Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiBiggest State Party to Obama: Get Out of Afghanistan
This week begins with a significant new straw in the political wind for President Obama to consider. The California Democratic Party has just sent him a formal and clear message: Stop making war in Afghanistan.
Overwhelmingly approved on Sunday by the California Democratic Party's 300-member statewide executive board, the resolution is titled "End the U.S. Occupation and Air War in Afghanistan."
The resolution supports "a timetable for withdrawal of our military personnel" and calls for "an end to the use of mercenary contractors as well as an end to air strikes that cause heavy civilian casualties." Advocating multiparty talks inside Afghanistan, the resolution also urges Obama "to oversee a redirection of our funding and resources to include an increase in humanitarian and developmental aid."
While Obama weighs Afghanistan policy options, the California Democratic Party's adoption of the resolution is the most tangible indicator yet that escalation of the U.S. war effort can only fuel opposition within the president's own party -- opposition that has already begun to erode his political base.
Participating in a long-haul struggle for progressive principles inside the party, I co-authored the resolution with savvy longtime activists Karen Bernal of Sacramento and Marcy Winograd of Los Angeles.
Bernal, the chair of the state party's Progressive Caucus, said on Sunday night: "Today's vote formalized and amplified what had been, up to now, an unspoken but profoundly understood reality -- that there is no military solution in Afghanistan. What's more, the vote signified an acceptance of what is sure to be a continued and growing culture of resistance to current administration policies on the matter within the party. This is absolutely huge. Now, there can be no disputing the fact that the overwhelming majority of California Democrats are not only saying no to escalation, but no to our continued military presence in Afghanistan, period. The California Democratic Party has spoken, and we want the rest of the country to know."
Winograd, who is running hard as a grassroots candidate in a primary race against pro-war incumbent Rep. Jane Harman, had this to say: "We need progressives in every state Democratic Party to pass a similar resolution calling for an end to the U.S. occupation and air war in Afghanistan. Bring the veterans to the table, bring our young into the room, and demand an end to this occupation that only destabilizes the region. There is no military solution, only a diplomatic one that requires we cease our role as occupiers if we want our voices to be heard. Yes, this is about Afghanistan -- but it's also about our role in the world at large. Do we want to be global occupiers seizing scarce resources or global partners in shared prosperity? I would argue a partnership is not only the humane choice, but also the choice that grants us the greatest security."
Speaking to the resolutions committee of the state party on Saturday, former Marine Corporal Rick Reyes movingly described his experiences as a warrior in Afghanistan that led him to question and then oppose what he now considers to be an illegitimate U.S. occupation of that country.
Another voice of disillusionment reached party delegates when Bernal distributed a copy of the recent resignation letter from senior U.S. diplomat Matthew Hoh, sent after five months of work on the ground in Afghanistan. "I find specious the reasons we ask for bloodshed and sacrifice from our young men and women in Afghanistan," he wrote. "If honest, our stated strategy of securing Afghanistan to prevent al-Qaeda resurgence or regrouping would require us to additionally invade and occupy western Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, etc. Our presence in Afghanistan has only increased destabilization and insurgency in Pakistan where we rightly fear a toppled or weakened Pakistani government may lose control of its nuclear weapons."
Hoh's letter added that "I do not believe any military force has ever been tasked with such a complex, opaque and Sisyphean mission as the U.S. military has received in Afghanistan." And he wrote: "Thousands of our men and women have returned home with physical and mental wounds, some that will never heal or will only worsen with time. The dead return only in bodily form to be received by families who must be reassured their dead have sacrificed for a purpose worthy of futures lost, love vanished, and promised dreams unkept. I have lost confidence such assurances can anymore be made."
From their own vantage points, many of the California Democratic Party leaders who voted to approve the out-of-Afghanistan resolution on Nov. 15 have gone through a similar process. They've come to see the touted reasons for the U.S. war effort as specious, the mission as Sisyphean and the consequences as profoundly unacceptable.
Sometime in the next few days, President Obama is likely to learn that the California Democratic Party has approved an official resolution titled "End the U.S. Occupation and Air War in Afghanistan." But will he really get the message?
46 Comments so far
Show AllObama to the world: sure, we will get out of Afghanistan! Just let us get that transnational oil pipeline built for our petrodoners and former Unocal executive Karzai and we will pull out our troops (except those needed to protect the pipeline, of course).
