FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Fogginess of War Test

On any given Sunday morning, TV viewers nursing hangovers or coffee can often bear witness to a steady flow of retired military generals, aging politicos and former CIA, NSA and FBI hacks – all of whom are too old to do battle – discussing the inevitability of wars being fought or might be fought, “over there.”

With steadfast confidence they will assure us that innocent lives will be lost, cities will be leveled and survivors will be forced to “migrate” to distant failed states which are only marginally better equipped to feed or house them.

And then the Alphabet Soups will proclaim, with great mock-sadness, that these are the natural consequences of  “the fog of war.”

The term was originally intended “to capture the uncertainty regarding one’s own capability, adversary capability, and adversary intent during an engagement, operation, or campaign.”

But more recently it has become a convenient shorthand allowing the TV-Pundits to avoid any mention or responsibility for “friendly fire,”  “collateral damage” or countless other horrible infractions of the-once-sacred Geneva Conventions.

If we manage to step back from this mesmerizing lunacy for a moment we would see that, in real life, there is little room for ambiguity: There is fog and there is war, both of which are concepts we can easily understand.

But when these simple concepts (fog and war) are willfully manipulated to approximate something “unreal” (the fog of war) it is only natural that we should feel confused and agitated by the distortion.

And so it is when we observe a wanton tampering of the concept of “truth.” When “the truth” is manipulated, we know almost at once that something is amiss, even if we cannot immediately put our finger on the “real truth.”

Think ‘Fuckishima.’ Or Hanging Chads. Or the induction of Jerry Lewis into the French Legion of Honor. You get the idea.

But it gets worse. The manipulators of The Truth see themselves as being Master Craftsmen, and so it is only a matter of time before they create an even more distorted and confusing “new-new truth.”

This new-new-truth is too much for our wee brains. We cannot help but question not only our intelligence, but our capacity to understand simple concepts. Like fog. Or war. Or the truth.

It is not our fault. This technique is as old as “democracy” itself. Indeed we could call this process the Fog of Democracy.

This Fog of Democracy is predicated on our total and unconditional  acceptance of otherwise nonsensical conceits that we assume form the very foundation of our democratic way of life.

Think “American exceptionalism” or the “Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists” or “enhanced interrogation” or the very extraordinary “Extraordinary Rendition.”

Now no one in their right mind would believe there is legal or moral rationale to remove anyone – foreign or otherwise – from their beds or an airport queue, blindfolded or drugged, and  transporting them to be tortured -sorry, interrogated with enhancement- in Syria, Guantanamo Bay or any of the dozens of US black-op sites scattered throughout the world.

But we are repeatedly asked to accept such notions. We are told that torture is justified, for example, and so we take at face-value the idea that torture is a natural consequence of our ‘democratic way of life.’

So, in order to preserve some semblance of personal sanity, I have devised an easy test that can be used to gauge the level of my very own Fogginess of War. I call it… The Fogginess of War Test.

And now you can use it, too! It is easy.

Phase One: The Fogginess of War Test

The next time The Trumpster spews off some stupid Tweet about his internal-intestinal-agitation or the really, really unfair price of maple syrup from Quebec, step back and watch how the media reacts.

We will see days (and days) of wall-to-wall coverage, spilling over in truly absurd (and admittedly fake) levels of righteous indignation! The Insanity of it all! How dare he treat democracy with such disdain! Impeach! Impeach!

We will get caught up in it, too. “My word,” we’ll cry out over our spilt beer. “How can anyone be so stupid. Impeach! Impeach!”

And of course we are right to feel this way. What kind of people -let alone hoards of media – would want to obsess about something so inconsequential for SO long when we all know damn well there are real and true life-and-death issues we could and should be talking about. Like, oh I don’t know, climate breakdown or some such.

Phase Two: The Fogginess of War Test

Now, watch what happens when The Trumpster says something like calmly and callously threatening to bomb a country with nuclear weapons. All that damnation and hellfire. The End of Days. The Piss in the Wind to end all Pissses in the Wind.

Well, nothing you expect would happen does happen.

The TV ‘satirists’ will go off on completely nonsensical monologues about the other leader’s girth or his insane ‘paranoia’ that ‘people are trying to kill him’ or how they so long for the days when all they had to worry about was the price of maple syrup from Quebec!

The media for their part will discuss his ‘reasons’ for ‘taking this stand’ in uncharacteristically quiet and dignified tones.

They’ll invoke the need for national security and Manifest Destiny and the price of oil and the fact that The Trumpster has finally shown himself to be really and truly Presidential.

Deadly, to be sure, And perhaps even insane. But Presidential. And that, they will intone majestically, is what the country needs at This Juncture.

