ce jour<\/a> tente de clarifier pour nous la question surr\u00e9aliste des d\u00e9penses pour les guerres diverses :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00abThe $50 billion figure appears to be based on the assumption that the increased military deployment in Iraq will be maintained at least until the spring of 2008.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThis additional money comes on top of the $611 billion that the Congressional Research Service recently gave as the total amount already approved by Congress for the so-called war on terror (74 percent of it going to pay for the killing in Iraq, 21 percent for Afghanistan and 5 percent for embassy security) from September 11, 2001, up to and including its vote last May 25 to give Bush another $100 billion in war funding.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbIt is also in addition to another $147 billion that the administration has already requested for war funding for fiscal 2008. It will probably be bundled together with this request, with Congress asked to approve a total supplemental funding request of about $200 billion.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbIf approved, it is estimated that Iraq war spending would rise to more than $3 billion a week, with the total spent surpassing the costs of all previous wars save World War II.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tIl est \u00e9videmment bien difficile de suivre toutes les p\u00e9rip\u00e9ties grotesques de la pr\u00e9sidence GW et du monde politicien \u00e0 la d\u00e9rive qui l’entoure, face \u00e0 la situation de la guerre contre la terreur et ses effets aux USA. Finalement, le plus int\u00e9ressant dans le compte-rendu que nous offre WSWS.org<\/em> pourrait venir de cet emprunt fait \u00e0 un article d’un journal local de l’Oregon, d\u00e9crivant la fureur publique lors d’une r\u00e9union d’un parlementaire de l’Etat (un d\u00e9mocrate) et de ses \u00e9lecteurs.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00abThe immense anger building up not only against the Bush administration, but against its accomplices in the Democratic Party, found public expression recently in the form of an explosive confrontation between one Democratic congressman who voted for the war-funding measure last May and his constituents.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbAccording to the August 28 issue of the Oregonian, Hundreds at a raucous and hostile town hall Monday night let US Rep. Brian Baird know that they disapprove of his support for the troop surge in Iraq. Many suggested the Vancouver Democrat is not representing the will of his district.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbBaird, who was first elected in 1998, attempted to defend his support for funding the war, but was repeatedly shouted down by a capacity crowd of some 600 people. We don’t care what your convictions are, one member of the audience told him. You’re here to represent us.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbSix hundred peoplefrom veterans to teachers, from a Columbia River boat captain to a lady who plays bagpipes at soldier funeralsspent nearly four hours castigating Baird, reported Danny Westneat, a columnist for the Seattle Times. He was called a sellout, Bush’s lap dog, a neocon pet. Some scoffed at anything he said. Some told him to resign.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThere’s an epic quality to how mad folks are, he commented. It feels like an anger that may last well after the war is gone.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe attempts by the various liberal pressure and protest outfits to promote illusions in the Democratic Party notwithstanding, the political trajectory that this party has pursued since being placed in control of Congress by the massive outpouring of antiwar sentiment in the 2006 midterm elections has made it increasingly difficult to mask its role as a direct collaborator and enabler in the crimes carried out by the Bush administration.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tM\u00eame si l’exemple est limit\u00e9, l’intensit\u00e9 est frappante. L’observation qui vient aussit\u00f4t \u00e0 l’esprit est qu’il y a l\u00e0 un extraordinaire potentiel de fureur de la part des citoyens. Cette fureur ne parvient pas \u00e0 s’exprimer d’une mani\u00e8re politiquement efficace parce que le syst\u00e8me est verrouill\u00e9 de fa\u00e7on \u00e9tanche de ce point de vue, avec son parti unique r\u00e9publicain-d\u00e9mocrate (r\u00e9publicrate) et tout ce qui va avec. La chose n’est pas nouvelle mais l’intensit\u00e9 qu’on devine est si grande qu’on ne peut s’emp\u00eacher de se demander combien de temps durera cette confrontation entre un syst\u00e8me aussi \u00e9tanche, aussi sourd, aussi ferm\u00e9 et la fureur de la population qu’il est cens\u00e9 repr\u00e9senter.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tLa caract\u00e9ristique du syst\u00e8me, qui ne peut se permettre d’interdire la libert\u00e9 de communication sous peine de mettre en p\u00e9ril le fonctionnement d’une \u00e9conomie dont il d\u00e9pend compl\u00e8tement, jusqu’\u00e0 sa philosophie de fonctionnement, est qu’effectivement les moyens de communication ne peuvent emp\u00eacher de donner un certain \u00e9cho de cette col\u00e8re malgr\u00e9 toutes les r\u00e9sistances officielles et l’auto-censure qui existent. La potentialit\u00e9 est explosive; la question pos\u00e9e n’est pas nouvelle: l’explosion aura-t-elle lieu et si oui, quand et comment?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 30 ao\u00fbt 2007 \u00e0 17H28<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
GW Bush va demander $50 milliards de plus pour sa folie irakienne, le Congr\u00e8s va signer des deux mains et les yeux ferm\u00e9s, en pensant \u00e0 autre chose. Tout le monde applaudira le rapport Petraeus dont tout le monde sait qu’il a \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9dig\u00e9 par les services de la communication de la Maison-Blanche. L’opposition entre… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[6991,6748,3127,2927,3037,6125,2645,2622,3268,6264,5608,3744],"class_list":["post-69171","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-6991","tag-milliards","tag-budget","tag-colere","tag-contre","tag-democrate","tag-guerre","tag-la","tag-oregon","tag-petraeus","tag-populaire","tag-terreur"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69171","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=69171"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69171\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69171"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69171"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69171"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}