Ignoring Realities

08/03/2011 08:57 pm ET | Updated Oct 03, 2011

The Norwegian Christian pleads guilty to terrorism, explaining that he wanted to save Europe from a "Muslim takeover." The Saudi Arabian Muslim, Osama bin Laden, pleaded guilty constantly to his terrorism at the Air Force Barracks in Saudi Arabia, the embassies in Kuwait and Tanzania, the U.S.S. Cole, and the World Trade Towers, explaining he wanted to save the Muslim world from a Crusade or "Christian takeover." The United States is so enthralled with its military and defense that we brag that we got Osama, but ignore his cause. Instead we prove Osama's case with troops in Iraq, Kuwait, Kosovo, Bahrain, Egypt, the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan and drone kills in Pakistan, Libya, Yemen and Somalia. There is no war of terror. If it was, we'd be drone killing every day in Saudi Arabia where Osama bin Laden learned terror, the 9/11 crew emanated, and they still teach terror -- you and I are infidels. We ignore the lesson of Vietnam that you can't change a culture militarily. Thinking we can, we are begging to stay in Iraq, where everyone agrees that the war was a mistake, and after ten years languishing in Afghanistan where General David Petraeus, just before he left, described our gains as "... 'fragile' and 'reversible' making the continued presence of American troops in the oft-violent country a continuing necessity."

In fact, we are so imbued with military that we ignore the economic war that China wages. China realizes that nuclear is the ultimate weapon of defense or a suicide weapon. So China aims to take over the world economically. With population galore, China has work crews around the world building highways, bridges, railroads, etc. -- even in the United States. After Tiananmen, the U.S. obtained a resolution in the United Nations to investigate human rights in China. China went to Zaire where it built its railroad and friends in Africa and the East, and there has never been a hearing. When Japan seized China's ship captain, China withheld rare earth shipments and Japan promptly released the captain to China. China takes the world's technology, alters it slightly, patents the altered technology, and with its market of 1.3 billion, the altered article becomes immediately the article in trade. In a few years, when China no longer needs U.S. technology and production, Corporate America will return home with nothing to produce. This is economic war, and China is using our Good Neighbor Policy, which we have forgotten.

The principal contributors to the president and Congress -- Wall Street, the big banks and Corporate America -- want the easy profits from China to keep flowing. The president and Congress want the contributions to keep flowing, so they subsidize the off-shoring of jobs and the economy. Not one of the 535 members of Congress will introduce a bill to repeal the tax exemption that subsidizes off-shore production. President Obama's appointed Jeffrey Immelt of G.E. to create jobs who promptly off-shores G.E.'s $550 million research facility to Brazil and G.E.'s medical imaging health unit from Wisconsin to China. The president and Congress say they are for jobs, but act as a fifth column in the economic war.

We continue to ignore the weapon of 136 countries in the economic war: the value added tax. If we gave Corporate America the same tax benefit to on-shore instead of off-shore by cancelling the corporate tax and replacing it with a 6% VAT, we could cut taxes, provide billions to pay down the debt, create millions of jobs, promote exports and cut the size of government.

Finally, we ignore the reality that the budget can't be balanced with spending cuts alone. It will take spending cuts and additional revenues. In the last eleven years, we have lost $2 trillion in revenues from the deficits in the balance of trade (ignoring the economic war); $4 trillion from tax cuts; $3 trillion to pay Defense, State Department contractors, and CIA bribes in the wars. Now that the president and Congress have decided to pay for government and obtain a balanced budget like we gave President Bush in 2001, the trillions lost can't be paid for with just spending cuts. President Obama frames the debate "for or against the rich," "for or against balance" instead of the impossibility of obtaining a balanced budget with just spending cuts. Eric Cantor voted for tax cuts and wars without paying for them. Ask the Congressman to list his $7 trillion in spending cuts to balance the budget.