Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

H2O Man

H2O Man's Journal
H2O Man's Journal
January 3, 2020

The Taste of Blood

“The term predatory aggression is used for dogs who stare at a target creature, move silently and quickly with a grab-bite to the jugular or abdomen – the vital organs. A hallmark of this is the sudden, impulsive action of the dog. For many dogs, this may be the only type of aggression they show. It is dangerous because it cannot be trained, medicated or counter conditioned out of them. You may have a dog who chased cats be commanded to stay or sit around the cat, but they will still chase the cat down at some point. I have seen this happen. This aggression is shocking to the owners because it comes out suddenly and it is directed to what we do not see as prey. But the dog’s instinct tells otherwise.”

https://drsophiayin.com/blog/entry/killer-dogs-predation-and-predatory-aggression-in-pets/



I love dogs. I've had dogs all of my life. But since Trump frequently calls his enemies “dogs,” I am opting to use canines to illustrate a point about him.

For most of my life, I've raised chickens, turkeys, ducks, and geese. Started when I was seven years old. I'm not including chickens as a reference to Trump, though, as I think “coward” is more accurate. Anyhow, at one point, I got some Japanese Silkie chickens. My grandfather said it was a mistake, because one of my dogs was a Malamute.

He said that she would kill those birds, and once she had a taste for blood, would begin killing other animals. I said that she was an intelligent dog, and I'd teach her not to. He said, “Like hell you will.” And, of course, he was correct. She began killing other animals, and even attacked a number of porcupines. Even that initial experience didn't teach her to stop attacking porcupines.

I'm not trying to say that Trump is as intelligent as my dog was. He's definitely not as strong, nor could he run in snow like she did. Still, I told this story, to set up another one.

Since Trump has taken office, I've referred to him on this forum as a sociopath. I haven't intended that as an insult, but rather, as an accurate description of the essence of his being. And just as dogs, chickens, and porcupines behave according to their nature, so does a sociopath.

My job included working with a number of clients who were sociopaths. It also included having several co-workers who were a heck of a lot smarter than me, and who helped me apply my training in dealing with sociopaths. One in particular, who I am still close friends with, taught me something important. She couldn't predict when certain of those clients would act out violently, but she was 100% accurate in predicing which ones would.

As I've noted many times on this forum, as pressures increase on Trump, there is a growing likelihood of his lashing out. Despite his constant attempts to sound like a tough guy – pathetically claiming to be a “counter-puncher,” an art that requires a full detachment from emotions – he is a weakling, a coward. So I never thought he would actually shoot someone on Fifth Ave, much less start a fist-fight.

But I did fear that he would get a taste for blood. An that doubles in danger, in the context of his attempting to out do President Obama – specifically for Obama's role in the killing of Usama bin Laden. For jealousy and cowardice amplify one another in a bad way. We remember last October, when al-Baghdadi was killed, Trump's feeble attempt to claim it was more significant than the killing of bin Laden.

Regardless of if this was justified or not in military terms, it gave Trump a taste for blood. That taste was reinforced by the chemical reactions in his brain – the excitement was, in his mind, a good thing. He believed it made him a hero in his supporters' minds. For Donald Trump, thrill-seeking became connected to killing, just like a dog.

What happened yesterday in Iraq comes as no surprise. Numerous forum members here have expressed concern that Trump would try to distract from his impeachment by starting a war with Iran. Again, this is separate from if killing Soleimani was a justified military action or not. The fact is that Trump is wholly unqualified to serve as commander in chief under ANY circumstances, and poses a greater danger to domestic and international security than any other person on our planet. Add to this the fact that Soleimani has been traveling openly in Iraq and elsewhere for years – unlike, say, bin Laden – and would have been an open target to easily kill if that was deemed necessary from a military viewpoint.

That this taste of blood happens at the exact time when even more documentation of Trump's corrupt dealings with Ukraine are spilling out, and his impeachment trial approaches, does not appear to be a coincidence. Of course, I do not believe in “coincidence” to begin with

We are in a dangerous time. It may become far worse in an instant. As Democrats, citizens of the United States and indeed, of the world, this time calls upon each of us to join together to remove Trump from office as soon as possible. That requires our putting any minor differences behind us – it doesn't matter, for example, which candidate one supports in the primaries, but it does matter that we not engage in attacking another candidate or her/his supporters. No, we need to all support whoever is on our ticket in November. And to get there, we have to be united now, in this hour of darkness.

Peace,
H2O Man

January 1, 2020

War Children


“The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas.” – George W. Bush; 10-7-2002


I think that every rational American knows that the Bush-Cheney military invasion of Iraq was horribly wrong. Although the “official” start of the war was in March of 2003, evidence documents that members of the Bush administration were making plans to invade Iraq even before events on 9/11, and became solidified after that date.