Norm, about your last sentence: "Will he really get the message?"
He'll get it, no doubt about that.
But what does this message actually say? Does the message say, "we will withhold support for you in the next election," or does it say, "We're having one of our begging sessions here, but not to worry, it will not effect our support come election time."
The majority of American voters want an end to these wars, the Dems know that. duh. It reminds me of Obama saying he will re-negotiate NAFTA but telling free traders not to worry, he's just lying to get votes. And people still supported Obama in the midst of back stab.
I live in the Twilight Zone or the era of the Body Snatchers.
Both parties are willing to lose a few for their masters' sake. It doesn't matter to the $$ which party wins or loses, as long as they continue to call the shots. I'm beginning to think the "Obama phenomenon" was designed as a one term deal. And those of us who can't stomach supporting someone who would kill children, will get the M&M treatment, again. (malign and marginalize) when the Republicans take up where Obama left off.
"Whenever we compromised, we lost." David Brower, the great Arch Druid
I'm no seer, but this California declaration will go nowhere. The Dem Party, on the whole, solidly supports the wars.
California has a multitude of "defense" industries that all serve to funnel federal money to the state. For that reason alone, its Congressmembers typically support the wars. The list is long: Pelosi, Harmon, Feinstein, etc.
Norman Solomon thus far has been excessively optimistic about the Dem Party. When this goes nowhere, I hope he'll finally see that the Dem Party cannnot be reformed. The party gets its funds from corporations precisely to continue the wars. Nor has the Dem Party ever been an antiwar party!
It really doesn't matter what Dem voters thinks about all of this because they have no alternative. People lose democratic influence every time they vote for the duopoly - that means the Dem/Repugs.
People should still lobby hard for this, of course. But it will lose out and fade from memory by the time of the next election, I predict.
-TIA
Clinton recently said that the U.S. has no long-term plans in Afghanistan, but that's somewhat hard to believe. Whether or not Obama decides to stay in this war is going to draw criticism from opposite ends. Asia Chronicle has been giving some good insight on the situation in Afghanistan. Worth a read I think. www.asiachroniclenews.com
I am bored by assertions of the waste of American lives.
Those who concentrate on this are part of the problem.
It is the people Americans kill that concern me. The USA is a murderous state. All Americans are going to have to wash the feet of all the families of their victims and of all those impoverished and wounded since the beginning of the wars.
The USA has become a repulsive monster. As a member of the human race currently alive, I feel shamed that I have allowed this to happen on my watch
But there are lights in the darkness. If The USA had any reason for existence I would say rtdrury for president. But he hasn't a snowball's chance. The USA has forfeited its right to be. It has become a blatant absurdity.
This paradoxically leads us to recognise that the nation state is an anachronism. G6 and G20 and UN and funnily enough China are indications of the new political reality. When they are dominated by the greedy assertions of the nation state they are ineffective. Bolton, that prime idiot, inadvertently shows us that this means nation states are useless.
I was getting depressed with Solomon's book but now ...
NOW, I'm ready to go back in the streets, where we have been for EIGHT YEARS!!!
There's a call on the website ANSWER@AnswerCoalition.org to protest on March 20,2010.
With all due respect, what good will that do??? The decision will be made in a week if not already. California is at least on time. We need to be in the streets NOW!
GET YOUR STUFF TOGETHER,
GET ORGANIZED.
WE ARE MOVING ON THIS ONE!!
"They've come to see the touted reasons for the U.S. war effort as specious, the mission as Sisyphean and the consequences as profoundly unacceptable"
If it took California Demoks more than a nanosecond to see that war is profoundly unacceptable, and they were under sworn oath to uphold the public interests, then they were in grave violation of their oaths at the end of that nanosecond. It's been eight years. Furthermore, we have to emphasize that it's not only the consequences of war that are profoundly unacceptable, but any reasons for war are also profoundly unacceptable, and any war effort is also profoundly unacceptable. There's no "good war". The roads to war for Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were paved by the global cabal of warmongers/profiteers. The "good war" represents a "terrible failure" by the relevant societies to ostracize the warmongers/profiteers. The enablers of future wars are the likes of General G.W. (global war) Electric that today pays Huffington Post for ad space, to implant "good feelings for Uncle MIC" in the hearts of the audience. Just one of many examples of entrenched triangulation, the idea that oh we can keep supporting war while we "do good" in some way to compensate. Oops, murdered someone, let's compensate!
