In Support Of The Policy Of Deterrence
Listen to a reading of this article (reading by Tim Foley):
There’s been a lot of debate lately over the US strategy of surrounding nations like Russia and China with war machinery in order to deter them from aggressive actions. Some argue that since powerful nations tend to respond aggressively to the amassing of military threats on their borders, this policy actually provokes the very aggressions its proponents claim it prevents.
And to these people I say: hogwash. Only peaceful and harmonious responses can possibly be expected from policies of military encirclement.
That’s why I propose that the People’s Liberation Army should begin militarily encircling the continental United States with Chinese war machinery as quickly as possible, in order to deter future US aggression around the world.
The US has after all been the single most aggressive government on the world stage for generations now. It has repeatedly invaded and staged regime change operations against its neighbors in Latin America, to say nothing of its military aggressions and proxy warfare in nations like Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and Yemen. No other government has spent the 21st century killing people by the millions in wars of aggression. No other government has been surrounding the planet with hundreds of military bases, deliberately targeting civilian populations with deadly force around the world via starvation sanctions, and working continuously to topple any government on earth which disobeys its dictates. Only the US has.
Therefore as a Super Serious Foreign Policy Pundit I recommend that China begin working with the leftist governments in Latin America which have a contentious relationship with Washington and establishing some military alliances of mutual defense, ideally including Russia and Iran in those alliances as well. Hopefully Mexico will allow China to construct missile systems and military bases along the US border, and the Chinese navy can continually patrol US coastlines to ensure that its aggressions remain fully contained.
Some of the people with whom I’ve shared this proposal objected that it would instantly provoke a war and result in a great increase in the military violence I aim to deter, including increasing the likelihood of nuclear war. So naturally I screamed at those people and called them appeasers and White House propagandists.
“You’re basically another Neville Chamberlain!” I shrieked. “If it had been up to you we’d have appeased Hitler and made deals with Nazi Germany! You American troll! You Biden puppet!”
These people just don’t understand how deterrence works. If history has shown us anything, it’s that amassing military threats on the borders of powerful nations only ever leads to peace and love, and has never caused anything bad to happen at any time ever.
I am a very reasonable person. Everyone should listen to me. Give me a big house and a senior fellowship at an influential think tank.
______________
My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece here are some options where you can toss some money into my tip jar if you want to. Go here to buy paperback editions of my writings from month to month. All my work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.
Bitcoin donations: 1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2
I was recently enlightened by Fadi Lama’s new book about the truth of the US invasion of Panama…
In 1981, Japan had discussed a plan with President Omar Torrijos of Panama to replace the Panama Canal with a new, more efficient canal. On July 31, 1981, President Torrijos was killed in a plane crash. President Torrijos’ successor, Manuel Noriega, continued the exploration of prospects for building a new canal to be financed and constructed by the Japanese. A tripartite discussion between the U.S., Japan and Panama took place in summer of 1985. The Japanese submitted plans for an alternate, more efficient canal, a canal capable of handling ships of up to 300,000 tons capacity, instead of the current capacity of 65,000 tons. According to an American official, “the agreement, reached this summer [1985], does not commit the three countries to a particular plan or even to any action at all. The feasibility study is expected to take four years, starting in 1986, with the $20 million in estimated expenses to be shared equally.” Quoting Noriega: “I want to make it very clear: the destabilization campaign launched by the United States in 1986, ending with the 1989 Panama invasion, was a result of the U.S. rejection of any scenario in which future control of the Panama Canal might be in the hands of an independent, sovereign Panama – supported by Japan …” On December 20, 1989, the U.S. took action; it occupied Panama, arrested Noriega and took him to the U.S. where he was jailed.
Actually the US practices brinkmanship going back to the time of John Foster Dulles who coined the term and made it the keystone of US foreign policy- which is too intimidate and coerce other nations and keep everybody on the cusp war and all the tensions that go with it. Going back to Maxwell Smart Washington is the unsurpassed agent of chaos.