The purposeful lies were coordinated efforts at “perception management,” as the administration hired “experts” in that field to help them sell the war to the American public. This included purposeful lies, most famously about “yellow cake.” We were told by Condi Rice (on CNN) and others that “we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.” The connections between “journalists” and intelligence were exposed by the New York Times' Judith Miller.

Those of us who were on the Democratic Underground remember that everyone here knew the administration was full of shit, that the WMD “threat” was bullshit, and that the invasion and military occupation of Iraq was a disaster. We understood, to quote Edgar Allan Poe, the “sequence of cause and effect, between the disaster and the atrocity.”

The closest that anyone associated with the Bush-Cheney administration came to telling the truth was when unconvicted war criminal Henry Kissinger – the advising George W. Bush, said, “They [American forces] are there as an expression of the American national interest to prevent the Iranian combination of imperialism and fundamentalist ideology from dominating a region on which the energy supplies of the industrial democracies depend.”

A bumper-sticker at the time summed it up with the question, “How did all of our oil end up under their sand?” This stood in stark contrast to the infamous “Mission Accomplished” banner on the USS Abraham Lincoln that hung behind Bush on his May 1, 2003 “victory” speech.

Between that asinine speech and 2019, American military members and “contractors” continued to kill and be killed in Iraq. Nothing says “victory” like sixteen years of violence. Yet, perhaps because the US role in Iraq is covered far less frequently in the media, far too few people discuss what the heck we are doing there today. What, pray tell, is the game plan? Because it sure as hell hasn't brought peace and stability to Iraq or the larger Middle East.

On Sunday, I began to watch media reports on the Trump administration's bombing of five sites in Iraq and Syria. Without exception, every report stated that the bombs were dropped upon “Iranian-backed” forces. Day after day, every media report continued to apply that “Iranian-backed” label. I note that this is distinct from the description of the 9/11 attackers, who were Saudi-backed.

I do understand why our military would want to strike those targets, in the context of their being deployed in the land of this on-going military disaster. I also appreciate that Trump and his merry crew will seek to exploit anything and every thing that might distract from impeachment. And that has to be viewed in the context of thousands of Iraqi citizens demonstrating and eventually attacking the US embassy. Film shows that this included a military group – perhaps not those the administration currently favors, but one that the Iraqi security forces were comfortable with. Indeed, the Iraqi government's leadership was and is strongly opposed to the strikes on targets in their country.

In a conversation yesterday with a good friend here on DU, I said that these events had brought me back to a speech that Malcolm X gave in Rochester, NY, of February 16, 1965 (five days before his assassination). I remember it in the context of something the late Dick Gregory said in the 1980s, that America would not understand the Islamic world, because it had failed to understand Malcolm X. Below are some interesting quotes from Malcolm's speech:

“The press is used to make the victim look like the criminal and make the criminal look like the victim… . This is imagery. And just as this imagery is practiced at the local level, you can understand it better by an international example. The best recent example at the international level to bear witness to what I’m saying is what happened in the Congo. Look at what happened. We had a situation where a plane was dropping bombs on African villages. An African village has no defense against the bombs. And an African village is not sufficient threat that it has to be bombed! But planes were dropping bombs on African villages. When these bombs strike, they don’t distinguish between enemy and friend. They don’t distinguish between male and female. When these bombs are dropped on African villages in the Congo, they are dropped on Black women, Black children, Black babies. These human beings were blown to bits. I heard no outcry, no voice of compassion for these thousands of Black people who were slaughtered by planes

“Why was there no outcry? Why was there no concern? Because, again, the press very skillfully made the victims look like they were the criminals, and the criminals look like they were the victims.

“They refer to the villages as “rebel held,” you know. As if to say, because they are rebel-held villages, you can destroy the population, and it’s okay. They also refer to the merchants of death as “American-trained, anti-Castro Cuban pilots.” This made it okay. Because these pilots, these mercenaries—you know what a mercenary is, he’s not a patriot. A mercenary is not someone who goes to war out of patriotism for his country. A mercenary is a hired killer. A person who kills, who draws blood for money, anybody’s blood. You kill a human being as easily as you kill a cat or a dog or a chicken.

"So these mercenaries, dropping bombs on African villages, caring nothing as to whether or not there are innocent, defenseless women and children and babies being destroyed by their bombs. But because they’re called “mercenaries,” given a glorified name, it doesn’t excite you. Because they are r
eferred to as “American-trained” pilots, because they are American-trained, that makes them okay. “Anti-Castro Cubans,” that makes them okay. Castro’s a monster, so anybody who’s against Castro is all right with us, and anything they can do from there, that’s all right with us…. They put your mind right in a bag and take it wherever they want, as well”

I apologize for this being even longer than my usual tirades. I'm hoping that the Democratic Party will fully address this issue and those related this year as our candidates campaign for offices – including for the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives.

H2O Man

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Dec 29, 2003, 08:49 PM
Number of posts: 73,993
Latest Discussions»H2O Man's Journal