EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
Popular content
Today's Top News
Published on Saturday, July 31, 2010 by CommonDreams.org
Out of Afghanistan
The war in Afghanistan is nearly nine years old—the longest in American history. After the U.S. quickly toppled the Taliban regime in October 2001, the Taliban, by all accounts, came back stronger and harsher enough to control now at least 30 percent of the country. During this time, U.S. casualties, armaments and expenditures are at record levels.
America’s overseas wars have different outcomes when they have no constitutional authority, no war tax, no draft, no regular on the ground press coverage, no Congressional oversight, no spending accountability and, importantly, no affirmative consent of the governed who are, apart from the military families, hardly noticing.
This is an asymmetrical, multi-matrix war. It is a war defined by complex intrigue, shifting alliances, mutating motivations, chronic bribery, remotely-generated civilian deaths, insuperable barriers of language and ethnic and subtribal conflicts. It is fought by warlords, militias, criminal gangs, and special forces discretionary death squads. Millions of civilians are impoverished, terrified and live with violent disruptions. There is no central government to speak of. The White House uses illusions of strategies and tactics to bid for time. In Afghanistan, the historic graveyard of invaders, hope springs infernal.
Neatly dressed Generals—who probably would never have gotten into this mess if they, not the civilian neocon, draft dodgers in the Bush regime, had made the call—regularly trudge up to Congress to testify. There they caveat their status reports, keeping expectations alive, while cowardly politicians praise their bravery. General David Petraeus could receive the Academy Award in Hollywood next year, as long as he doesn’t say what he really thinks, obedient soldier that he is. Listen to General Stanley A. McChrystal, not known for his squeamishness. Speaking of civilian deaths and injured at military checkpoints, he said: “We have shot an amazing number of people, but to my knowledge, none have ever proven to be a threat.”
On the ground are 100,000 U.S. soldiers with another 100,000 corporate contractors. The human and economic costs are huge. According to the CIA, James Jones—Obama’s national security adviser—and other officials, there are only 50 to 100 Al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan and 300 to 400 members of the group in Pakistan. The rest have scattered to other nations or just melded back into the population. Affiliates of Al Qaeda have emerged in the southern Arabian peninsula, Somalia, North Africa, Indonesia and other locales. There is something awry about this asymmetry.
The Taliban number no more the 30,000 irregular fighters of decidedly mixed motivations entirely focused over there, not toward the U.S. mainland. President Obama describes the Taliban as “a blend of hard-core ideologues, tribal leaders, kids that basically sign up because it’s the best job available to them. Not all of them are going to be thinking the same way about the Afghan government, about the future of Afghanistan. And so we’re going to have to sort through how these talks take place.”
Helping Obama “sort through” are drones blowing up civilian gatherings—by mistake of course—to destroy suspected militants often casually chosen by other natives because of grudges or the transfer of money. Helicopter gunships and fighter planes spread havoc and terror through the populace. “Special forces” go deeper into Pakistan with their secret missions of mayhem. Local resentment and anger continues to boomerang against the U.S. occupiers.
U.S. Army truckloads of hundred dollar bills are paying off various personages of uncertain reliability. At the same time, Obama’s representatives regularly accuse President Karzai of rampant corruption. In between, civilian Americans and USAID try to dig wells and construct clinics and schools that might not be there very long in the anarchic, violent, nightfall world of the Afghan tribal areas.
More military force is expected to clear the way for the assumption of Afghan-run duties and security in 2014 by a central government that is neither central, nor governmental. The locals loath the government’s attempt to collect taxes, and continue to survive by growing poppies (opium).
In early 2001, George W. Bush awarded the Taliban $40 million for stamping out the poppy trade; now Afghanistan is the number one narco grower in the world. U.S. soldiers walk right past the poppy fields so as not to turn the locals against them.
U.S. dollars pay warlords and the Taliban in order for them not to blow up U.S. conveys going through mountain passes, some carrying fuel that costs taxpayers $400 per delivered gallon. The Taliban receive half the electricity from a U.S. built power plant and collect the monthly electric bills in their controlled areas. The more electricity, the more money for the Taliban to fight the American and British soldiers.
