–Today’s “It’d-be-funny-if-not-so-sad” story: Iraq version

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Mitchell’s laws:
●The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening the gap between rich and poor,
which ultimately leads to civil disorder.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
●The penalty for ignorance is slavery.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive.


Allow me to share with you excerpts from today’s best “It-would-be-funny-if-it-weren’t-so-sad” story.

White House: US pullout not cause of Iraq violence

WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House is pushing back against critics who argue that the U.S. pullout from Iraq is to blame for escalating sectarian violence.

Escalating tensions in Iraq have raised U.S. concerns about al-Qaida taking firmer root inside the country, as insurgents challenge the government for control of territory.

This sad story is hilarious on several levels:

1. There was no al-Qaida in Iraq until after the US lied to Americans (so what else is new?) about the need to destroy the Iraqi government.

2. There were far more casualties caused by the invasion of Iraq than by recent sectarian violence.

3. More than 4,000 Americans were uselessly slaughtered and 32,000 uselessly wounded in the useless war with Iraq — comparable to the number of Iraqis killed since the US withdrawal in December 2011.

4. The original vote for the useless Iraqi war was:
Republicans: For: 216; Against: 6
Democrats: For: 82; Against: 126

Republicans: For: 48; Against: 1
Democrats: For: 29; Against: 21

Question: Who are the current critics of the pullout?

But the black humor isn’t finished:

March 11, 2010, 12:22 am
Five Republicans vote to pull out from Afghanistan
By Eric Zimmermann

Five House Republcians joined 60 Democrats tonight in voting to pull out U.S. forces from Afghanistan. The measure, defeated by a vote of 356-65, was introduced by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) and co-sponsored by three of the Republicans who ended up supporting it: Reps. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), Ron Paul (R-Texas), and Tim Johnson (R-Ill.)

A huge majority — 336 to 65 — voted to keep Americans in the useless Afghanistan war, where more than 20,000 were killed and wounded. If this slaughter doesn’t tickle your funny bone, what about this:

U.S. wants Afghanistan to sign security deal in ‘weeks not months’

The Afghan government had ignored U.S. demands for it to sign a framework security agreement by the end of 2013.

U.S. officials say unless a deal is reached to keep upwards of 8,000 U.S. troops inside the country after 2014, the United States might instead completely withdraw from the country.

Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai has expressed skepticism at the U.S. threat for a complete withdrawal.

So, our President is begging Karzai to allow us to leave 8,000 Americans in his country, to be killed and maimed (while giving Karzai billions in aid).

Karzai is thinking about it.

And what can you say about this:

Afghanistan to Free Prisoners Despite US Objection

The decision angered US officials, who said the 88 prisoners are Taliban fighters involved in attacks that killed at least 60 American soldiers and more than 50 civilians.

Clearly, our investment of lives and money in Afghanistan and Iraq is paying dividends — for the Taliban.

So let’s put it together: Our foreign policy has been a mortal disaster. Our domestic policy has been a mortal disaster. Our immigration policy has been a mortal disaster. Our financial policy has been a mortal disaster. The gap between the rich and the rest has been growing, disastrously. Everything Congress and the current and former Presidents have touched has been a disaster.

Please raise your hands: How many plan to vote for an incumbent?

Most of you?

Now that’s funny — and sad.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

Nine Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Send every American citizen an annual check for $5,000 or give every state $5,000 per capita (Click here) Or institute a reverse income tax.
4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone. Click here
5. Salary for attending school (Click here)
6. Eliminate corporate taxes (Click here)
7. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually
8. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here)


10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. Monetary Sovereignty: Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.
Two key equations in economics:
1. Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
2. Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports

Monetary Sovereignty Monetary Sovereignty

As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the lines rise.


6 thoughts on “–Today’s “It’d-be-funny-if-not-so-sad” story: Iraq version

  1. Nations may win or lose wars, But Capitalism always wins. Where would our economy be w/o the military-capitalism complex? The military can fail, but capitalism is too big.

    We must keep those multi billion dollar contracts rolling, and all those people working, and lest we forget, the livelihoods of the doctors, psychiatrists, flag and coffin makers.

    We have to have an enemy! So we have to keep our noses in other people’s resources even if we’re not wanted there. We aren’t defending anything. We’re Off ending.


    1. military-capitalism complex? ron paul calls it “military keynesianism.” that’s about the only thing he ever said that i agree with.

      if only they would cut back the “keynesianism” for the military and increase it for the rest of us. then we’ll all be fine…


      1. Aside from one small detail (the killing part) military spending is highly beneficial. Not only does it pay many salaries, but it supports quite a bit of valuable research.

        I have no objection, in fact, favor, military spending, if only we could find a way to do it and not get into senseless wars. Don’t know if that’s possible.


