The civilian leadership starts the wars. The military just fights them in accordance with the directions and commands of civilian leadership. This war was started by the Soviet civilian leadership.
And I maintain that the underlying cause of this war was 40 years of NATO constantly poking the USSR in the chest and chanting "Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough!" like a drunk football hoolie!
Indeed, as the USSR we're talking about here was still run by the WWII generation (and "run by" does not just mean the Supreme Soviet), people so brutalised that it makes the North Africa & Italy experiences of my Granddad look like a picnic, it's like NATO was behaving as a stalker to a rape victim.
That said, however, I am happy to reassure you that my applying 'Class-Analysis' (as I think Revolutionincyberspace was doing too) to the positions of both the Police & Military
as institutions in Western society is in no way meant to be an attack on soldiers and coppers as people doing a job (and predominantly working-class people at that!)
And when, for example, my then-toddler daughters went missing, the Police were the first people whose assistance I sought, and jolly grateful I was for it too!
I do think part of the difficulty we are
all having here, is that we are trying to discuss events in a fiction and events that really happened as if they are one-and-the-same-thing, which of course they are not.
Otis R. Needleman said:
Your comment about our judicial system is terribly naive. "Judicial slavery"? Most people who are in prison are there for serious offenses, such as murder, rape, kidnapping, armed robbery, etc. Many of these convicts are career criminals, with multiple stints in prison behind them, not to mention time in jail, on probation, or suspended sentences. If you don't do the crime, you won't do the time. And I'd rather live in a country where violent criminals are locked up, than a country where, if you are attacked and try to defend yourself, you may go to prison, where your attacker merely receives a caution. Or if someone breaks into your house and you try to defend yourself, you may go to prison, and the home invader gets off with a slap on the wrist. Yes, we're talking the United Kingdom here, folks. No, thanks. I prefer our system and our Bill of Rights, especially our Second Amendment.
I'm not going to jump down your throat for accusing me of naivity here, because you've misread what I wrote (which is easily done, and I've done it myself many times.)
I didn't say "Judicial slavery", I said "Racial slavery".
Of course, the US Judiciary are major actors in this, so you may choose to come back at me again there.
If you do, maybe you will teach me something about reality in the US, it won't be the first time - I've written before how a post from Beauhooligan made me realise that imposing UK-style control of guns on the US is simply unfeasible, although the fact that Beau' also decried the idea that introducing US-style gun availability on the UK was in any way desirable made me much more receptive to what he was saying.
Unless you do came back here, though, I am still of the view that a hideous number of people are in prison for life in the US, overwhelmingly Black, and that they are there for things like having some drugs on them or a bit of shoplifting, because of the '3 strikes' rule.
US industry the gets a lifetime of their labour for free, which whilst I doubt is what Clinton had in mind (I think he was just being a populist arsehole) it is remains the real result.
Now with the above waffle in mind, I hope you'll not be upset by me explaining you're mistaken about the myth us Brits are unable to legally defend ourselves.
This is a creation of the UK print media, who are awful; every bit as populist and politically-biased as, eg, Fox News are renowned for being in the US.
You absolutely can defend yourself against intruders here, but what you cannot do is be a professional criminal yourself baiting a trap for people you owe money to and lay in wait before shooting a minor in the back whilst he's running away crying "No, no, please don't shoot!" (the Tony Martin case, where UK press deemed the professional criminal a hero because the kid he shot was a 'gypsy')
Nor can you catch a genuine burglar (however shitty, and this guy was! It's the Hussain case) after chasing him down the street, then send your brother back home to collect cricket bats before punishment-beating him into a coma and disabling him for life).
I know these would be equally illegal acts in the US!
If I were ever to injure somebody whilst defending myself, I wouldn't just expect to be arrested, I would
want to be, because only then would I be awarded my legal rights (not to speak, have a lawyer, etc) whilst the police officers investigate - are they supposed to just take my word why the injury happened? What if I'm lying?
I think I have far more respect and understanding for police than the reactionary Right!