With the findings of all that oil north of Afghan, we must
stay there for Exxon, and run that pipeline to the ocean for
China and India. Why can't Obama be honest about it?
Good for the California Democrats! I wish others would do it, and it's possible this is a critical time for such dissent.
Yes, Pelosi is a scumbag, but this is a good thing.
Well well, thanks to Solomon, Bernal, and Winograd.
Applause for the Democratic Party in California ---- Man! I have waited a long time to say that.
..
I have to say I think the failure of Dems to arrange even a healthcare bill as a sop to their constituents probably drives this sudden spark of cooperation.
We might observe that pressure towards progress might garner response in distinct parts of the spectrum of issues.
So, for instance, if we can reject Frankenstein's Insurance bill, with its 1900 pages of sewn-together offal, we provide a motive for California Dems to separate themselves from the shame that 0 and Pelosi's greater-than-average betrayal progressively thrusts upon them.
So, hey, yo, California:
MORE GRUEL! MORE GRUEL! MORE GRUEL!
Yeah, the next move for the CDP ought to be a vote followed by a letter rejecting "Frankenstein's Insurance bill, with its 1900 pages of sewn-together offal." Now that on top of this letter would be impressive and mark a significant and positive change in the state party's power structure. The only effective challenge to federal power and policies comes from the states as it is still possible for a state party to remain independent of the DLC. And while I'm a Green, I heartilly endorse the above letter.
California here I come
minitrue:
With all due respect, politicians are no longer “bought.” They are leased. Within the ruling corporatocracy, diverse interests compete, via their congressional representatives, for money, power and privilege. No particular elite wins all of the time, of course; in the interest of fairness, they take turns. On any given issue, money cobbles together a coalition that determines which of the elites will triumph. No politician would be so foolish as to limit himself to being “bought,” permanently, by any one interest. It’s far more lucrative to put one’s vote up for bid, on issue after issue, to whatever moneyed interest will pay the best price as shifting coalitions vie to determine our political outcomes. We are ruled by a corporatocracy that is the lessor of two evils, the Democratic and Republican parties, neither of which represents the average citizen, both of which do the bidding of the donors who fund their political campaigns.
You nailed it!
The money doesn't care which party wins any given election, Democrat or Republican will do. If the voting public is sick to death of Republicans, the money shifts it's support to the Democrats. You're right, they take turns, probably knowing full well who will win an election long before we even vote.
That is why my wifes super wealthy uncle always hedges his bets and makes large contributions to both party's.
Sure. That is the basic method.
A given corporation may indeed have a preference who wins, but that that is no reason to avoid bribing anyone else who might or even anyone who might otherwise make a noise during a campaign.
I am following this discussion from The Netherlands. Most people here like this comment from our friends in California.
You know that we have also soldiers in Afghanistan and our parliament has decided that the troups should leave Afghanistan by the summer of next year. Also here is strong pressure from all sides to continue our presence in Afghanistan, for that reason I like the movement in your country to finish our military involvement in Afghanistan.
Keep it up, let the peace movement unite!!!!
"let the peace movement unite!!!"
It could be a collective world-wide voice for peace. We can make it so.
thank you Leo! If our governments prove intransigent ... well, we'll just have to do something about that,eh? We wouldn't be the first!
I agree.
Obama to California "Sure, we'll get out of Afghanistan. Just let us get that trans-Afghanistan oil pipline build for our petrodoners first!"
My Dad told me many years ago the definition of an honest politician. "One who stays bought." From what I've seen in the last few decades (especially the last) we have the most honest politicians that money can buy, all the way up to the oval office. Regardless of the wishes of We the People whom they are supposed to represent, they obediently give in to the orders of the wealthy oligarchy that pays for their campaigns (both parties) in hopes of getting yet more largess. Obama is proving no different. He just is a little more subtle than Cheney with his "F--- Y--!!'s"
Here are a few words of wisdom from a man who lived through the American Civil War and its aftermath.