        1. Interesting challenge, Rodger. I should think this through a little more but how about gradually withdrawing troops from areas that we’re not wanted or are dead ends. Keep the bases in Turkey to protect Israel from Iran, but everyone else starts coming home gradually. Your stint would be to protect the USA, not another nation, except Israel. You are merged with the National Guard. You can go to school at your own pace. You go on assignments wherever/whenever needed in the USA. You can make a career out of it or leave if a private sector job opens in your area of expertise.

          As for the culprits who quietly push for war and war contracts, they will have to retool. Engineered mass produced housing would be a great place to start. If they need financial help to make the transition they can be given all the help they need so long as they keep everyone working and pay for retraining… swords into plowshares. Nobody takes a hit and Wall Street should be happy. Gas prices down?

          Now to find someone with the guts (and the bullet-proof vest) to tell it like it is and carry out such a policy would be a miracle and a breath of fresh air.


      2. Hi Yuu- Good point about Ron Paul. However, offsets won’t grow an economy. It seems Washington has no comprehension of this either. Time and again politicians (Obama is the greatest offender) claim something must be cut in order for other spending to occur. This is proof they absolutely don’t believe or understand (or get paid not to believe or understand) the key economic equation for GDP. At best, some money might be better spent or spent more of due to the spending multiplier effect, but overall, it’s not going to do much to increase overall demand in the economy.

        At last summer’s MMT economic conference in Italy, Warren Mosler stated that the USA would have to have a deficit approaching $$$ EIGHT Trillion dollars before any problematic inflation would occur.

        I used to think like you, but now wholeheartedly agree with Rodger’s comment.


  2. [1] Don’t believe the corporate media’s guesses and rumors. The troops and the drones will never leave Afghanistan.

    Reason: there are only two places in the world where the soil is suitable for the mass-production of opium poppies, from which heroin is derived.

    One place is in the “Golden Triangle of Southeast Asia (Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, and Vietnam). Southeast Asia shut down much of its opium production with the end of the US war on Vietnam.

    The other place is the “Golden Crescent” of rural Iran, Pakistan, and especially Afghanistan. Some 95% of the world’s heroin and cannabis supply now comes from Afghanistan. The production of poppies and marijuana is protected by 112,500 NATO troops (mostly American), who operate from 700 bases. Even the corporate media admits this, explaining that the troops must oversee the production of illegal drugs, or else the Afghans will be forced join warlords in order to survive.

    The poppies are processed into heroin, which provides $4 billion per year in supplemental income for “intelligence” agencies (e.g. CIA, MI6, France’s DGSE, Italy’s AISE, Israel’s MOSSAD, and so on). The hashish and heroin also help to keep law enforcement officials employed at all levels (federal, state, county, and municipal). The drugs also helps to keep prison guards and officials employed, and they help boost the profits for executives of the private prison industry. Furthermore the hash and heroin help to sustain the “war on drugs,” which is a great excuse to keep expanding the police state, in order to keep expanding the gap between the rich and the rest.

    So, 200,000 Afghan families grow poppies. Warlords sell seeds to them, demand tribute from them, and charge fees for the use of roads. When one Afghan crosses a competing Afghan (kills him, robs him, burns his fields, whatever) it can destabilize the overall production of heroin. Therefore the USA sends a drone to eliminate him and his entire village as an example to everyone else. If there are any survivors, they take revenge on whomever among their neighbors they think assisted the US in the drone strike. My family and village were wiped out, so now I will wipe out your family and village. This brings more US drone strikes, followed by more native retaliations, followed by more drone strikes. Round and round it goes in a never-ending cycle of blood and drug money. It’s like a gangster movie in which various criminal “families” vie for supremacy. The murder-and-revenge cycle never ends.

    Above it is the USA with its troops, aircraft, and drones. The US government doesn’t care who gets killed below, as long as the opium, heroin, and hashish keep flowing. Thus, the “war in Afghanistan” will never end.

    Of course, one can stay in a dream world where the troops are in Afghanistan in order to fight “terrorism,” but this fantasy is as absurd as the Big Lie.

    [2] The violence in Iraq is a battle between Shiites and Sunnis. Sectarian animosities between the two have always existed, but they were greatly intensified with the Iranian revolution of 1979 and the eight-year Iran-Iraq war that followed it. After the USA invaded, the hatred increased between Sunnis and Shiites. They entered a ferocious sectarian civil war that peaked in 2006-07 and ended with a Shia victory. However the bombing, assassinations, and revenge killings go on.

    Much of the entire Middle East is now caught up in this war between Sunnis and Shias. That’s certainly the case in Syria and Lebanon. The Gulf oil sheikdoms (Sunni) absolutely despise Iran (Shia). And since the former are allied with the USA and Israel, the latter (e.g. Hezbollah) are called “terrorists.”

    For a useful analysis of this situation, see


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s