From a purely technical viewpoint, the so-called "drone airplanes" are the corpus delicti of an organised and systematic Robot law violation, with Isaac Asimov being recognised as the just as hidden as obvious Founding Father of all things cyber-American. In addition to this, as everybody knows since robots are not natural persons in any ethical or practical sense of the term, but programmed machines like the palace fools of the dark ages, their creators are liable for them. Technicians who operate lawless robots and politicians who command them are in fact responsible in the same way as anyone using any conventional technology. This must be made entirely clear. No distinction with owner whether robot or knife. Robot must always be programmed to follow Robot Laws or is lawless robot.
The statement on the epidemic use of lawless killer robots as a questionable antidote to the ever-increasing suicide rate among these selling their lives to the military drew planetary attention because it revealed the enormous fragility of the imperialist war machine: To perceive any chance of success in persuading his death squads to reduce their bloodlust, their so-called "commander in chief" must address them publicly and argue with infantile notions of prestige, apparently because commands issued along the same way the entire campaign began do not fulfill their purpose - obviously the command chain of the military hierarchy is a tactical one-way road, and its bureaucratic apparatus the proverbial vehicle without brakes, except that it is not going anywhere.
Instead it is threatening to stay and repress everyone who happens to be in any place it is threatening to take. It seems that the person supposed to be in charge of it cannot keep its own business in order. This statement does not absolve from responsibility, but responsibility is not the same as capability. The attempts seen now, whatever spell might finally have triggered them, are belated and dishonest, as well as poisoned by the same ideology of hatred that enabled the evil, the unchecked defamation of any claim of reciprocal independence as extremism, as if it was wrong to distance oneself from what is being perceived as wrong. In the self-inflicted nightmare of the American ideology, independence seems to be only for regimes and people have to depend on voting. Yet so far all regimes including this one have depended on exploiting people. The blowback is proof.
It is not a pilgrimage to be President of Unitedstates. An honest man in that role would long have resigned. A wise and honest person would have dissolved its apparatus and resigned. A strong, wise and honest individual would have produced a challenge on an intellectual level the dying empire cannot answer out of all of the above. Mr. Obama quite obviously is none of the above, as his domestic opponents have alleged based on their own merits. From the outside view, obviously the abyss of stupidity had not yet been reached with Mr. Bush, and the serial killer succeeding the hostage taker continued to lower the bar. It might be interesting to find out what these who saw him as an embodiment of their expectation to overcome the Bush legacy make of it. Apparently with Obama the notorious prison on Cuban soil would not exist because all the inmates would be murdered, unable to lay testimony to future generations over the nature of imperialism.
There is no reason whatsoever that would in any way mandate any continuation of this tragedy, if is it not a farce already. One can easily imagine how it does play out when his victims, but only these of them he considers innocents, are haunting him at night - apparently when their spirits make their nightly visits they are being asked to present proof of innocence or risk being denied entrance to the cloud palace of Presidential dreams. Are there imaginary drones in his dreams which kill all the uninvited spirits once again? Do these dream drones accidentally target innocent spirits as well? Are these then being lifted to a new level of haunting? Is their innocence recognised there? Are there drones all the way up to his Creator? You are beginning to get the idea. Even the foreign policy advisors are tearing their hair, as the once closest allies prefer sticking their heads into the compost heaps of their own national delusions rather than into this one.
Certainly it is tough to say it directly: The last chance to pardon America as a nation passed away with Osama bin Laden two years ago. Today we know that the man was killed not because he had been found but because another distraction from rising criticism of the "American crusade" could not be found, so the disturbed henchmen took their postmodern messiah out of their projected death row to crucify him. Nothing makes this more visible than the desperate attempts to maintain a narrative of denial: The allegation of consistency between past anti-colonialist struggles and the current militarist rampage, the hollow clinging to a dystopian future full of more of the same, the systematic oppression of any independent alternative however economically viable that might be.
On this background what matters more than what was said is what was not said. The President of Unitedstates did not say that it fundamentally regrets that choice of weapon, it did not say that it would make a significant change, it did not analyse what brought it to this point. While nobody can fill in for the first and the second, the third can be reconstructed here. What got the North Americans to entrap themselves into this - from its very origins morally bankrupt - robot war is their alienation from all possible human allies. They betrayed and attacked anyone interested to show them a way out of the mental prison of their militarism without further bloodshed until they would arrive at the inevitable conclusion that America is in fact an infinitely prolonged suicide attack on their life and a morally degenerate parasite of their dreams.
These days the Syrian opposition has become a showcase how the deceasing empire is systematically turning allies into enemies until none are left. There are indications that even Osama bin Laden before he concluded otherwise was trying to take the Washington regime serious, even though it might only have been because both did not understand the roots of Karl Marx in the Germanic tribal areas that could be described as the Afghanistan of the Roman era. But there seems to be something about North America so fundamentally wrong that to these experiencing it is ultimately repulsive across all imaginable cultural boundaries. Allies are not a renewable resource. They are finite. And they are all gone by now, even these who might have worse local problems. And robots do have all the predictable disadvantages of a surrogate. America is alone in the horror of itself with no one left to blame.
This poses the possibly most fruitful question for the analysis of the rhetoric of a military superpower that has come to feel that everyone else feels that its end has finally become a matter of current possibility - who "messed with" the drone program? Or more precisely, who is the nameless enemy sketched in the deluded imagination of the ailing power that is so bitterly accused to have virtually shot down the grotesque embodiment of the military-industrial complex? Is it a specific material entity of any kind or is it more like a social awareness that has learned to live with the fact that beyond a certain threshold of consciousness humans cannot be replaced with robots, and these who try do only bring about their own dehumanisation, plus in the worst case that of others as well?
Even the most offensive act, the force-feeding of prisoners is a mirror of the sickness of their own society (not to mention the fascist abuse it derived from in Europe). This is being expressed in all its iconic banality by the official pictures of the procedure, which consistently display aesthetically sterile military equipment, with the single exception of the food that is being forced into the tortured, whose packages appear to be designed for trade in a civilian market where customers might voluntarily purchase it. And yet the content is suitable for no other purpose than force-feeding. The apparent contradiction resolves itself into banality when it is being taken into consideration that the North Americans use this on their elders at a great extent.
You do not need to be stigmatised as a terrorist by the regime, it is sufficient to grow old enough to be forgotten by everyone else than the commercial nursing system to face a risk to be exposed to this by a medical profession suffering from its technology being developed further than its ethics. Terri Schiavo was so lucky to have her force-feeding cancelled because at the time there were some judges feeling that such dehumanising treatment might be imminent for their own religious leaders if it is not being stopped once and for all. This is a reasonable assumption, in the same sense as it is reasonable to assume that suffering can feed compassion. America has not risen any higher ever since. These dangerous idiots might even try to force-feed the Buddha just because they do not believe in hemp.