"Who can sum up the horrors and woes accumulated in a single war?...War comes with its bloody hand into our very dwellings. It takes from ten thousand homes those who lived there in peace and comfort, held by the tender ties of family and kindred. It drags them away to die untended, of fever, or exposure, in infectious climes; or to be hacked, torn, and mangled in the fierce fight; to fall on the gory field, to rise no more, or to be borne away in awful agony, to noisome and horrid hospitals. The groans of the battlefield are echoed in sighs of bereavement from thousands of desolated hearths. There is a skeleton in every house, a vacant chair at every table. Returning, the soldier brings worse sorrow home, by the infection which he has caught, of camp-vices. The country is demoralized. The national mind is brought down, from the noble interchange of kind offices with another people, to wrath and revenge, and base pride, and the habit of measuring brute strength against brute strength, in battle. Treasures are expended, that would suffice to build ten thousand churches, hospitals, and universities, or rib and tie together a continent with rails of iron. If that treasure were sunk in the sea, it would be calamity enough; but it is put to worse use; for it is expended in cutting into the veins and arteries of human life, until the earth is deluged with a sea of blood."
Albert Pike
1809-1891
Things are no different now, only more costly and more deadly with the "improvements" in death dealing in the past century and a half.
War profiteers flourished in the Civil War as they have in every war, while the people suffered and died. Life is supposed to be a learning experience but I hate to think what the lesson is supposed to be from the current crew that is running, and ruining, ours.
War profiteers flourished in the Civil War as they have in every war, while the people suffered and died.
Quite. Rockefeller got his start during the civil war. He, of course, hired someone to replace him in enlistment.
Madame Defarge knew how to deal with incorrigible human predators.
Sioux Rose
MINITRUE: Excellent post.
The capacity for war profiteers to do their ignominious business would not be possible were it not for a media always clammoring for war and rendering of the soldier a hero by lying about the cause(s) he's sent to fight/pursue. A lot of machinery goes into the wiring of a public to massage its conscience away in favor of these redundant, calamitous outcomes that as you mention, only bear dark profit to a few who appear to possess no consciences whatsoever.
Sioux Rose,
Hi. I hope NYC wasn't too much of a pain.
In regard to your comment, I thought of the book "War and Peace". The author so cleverly ridicules the glorifying of war by showing the gore, dismemberment, hunger and chaos that begins with fancy parades and a call to arms. Our revolutionary war was rife with profiteering. Kevin Phillips explains how the early fortunes in the northern USA came from war profiteering. The northern states benefited from the slave trade as well but war profiteering was much more lucrative. Shays Rebellion was our first banker bailout on the backs of those who fought in the revolution. It was really a back door war profiteering scheme.
Every single influential family name in the USA has engaged in, or indirectly benefited from, war profiteering. This sin is squarely upon the elite of this country. They need to pay for this monstrocity.
Sioux Rose
AGG: NY was a good break from my rural life in North Florida. Thank you for asking. I had my "time" with Van Gogh and the Impressionists as food for the soul. And plenty of mundane food, as well. I didn't see any signs of the recession/depression along 5th Avenue, at the MET, in Little Italy, or on Broadway. Perhaps these are elite venues? I'm lucky to visit them once a year, if that.
After reading "Collateral Damage" a site previously posted by Yachtie, and being half-way through Parenti's book, "Contrary Notions," and half-way through "JFK & The Unspeakable," with Perkins' book waiting on my desk... I am definitely receiving a crash course in the dynamics behind war profiteering and who is involved in these diabolical debacles that are driving Western "civilization" off a cliff. Well over fifty million Americans think we are approaching the END of time, and since belief is a powerful thing, many from this ilk have no qualms about courting a military-style Armageddon that would lead to the fulfillment of their own dark prophecy. This leads one to reside in a state of paradox, grateful for their daily bread and yet mindful of all the suffering going on around them, some directly caused by the misleaders of their own nation.
Even I "think we are approaching the END of time." and I am not the slightest bit religious. I read Jared Diamond's book: Collapse. Mother nature's human experiment is turning out to be an utter failure. It's not just the fault of our "misleaders," The misleaders go along with the money, and we the people go along with the misleaders. We collude with them and they with us. Should we ask them to do what we can't do ourselves?
As responsible adults, when there are bullies in the school yard, don't we remove them and prevent them from harming more people. You say our "misleaders" cause a lot of suffering, which is true, but they're a product of nature, like it or not. There will always be those who are willing to kill and steal without a thought for others. As adults, the chance of their changing into loving, responsible human beings is close to nil.
