing holocaust.
Now I know a lot of you out there are saying “Well, Obama started a little war in Libya, and that's done jack-all for the economy”. True. I think the problem here is kind of like the “stimulus bill”: he didn't go far enough. What we need is a full-on, boots-on-the-ground, blood-and-guts kind of combat. Not this “fly-over war” crap. We need a real war: one that will mobilize the entire country. This conservative "we can have a war with only 100,00 troops" is bullshit! How is a corporation to make a decent war profit and put us all back to work when we are only outfitting 100,000 troops?
Plus, you will notice that all of the two-and-a-half wars we got going on now are against brown people. And I'm not sure Obama's heart is in it. Perhaps what is needed is a war against an aryan people to bring out Obama's famous hatred for the white man. Then we might finally see the 'roid-ragng angry black man exploding Hulk-like from beneath that Mr. “no drama” Obama” exterior. THEN we might see a real war!!!
And I know all you conservatives out there are saying “you liberals keep looking to the 1930s for your solutions to today's problems” And I agree, things have changed since the 30's. First off, we got the whole “5 deferments” Cheney, and the 4F Limbaughs to deal with (no, it was not the addiction; Limbaugh was classified 4F for a pilonidal cyst, which is medical speak for “a big pimple on your ass” - what a crybaby!!). The fact is, the corporatocracy doesn't want to fight in any wars, they only want to profit from them. But I'm sure we can use the genius of modern marketing techniques can even get members of the corporatocracy to sign up: “A Corporation of One!”, or “Navy – a force for corporations”, or “There's strong, and then there's corporate strong!!” This just takes a little creativity, people!
On a cautionary note, let me say that this works out best if we win. Losing wars doesn't give us the same great economic lift that winning wars does. Yes, I know: Germany and Japan did all right in the end, but it took a lot longer for them to gain economic advantage than it took us. And if further proof is necessary, just look what losing a war in Afghanistan has done to the two former world super-powers. So, if we go down this road, let's make sure we have chosen an opponent who can Marshall-plan us back to economic health in the event we lose.