And the concept of nuclear annihilation? Death and destruction? The possible lack of future generations? The utter stupidity of it all?

Not so much. There is no room for such ‘negative’ thoughts when a nation’s very manliness is on the line.

And besides, any evil things that might happen will happen ‘over there.’ Not here. Never here.

“And I have to say,” some Graham-wannabe might say. “I have had my differences with the President of the Free World but I must say, well I totally agree with him. We’ve been silent for too long. We cannot allow another country to walk all over us. We must act. And react. If that means going nuclear, so be it.”

But look. Here comes a Tweet from The Trumpster stating in no uncertain terms that Israel will really, really, definitely certainly be forced to pay for The Wall. He means Mexico, of course. But so be it. He has bought himself days and Days of coverage on the obvious differences between The Wall in Israel and the one in Mexico. Days and days.

And that, Dear Friends, is how The Fog of Democracy works.

James Porteous is editor/curator of The Hawkins Bay Dispatch, a daily collection of news and views that fly below the radar.

More articles by:
September 20, 2018
Michael Hudson
Wasting the Lehman Crisis: What Was Not Saved Was the Economy
John Pilger
Hold the Front Page, the Reporters are Missing
Kenn Orphan
The Power of the Anthropocene
Paul Cox – Stan Cox
Puerto Rico’s Unnatural Disaster Rolls on Into Year Two
Rajan Menon
Yemen’s Descent Into Hell: a Saudi-American War of Terror
Russell Mokhiber
Nick Brana Says Dems Will Again Deny Sanders Presidential Nomination
Nicholas Levis
Three Lessons of Occupy Wall Street, With a Fair Dose of Memory
Steve Martinot
The Constitutionality of Homeless Encampments
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
The Aftershocks of the Economic Collapse Are Still Being Felt
Jesse Jackson
By Enforcing Climate Change Denial, Trump Puts Us All in Peril
George Wuerthner
Coyote Killing is Counter Productive
Mel Gurtov
On Dealing with China
Dean Baker
How to Reduce Corruption in Medicine: Remove the Money
September 19, 2018
Bruce E. Levine
When Bernie Sold Out His Hero, Anti-Authoritarians Paid
Lawrence Davidson
Political Fragmentation on the Homefront
George Ochenski
How’s That “Chinese Hoax” Treating You, Mr. President?
Cesar Chelala
The Afghan Morass
Chris Wright
Three Cheers for the Decline of the Middle Class
Howard Lisnoff
The Beat Goes On Against Protest in Saudi Arabia
Nomi Prins 
The Donald in Wonderland: Down the Financial Rabbit Hole With Trump
Jack Rasmus
On the 10th Anniversary of Lehman Brothers 2008: Can ‘IT’ Happen Again?
Richard Schuberth
Make Them Suffer Too
Geoff Beckman
Kavanaugh in Extremis
Jonathan Engel
Rather Than Mining in Irreplaceable Wilderness, Why Can’t We Mine Landfills?
Binoy Kampmark
Needled Strawberries: Food Terrorism Down Under
Michael McCaffrey
A Curious Case of Mysterious Attacks, Microwave Weapons and Media Manipulation
Elliot Sperber
Eating the Constitution
September 18, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Britain: the Anti-Semitism Debate
Tamara Pearson
Why Mexico’s Next President is No Friend of Migrants
Richard Moser
Both the Commune and Revolution
Nick Pemberton
Serena 15, Tennis Love
Binoy Kampmark
Inconvenient Realities: Climate Change and the South Pacific
Martin Billheimer
La Grand’Route: Waiting for the Bus
John Kendall Hawkins
Seymour Hersh: a Life of Adversarial Democracy at Work
Faisal Khan
Is Israel a Democracy?
John Feffer
The GOP Wants Trumpism…Without Trump
Kim Ives
The Roots of Haiti’s Movement for PetroCaribe Transparency
Dave Lindorff
We Already Have a Fake Billionaire President; Why Would We want a Real One Running in 2020?
Gerry Brown
Is China Springing Debt Traps or Throwing a Lifeline to Countries in Distress?
Pete Tucker
The Washington Post Really Wants to Stop Ben Jealous
Dean Baker
Getting It Wrong Again: Consumer Spending and the Great Recession
September 17, 2018
Melvin Goodman
What is to be Done?
Rob Urie
American Fascism
Patrick Cockburn
The Adults in the White House Trying to Save the US From Trump Are Just as Dangerous as He Is
Jeffrey St. Clair - Alexander Cockburn
The Long Fall of Bob Woodward: From Nixon’s Nemesis to Cheney’s Savior
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail