More pondering about freedom, war, reproductive control

At times, I have pondered that the 9/11 plane crash fracas would not have happened if Democrats had won the 2000 Presidency, because the Democrats would be known to not have used it as an excuse to declare war on sovereign nations that had not attacked us, even though one was harboring a person believed to have masterminded the 9/11 fracas ... for reasons not very clear.

I assume (there is that word again!) that the Democrats would not have considered the way-out-of-proportion war response as being appropriate, and the instigators would have known that, and so they would not have bothered with the plane crash fracas, clearly intended to result in the devastating response by America, ruining our economy and ruining the lives of many American soldiers and tens of thousands of non-combatants in those countries. Yikes!

And the Obama Democratic Administration's involvement in the Libyan crisis seemed in line with that, allocating it mostly to NATO activity, and keeping military folks off the ground. Maybe it was still meddling in sovereign nation's affairs, however.

In Afghanistan, there were some deeper root problems, such as the reports of the Taliban men painfully ripping out women's fingernails if they had put Westernized nail polish on them, declaring a right to be attractive to men of women's own choice. This religiously-justified control of women's freedom of reproductive opportunity choice fits well with male desires to control reproduction by an elite few males. But is it America's responsibility to war upon the Taliban to right that wrong? Well, the current GOP considers even American women to not have the right to control their own reproductive choices, either. The difference is not very clear to me, right now, other than the GOP are not ripping out women's fingernails. (No doubt some menacing guns aimed at me could change my public-viewed mind a bit, of course.)

People are complicated in the extreme, as I have often stated in this blog, especially from the view of an Asperger's socially inept person like I am.

Yet that social comprehension ineptness has driven me to expend considerable thought and effort and risk to figure it all out. Even continuing a bit, even after the gratefully received knowledge that as an Asperger-afflicted person, I am incapable of comprehending the social intricacies that apparently seem so natural to non-Asperger's people.

And, the 9/11 fracas comes to mind at times. The hotspots of North Korea, Iran, Syria, Palestine/Israel, and similar nations, provide me uneasiness that a contrived knocking the chip off a shoulder (the Twin Towers were big chips on the shoulder of America) could be in the brewing.

So far, Obama has played it fairly cool, regarding such things. As the elected American President, he has his finger within reach of the Red Button and its lesser alternatives, that I suspect that far more power-crazed men-groups would like to possess by any means possible. He appears to have adequate self-control about pushing the Red Button and its lesser alternatives. And so a question explored here is regarding will the fracas-designers of the world, consider it a waste of time to do another grand 9/11 kind of fracas, so as to pull America - and her Allies - into financially devastating resource-squandering war kind of stuff. Puts lots of money into Daddy Warbuck's pockets, however, nevermind Orphan Annie.

All this who-does-what-to-whom centered stuff seems to be horrendously distracting away from the major resource-responsibility of mankind, and would seem utterly insane activities, except it fits squarely into the ancient basic mode of control machinations of who reproduces, vs who gets "Darwin Awarded out."

The media currently is pointing out the human sacrificing being done in Syria by the Syrian seated powers that be, closely resembles similar recent happenings in Egypt and Libya.

(I point out here that sacrificing a human by shooting a tank cannon round into his or her home killing them, is no less a human sacrifice than other ways historically done. Less in-their-face and perhaps not quite as formal a ritual, but does that matter much to the targeted?)

The American Civil War was the costliest war in terms of American lives, that America has known so far. Brother fought brother to the death. It seemed different from the current uprisings in Syria etc in that the American Civil War was about ending the supposedly righteous enslavement of other human beings. About the extreme enslavement by other people, by an elite few, plantation owners, as a rule.

I wonder, are these uprisings - in Syria etc - caused by such problems? More likely by oppressions that seem unjust by the folks involved. Thus they are more like the causes of the American Revolution than the causes of the American Civil War, except the oppression is from its own government.

I can get even more confused by recalling that in the American Revolution against England, fighting for our freedom, that slaves were the norm livelihood of our esteemed leaders. The Father of our Country, George Washington, General and then President, derived his income from slaves on his plantation, and major income was from growing the now-illegal hemp which supplied essential war supplies such as paper for writing upon and strong material for sails and rigging for sailing warships; and also by the distillation of whiskey, to fill in for the social-pressure-relieving-beverage rum that had been provided previously by England to America. And slaves, presumably fairly well treated but not free to do what they choose, did the work on his plantation. Much as even that of Thomas Jefferson, often considered the wisest man in the American Presidency. It was not until much later, that we did major soul-searching and realized that enslaving others, regardless of their skin color and country of origin, was not a nice thing to do to them; and, although harder work, all that could be done by free people for the benefit of free people, including the elite.

This winding path of pondering has led back to the question of whether outrageous happenings are not committed if the perpetrators do not expect the response to be what they want. 9/11 worked perfectly, it seems, to bring America to her knees and even instigate the internal big-brother fingers into everybody's pie, that some control-freak groups had long wanted to happen for them. And the even more basic question of Who Gets To Reproduce, so often controlled by religious groupings, it turns out if one looks. Much of women's power comes from their power to comfort men on a daily basis, using their in-built apparatus. However, that apparatus also sometimes leads to reproduction; and women declare the right to control that reproduction via their own bodies, including fixing mistakes. At the same time, some types of men unite to figure out ways to grab more than an equal number of women, for them to reproduce by, and nearly always they proclaim some religion or other, as their righteous excuse for doing this. And such men usually have brandished (or secretive) means for killing or maiming other men at hand with which to wreak this on other men, so as to eliminate the women's other options for reproduction; as well as making abusive regulations for women so as to control their reproductive options as well as their opportunity to provide comfort and relief to all men. The Afghanistan-Pakistanian Taliban are not the only folks afflicted with this game, one may notice in the current news streams.

Although it would no doubt elicit righteous rage from both men and women, were it to be said, I will sort of try to figure it out and say it, that if women were free to comfort and relieve every man on the planet on a daily basis, and had the aggregate responsibility to do so, and if there were means to prevent clever groups of men trying to prevent other men from receiving such comfort and even occasional reproductive opportunity, maybe there would be no more war. In such an idyllic scenario, who would want to launch nukes, disrupting it all, ruining a good thing?

Relieved of such stresses, and nightly bonded by loving, worldwide - we might settle down and start getting very responsible with our management of Mother Earth's finite resources, for which we supposedly are responsible: this is happening on our watch. With no more excuse of having to fiddle with the bad boy's machinations, we would have to take on the hard tasks of keeping our world alive, and of reaching out into the solar system's huge resources, bringing life there too, in time.