With more and more evidence mounting that it was, in fact, South Korea who fired first.

With more wikileaks releases showing the numerous ways america forces its will on others, and blatantly lies about all manner of things, people blithely debate more war.

A broken, divided, country, which is already bankrupt, morally and economically lurches forward, and americans urge more war. 

War is the answer. 

The other side ALWAYS deserves it.

A new Hitler to blame.

The beat goes on.

The band keeps playing.

And so it goes (K. Vonnegut).

Since WWII america has found justification to militarily intervene in the affairs of Iran (four times), Yugoslavia, Uruguay, Greece, Germany, China, the Philippines (three times), Puerto Rico, Korea, Vietnam, Guatemala (twice), Egypt, Lebanon (twice), Iraq (three times and ongoing), China, Panama (twice), Vietnam, Cuba (twice), Panama, Indonesia, the Dominican Republic, Cambodia (twice), Chile, Angola, Oman, Laos, Libya (three times)), El Salvador, Nicaragua, Grenada, Honduras, Bolivia, Liberia (twice), Saudi Arabia, Somalia (twice), Yugoslavia (twice), Bosnia, Haiti (twice), Zaire, Albania, Sudan, Afghanistan (three times and ongoing), Yemen (three times), Macedonia, Colombia, Liberia, Pakistan, and Syria.  A record of shame, inanity, and greed unparalleled in history.

http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html

Furthermore: If I recall correctly, the last two unequivocal triumphs for our "vaunted" military were Panama, where we blasted heavy metal music to get Noriega to leave the Vatican diplomatic mission in Panama City.

"Then came the Army's clownish boom-box bombardment - American soldiers drawn up at the Vatican embassy in Panama, playing rock music full blast around the clock to make life hellish for the Pope's emissaries.

Suddenly we seemed to be in Dr. Strangelove country. Punishing the Vatican with heavy-metal rock?"

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/01/03/opinion/observer-is-this-justice-necessary.html

The operation was dubbed "Just Cause," and the General Assembly of the UN voted 75-20 labeling the invasion a flagrant violation of international law.

The just cause for this invasion was that Noriega who had been on the CIA payroll was no longer cooperating in hiding the program by which guns were sent to various Central American death squads in return for cocaine being trans-shipped into inner-city america, and this illegal american activity had to be covered regardless of the circumstances necessary to do so.  Needless to say, we don't stop at violating the laws of others.  The Boland amendment forbade this whole travesty, but american exceptionalism allows us to ignore our own laws, as well as the laws of others.

And the band played on. 

The terrorists have been unclothed and they are america's president, compliant democrats and immoral republicans in the congress, and a supreme court that is supreme only in its arrogance and resemblance to banana republic decisions. 

The prior american victory was in Grenada, a country of 100,000 people, (with a democratically elected government) only days after a bomb in Lebanon at the marine barracks took the lives of 241 american servicemen.

The UN voted 122 to 9 that the invasion was a flagrant violation of international law.

The operation was named Urgent Fury, and the urgency was to get the 241 service members killed only a few days earlier due to another inept american intelligence failure off the front pages and preserve the delusion on morning in mr. reagan's america.

And the band played on. 

If you were taken in by the mindless and continual lies about Iraq:

Presumably, You are aware that Gulf War one was contrived when Hussein's objections to america supplying slant oil drilling to Kuwait so that they could drill oil out of Iraqi territory in the Rumaila oil field was answered when Bush I sent his envoy April Glaspie to Iraq and gave him the green light to invade Kuwait.

Then, next in the progression was testimony given to congress by a tearful UNIDENTIFIED young girl proclaiming her eyewitness accounts of Kuwaiti babies taken out of incubators.

This was orchestrated by the republican PR firm Hill and Knowleton, who had been hired expressly to turn public opinion, which had been against war, to supporting it.  Her testimony was key to rallying incredible support for war, which was lingering around and under 50% at the time to 90%.

Three months later, it was revealed that :

a. Nariyah had never even been in Kuwait at the time of the events she testified to having seen; and

b. Her father, in fact, was Saud Nasir al-Sabah, Kuwait's Ambassador to the US

http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html

Even within this backdrop, the senate and house of representatives votes authorizing force were the narrowest since the War of 1812.

