Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiIt's Not Hillary, It's The Policy Stupid!
The media obsession over who's in and who's out of consideration for the Obama Cabinet brings the admonition on the famous "War Room" wall of Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign to mind: "It's the Economy Stupid!" Those of us eagerly awaiting relief from the debacle called the Bush administration should avoid getting swept up the in DC parlor game of who is getting what position in the new administration and focus instead on the fundamental changes we need the Obama administration to start making. In short, "It's the Policy Stupid!"
President Obama will begin his presidency with enormous good will from the American people and great hope from the world at large. It is imperative that he seize this opportunity by quickly moving his campaign pledges into bold and decisive action despite the opposition that surely awaits him.
Step one: End the US military occupation of Iraq. Immediately begin withdrawing US combat forces within sixteen months, clearly delineating the number and role of any remaining troops to limited non-combat roles such as providing security to the US embassy and training Iraqi security forces. Even before taking office, President-elect Obama's message of change has made a security pact with Iraq much more likely by assuring Iraqis that the United States will respect their sovereignty and pull our forces out. It has weakened Iranian opposition by increasing their confidence that the US will not be occupying permanent military bases on their neighbor's soil as a staging ground for attack
Step two: Change course in Afghanistan. Responding to the Bush administration's failure in Afghanistan by initiating an escalation of US combat troops could be the next step into a quagmire that would be a catastrophe for the United States, Obama's presidency, and the region. Changing course should include support for the Afghan government's outreach to insurgent forces, including elements of the Taliban willing to negotiate an end to armed conflict; a robust diplomatic effort that reaches out to key regional nations, including Iran and Pakistan; and a serious and sustained commitment of humanitarian aid and development assistance that can bring relief and hope to the beleaguered people of Afghanistan. Continued military commitment should be limited and predicated on a clear exit strategy that is linked to this comprehensive approach.
Step three: Engage Iran. President Obama should declare that seeking regime change in Iran is no longer the policy of the U.S. and initiate diplomatic contacts with the Iranian government immediately without preconditions.
Step four: Make a just and lasting peace in the Middle East a top priority by seriously arbitrating a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and capitalizing on the common interests of states in the region to prevent an implosion of Iraq and to establish stability.
Step five: Replenish the strength of our weakened military by cutting the number of troops that are put into harms way and striking unnecessary and obsolete military weapons from the defense budget. President Obama should reject calls for an increase in military spending and combat forces. Troop levels should be set not by reacting to the demands of militarizing our foreign policy under George W. Bush, but by the requirements of a new national security strategy. Additional levels of combat troops will be necessary only if the United States intends to launch yet more counter-insurgency campaigns by invasions and military occupations. The alternative is a national security policy that buries the "Bush Doctrine," respects international law, and restores America's place in the world as a source of inspiration and hope, not outrage and fear.
None of these steps will be easy. Hawks will echo Senator McCain's attacks during the presidential campaign that President Obama will be snatching defeat from the jaws of victory by changing course in Iraq. They will clamor for more troops in Afghanistan without any semblance of an exit strategy while rejecting meaningful diplomatic engagement with key regional players like Iran. And, they will relentlessly pressure Members of Congress from both parties to continue the gravy train of wasteful defense spending on obsolete and unnecessary weapons and equipment. President Obama and Members of Congress need to demand that, from now on, defense spending will be based on the national security interests of our nation and no longer on the political self-interest of politicians and the insatiable appetite of defense contractors.
Undoing the incalculable damage done by the Bush administration will require a fundamental reassessment of how to achieve genuine national security and setting a profoundly different course for national defense and foreign policy. The election of Barack Obama opens an extraordinary opportunity for our nation and the world. The stakes are too high to squander it.
22 Comments so far
Show AllUndoing the incalculable damage done by the Bush administration will require a fundamental reassessment of how to achieve genuine national security . . .
Perhaps it cannot be undone. Perhaps George Wanker Bush was the tornado that destroyed the trailer park of the United States, then doubled back to wipe out what was left. Yes, Obama hasn't done anything yet. Soon, however, he will be Chief Honcho and in my lifetime ACTUALLY BEING Chief Honcho does nasty things to people. His "team" makes it appear he will be using the well-worn rule book all Chief Honchos have used since the end of World War II. But history, vis a vis this nation, doesn't play by those rules anymore.
When they make those numbered lists -- there always seem to be about six items -- I skip them. No point in even reading that hot air.
A question... I think I read that Hillary insisted on choosing her staff at State. What is typical? Does the President choose key appointments in a cabinet. Who gets to appoint ambassadors etc and reap the power from these appointments? I remember Janet Reno from the Clinton years. She seemed but a mouthpiece and I always thought that Clinton had key people right under Reno who steered her as directed by the President. Has Hillary been afforded privileges that aren't typical?
Of the 5 suggested steps, only one of them will even be considered by the incoming pack of hawks & proponents of empire. And even that one ("Engage Iran") will only mean a willingness to talk. This won't be "talk" in the sense of "looking for a peaceful compromise." It will be "talk" in the sense of "We'll tell you what you have to do to avoid having us bomb you."
Three of the other 4 items (End the US military occupation of Iraq, Change course in Afghanistan, Make a just and lasting peace in the Middle East a top priority ) are already off the table. Liberal naifs just don't realize it yet, or won't admit it to themselves.
- Obama has NEVER said a word about "leaving" Iraq. The most he has hinted at is a 16-month slow drawdown of COMBAT troops, subject to what his "commanders on the ground" say. This leaves enough wiggle-room to drive a truck through. The US will be there for decades.
- Afghanistan: Obama has been very clear about this -- he's going to ESCALATE the war in Afghanistan!