Human nature has equipped us with a wide set of tools for every situation. That's why humans can put other humans into gas chambers by day and by evening return home for a nice family meal and a bedtime story for the children. What other animal has the natural capacity to be such a hypocrite? We can lie, it's in our natures. We can kill mercilessly, it's in our natures. We can steal. We can take advantage of others in cruel ways. The person who can't or refuses to do these things will lose and why shouldn't they, they're using only half of their great, natural talents, while those you aptly call the "misleaders" can use every tool in the kit.
As someone once said to me, "but we'd like to think otherwise, wouldn't we?"
here's the problem
the war in afghanistan is not an act of the american government - it was an imperial act of the psychopathic emperor dick cheney
it is a nwo initaive to secure the oil, gas and pipelines for the removal of the caspian basin resources
the puppet - president peacenik doesn't factor into that - except for his 30 peices of silver safely tucked away i am sure in a tax free off shore account
the sign should say:
government of the the united states - now under new management
Cheney gone, troops remain: management =.
By analogy with a corporate model, figure the same stockholders hired a new CEO because he could charm the untermenschen while giving them -- us -- nothing.
This is a good start.
AD
This will be about the 10,000th time Obama will receive this message. Will he "get it"? He hasn't thus far. Maybe the California delegation is big enough to get his majesty's attention for one minute but it's doubtful it can trump the power profile of warmongers like McChrystal and Bob Gates. There's never been any point to this travesty, except the war industry's divine right to profit from senseless death and destruction, which both parties heartily support. It's just business, the only real business this country can depend on, having outsourced the rest of our economy to the Chinese and Japanese. War is the "health" of the pathetic, enfeebled, regressive state we've now become.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WARSHINGTON, D.C.
The Great Obama to California Democratic party:
Take a long walk on a short pier.
This is as clear a shot across the political bow of the Obama administration as has been made by Democrats since January 21, 2009. California is the ATM of American politics, and the pithy truism of Jesse Unruh, "Money is the mother's milk of politics," applies.
Now, when will the real Democratic power in California sign on namely: Pelosi,Harmon, and Waxman.
No, they won't. Here's what I think those zionist sympathizers will do:
A fake liberal replaces Harman in the democratic primary to keep people from going third party.
Waxman retires and they'll try the same routine as with the Harman replacement.
Pelosi stays and hopefully, gets knocked off by Cindy Sheehan. That's a long shot but you never know in San Francisco.
AGG: I would not bet against your post, except for Pelosi, but I would love to lose that bet.
Yay.
-30-
Thanks to all the Calfornians who have created this positive rightous Statement.
A statement is not positive or righteous unless is backed up by deeds. We can say anything to ease our conscience. What is difficult is carrying through. That means bailing from your sold out retched party and, once and for all, supporting good people. Why are Americans afraid of good people? Obama promises to go after terrorists, escalate war, and he wins. Nader and McKinney together get less than one percent of the vote. What's that about? I'm against war so I'll vote for a war monger? I feel like I'm living in the twilight zone. No one in my neighborhood can speak ill of the child killer in chief. They can criticize his minions, though, that seems to be tolerated. Why?
The Dems are gonna grow as the peace movement Does.
This illustrates, once again, the influence of money in politics. The abundant and historically verified wisdom of the citizenry gets filtered out by a money-based electoral system, sending the whores of money (e.g. Jane Harmon) to Washington to "represent" a district that wants a completely different agenda. People who call themselves "Democrats" in California don't want repression or imperial wars but elect Diane Feinstein as their senator. Get $ out of politics or we're doomed.
If they were serious they'd bi-partisanly send in The Terminator, if not to the White House and Congress, then to Iraqiranistan, to finally finish this DEM miserepublican travesty!
Are these democrats the same ones that support Pelosi?
It's meaningless banter.
It reminds me of those strongly worded letters from Waxman.
I'll believe it when I see them marching to DC with pink slips in their hands. Otherwise, I'll consider it in line with the new O-balm-ahhh strategy: assure the masses, use the carrot to string them along.
California should secede.
Cali is welcome up here in Cascadia.
Hector -
No, no -- they should do all that they can to get as many state Democratic parties as possible to sign their brief!