Then bush senior claimed: "Within three days, 120,000 Iraqi troops with 850 tanks had poured into Kuwait and moved south to threaten Saudi Arabia. It was then that I decided to act to check that aggression."[49]

The Pentagon claimed that satellite photos showing a buildup of Iraqi forces along the border were the source of this information, but this was later shown to be false. A reporter for the Saint Petersburg Times acquired commercial satellite images made at the time in question, which showed nothing but empty desert.[50]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War

The rush to war was so intense that we neither would allow the U.N. inspectors time to complete their task of searching for WMD's, nor provide adequate body armor for our soldiers, nor their vehicles.

At this point, 100,000 sorties were flown, dropping 85,000 tons of ordinance designed to destroy the Iraqi infrastructure, which has never since recovered.

After the official conclusion of hostilities, the no-fly zones were established and a harsh boycott put in place. At one point, sec. of state madeline albright was asked if the deaths of 1/2 million CHILDREN was worth our efforts, and she, unapologetically, replied affirmatively.

And the band played on. 

As for Gulf War II, plans for this were already on the table months prior to 9/11, thanks to vp cheney:

Bush's critics have questioned whether he and his administration were focused on Iraq rather than terrorism when they took office early in 2001 and even after the Sept. 11 attacks. Former Treasury secretary Paul H. O'Neill and former White House counterterrorism coordinator Richard A. Clarke have made that charge in recently published memoirs.

According to "Plan of Attack," it was Cheney who was particularly focused on Iraq before the terrorist attacks. Before Bush's inauguration, Cheney sent word to departing Defense Secretary William S. Cohen that he wanted the traditional briefing given an incoming president to be a serious "discussion about Iraq and different options." Bush specifically assigned Cheney to focus as vice president on intelligence scenarios, particularly the possibility that terrorists would obtain nuclear or biological weapons.

Early discussions among the administration's national security "principals" -- Cheney, Powell, Tenet and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice -- and their deputies focused on how to weaken Hussein diplomatically. But Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz proposed sending in the military to seize Iraq's southern oil fields and establish the area as a foothold from which opposition groups could overthrow Hussein.

Powell dismissed the plan as "lunacy," according to Woodward, and told bush what he thought. "You don't have to be bullied into this," Powell said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17347-2004Apr16.html

bush's approval rating prior to 9/11 were as low as under 50%. When highjackers, FIFTEEN of NINETEEN who were Saudis attacked the WTC, bush's approval ratings soared and then began the charade of WMDs, Al Qaeda/Saddam connections, efforts to obtain yellowcake from Niger; and successive shifting reasons to be there; all of which turned out to be lies. 

And the band played on. 

Now the band has a new song on the hit parade:

"On Korea, Here We Go Again!"

"While you can delve back through history for plenty of examples, today’s U.S. journalists might remember events like the Gulf of Tonkin clash that opened the door to the disastrous Vietnam War and the misplaced certainty about Iraq’s WMD that led to a bloody U.S. invasion and occupation.

Today's Korean crisis over an exchange of artillery fire between North Korea and South Korea is similar. Though the evidence is that South Korea fired first, you wouldn’t know that if you’ve been watching most U.S. news shows and reading the major newspapers, which have laid the blame squarely at the doorstep of North Korea."

Still, for the most prominent newspaper in the United States, a country that has repeatedly invaded and bombed other nations and killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of their inhabitants, isn't it a bit hypocritical to lecture a small country about how it should respond to an enemy firing at it?" 

So, instead of anything approaching “objectivity,” the U.S. news media dishes out selective outrage. And those double standards were out in force regarding the latest Korean crisis."

The Post, however, has never been known to criticize Israel for pocketing billions of dollars in U.S. aid – and counting on unwavering U.S. political support – without ever disclosing or dismantling its array of nuclear weapons and delivery systems, which are far more sophisticated than North Korea’s."

And the band plays on.

"However, before the war rhetoric gets completely out of control again – and creates another political dynamic that leads toward a bloody escalation – perhaps the U.S. news media should reflect for a moment on all the other times the American press corps has let itself and the country be stampeded into a dangerous misunderstanding of an international incident." 

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2010/112410.html