- Middle East: Why do you suppose Rahm Emmanuel is chief of staff? Why do you suppose Obama sucked up so hard to AIPAC last spring? It sure isn't because he's going to do anything Israel doesn't like.
The 5th item on the list was "Replenish the strength of our weakened military," in part by "reject(ing) calls for an increase in military spending and combat forces." Obama is already on record as calling for expanding the military by 90,000 troops. He hasn't said a word about CUTTING defense spending. My guess is that he'll go along with any increases desired by the MIC.
It's also not in anyone's interest to have "our weakened military's" strength replenished. We don't want a replenished military. It's a gargantuan monster, & we want to dismantle the whole damn thing -- no more CIA, no more foreign aggression, no more insane weapons spending. The best position for the US military would be to make it so weak it can no longer threaten the rest of the world. It should be strong enough to defend us from real threats, but not a whit stronger. We should be cutting this crazed monster by about 90%.
All that you say may be true. But Obama is not even president yet.
I would like to cling to some HOPE in th meantime, until it proves
HOPEless.
If Obama did the things in this article, I would rejoice! and hold
America high once again.
"All that you say may be true. But Obama is not even president yet. I would like to cling to some HOPE in th meantime, until it proves HOPEless..."
- Unfortunately, what is going to happen has nothing to do with your personal desire (or the desire of liberal voters generally) to cling to hope. It will be driven by very objective social & political forces. These forces guarantee that the direction of the Obama administration will be just like that of any other US administration: militarism in the service of the corporate oligarchy.
"...If Obama did the things in this article, I would rejoice! and hold America high once again..."
- Yeah, well, that's very nice. But there is zero chance of that happening.
It's also not quite true that "Obama is not even president yet." He has already begun making very consequential decisions which will affect all of us. We have every right to react to these decisions in accordance with our own perceptions & our own interests. We owe Obama nothing, if he makes decisions that run counter to our interests -- and he has very definitely done exactly that. He is behaving like an enemy of the people who voted for him. He is behaving like a willing agent of Wall St & of US militarism. This cannot possibly do any good for the bottom 98% of the US population.
Well said, let's wait for O. to act in January and not worry that he will forget his pledges to us.
Don't worrying, the MIC is doing of splendid job of weakening itself. The more it tries to maintain control, the further into oblivion it will slip.
"This leaves enough wiggle-room to drive a truck through."
I completely disagree! It leaves enough wiggle-room to drive a TANK through.
· Yr Obd't Servant
Good point. I stand corrected!
Its a "toss up" between Condi & Hilary for the all time diplomatic "jive talk" medal.
It was Hilary's support of hubby "Wild Bill" in his bomb bomb bomb Iraq 1998 "Desert Fox" campaign that set her War agenda in stone. Remember her support of Challabi & her claim that she was briefed on the 2003 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq even though no one on her staff was authorized to read the report, it’s unclear who could have actually briefed her --- Is there no one out there to ask the questions ???
AIPAC was watching & listening & was well pleased when Clinton was the only Democratic senator to categorically accept the Bush administration’s claims regarding Iraq’s alleged chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs, Iraq’s alleged long-range missile capabilities, and alleged ties to al-Qaeda.
This & more all are parts of the Clinton contribution to the over 20 year Holocaust brought to Iraq by the USA on behalf of Israel.
http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4802
http://www.bollyn.info/home/arti...foreign-policy/
he is bought off, or he would be dead as Dr. King,. Lennon and Kennedy,
you stupid USA 'sheeples'
that Bilderburg bitch needs to come clean on Mena, AK and the over 130 people dead from their coke trafficking,
bet she goes sees Uribe first, wanna bet
I am blessed, I get to go back to paradise and leave the old folks here
at least I am in the food business, but to EU, where they are more educated with what THEY eat
you folks can eat cake, Monsanto genetically screwed up cake
maybe the mexicans now know of what they have done to their corn and take matters like cartel style
and like remembering 1847, taught to all 2nd graders in Mexican schools
bilarybush-cheney,
many has Slobamanos really pissed of Latinolandia
Viva El Frente
Isn't branding a sociopath the women who wrote a book named "It Takes a Village to Raise a Child" a little over the top? I think Hillary comes across better than that characterization. She is flawed like all humans, but perhaps not that badly. Maybe a bit of a hawk, but that may have been the woman as commander in chief must be a little ruthless in appearance to get elected. Sorry but the American electorate is flawed in that respect. Just look at our bloated defense budget and our history.
It will be interesting to see how long Hillary Clinton tows the Obama line whenever it conflicts with her agenda.
www.wunderman-comics.com
Step 6. Let the UN do all of the above with our support.
As "fashionable" as it is on this site to live in the fantasy that the UN is anything but a corrupt, pathetic, toothless disaster, giving ANY task to the UN has proved a recipe for failure.
Maybe if the US paid their UN dues and did not corrupt most of the Security Council's decisions, the UN would not be a pathetic toothless disaster. The UN has kept the peace in places like the Balkans and some African countries in spite of it all.
Exactly. I'm so tired of Americans saying the UN is useless while stabbing it in the back. You don't GET to criticize something's efficacy when you're actively engaged in trying to kill it.
UN Peacekeepers are certainly effective at sexual assaulting the local women and refusing to fight to defend them (see Rwanda).
Here's a thought, let's let that catch praise die. James Carville and all his quaint notions should be left back in the 20th century.
Recycling is good. Except in the case of Hillary and Bill. Time will show this was Obama's first big mistake. Hillary is a warmonger and a sociopath.
But, Obama has now officially made his bed. He'll soon find out that among the bedbugs he's picked to sleep with, they'll be a couple of nasty cooties in there too named Hill & Bill. Unfortunately for us, we'll all feel their nasty bites.
....and Hillary will do these things. Hillary will be taken seriously, whereas Condy was a joke.