Last year, over three billion dollars in cash moved out of Kabul’s airport unaccounted for, while billions of US dollars flow into Kabul for undocumented purposes.
Despite fighting against “insurgents” possessing rifles, propelled grenades and suicide vests, the Obama administration—with an arsenal of massive super-modern weaponry at hand—keeps saying there is no military solution and that only a political settlement will end the conflict.
Tell that to the Afghan people, who suffer from brutal sectarian struggles fueled by American and coalition occupiers and invaders. To them, there’s a disconnect between what Obama does and what he says he wants.
Meanwhile, the war spills ever more into Pakistan and its turbulent politics generates more hatred against Americans. These people had nothing to do with 9/11 so why, they ask, are the Americans blowing up their neighborhood?
President Obama says the soldiers should start coming home in July 2011, depending on conditions on the ground. He wants the Taliban commanders, whom he is destroying one by one, to agree to negotiations with Kabul that requires their subservience. His formula is peace through more war. But the Taliban are not known to surrender. They know the terrain where they live and they believe they can wear Obama down, notwithstanding U.S. special forces and drones expected to stay there for years.
Congress—an inkblot so far—needs to assert its constitutional authority over budgets and policy toward the war. Members are regular rubber-stamps of White House recklessness under Bush and Obama.
Furthermore, nothing will happen without a few million Americans back home stomping, marching and bellowing to end the boomeranging, costly invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and concentrate on America’s needs at home.
America’s overseas wars have different outcomes when they have no constitutional authority, no war tax, no draft, no regular on the ground press coverage, no Congressional oversight, no spending accountability and, importantly, no affirmative consent of the governed who are, apart from the military families, hardly noticing.
This is an asymmetrical, multi-matrix war. It is a war defined by complex intrigue, shifting alliances, mutating motivations, chronic bribery, remotely-generated civilian deaths, insuperable barriers of language and ethnic and subtribal conflicts. It is fought by warlords, militias, criminal gangs, and special forces discretionary death squads. Millions of civilians are impoverished, terrified and live with violent disruptions. There is no central government to speak of. The White House uses illusions of strategies and tactics to bid for time. In Afghanistan, the historic graveyard of invaders, hope springs infernal.
Neatly dressed Generals—who probably would never have gotten into this mess if they, not the civilian neocon, draft dodgers in the Bush regime, had made the call—regularly trudge up to Congress to testify. There they caveat their status reports, keeping expectations alive, while cowardly politicians praise their bravery. General David Petraeus could receive the Academy Award in Hollywood next year, as long as he doesn’t say what he really thinks, obedient soldier that he is. Listen to General Stanley A. McChrystal, not known for his squeamishness. Speaking of civilian deaths and injured at military checkpoints, he said: “We have shot an amazing number of people, but to my knowledge, none have ever proven to be a threat.”
On the ground are 100,000 U.S. soldiers with another 100,000 corporate contractors. The human and economic costs are huge. According to the CIA, James Jones—Obama’s national security adviser—and other officials, there are only 50 to 100 Al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan and 300 to 400 members of the group in Pakistan. The rest have scattered to other nations or just melded back into the population. Affiliates of Al Qaeda have emerged in the southern Arabian peninsula, Somalia, North Africa, Indonesia and other locales. There is something awry about this asymmetry.
The Taliban number no more the 30,000 irregular fighters of decidedly mixed motivations entirely focused over there, not toward the U.S. mainland. President Obama describes the Taliban as “a blend of hard-core ideologues, tribal leaders, kids that basically sign up because it’s the best job available to them. Not all of them are going to be thinking the same way about the Afghan government, about the future of Afghanistan. And so we’re going to have to sort through how these talks take place.”
Helping Obama “sort through” are drones blowing up civilian gatherings—by mistake of course—to destroy suspected militants often casually chosen by other natives because of grudges or the transfer of money. Helicopter gunships and fighter planes spread havoc and terror through the populace. “Special forces” go deeper into Pakistan with their secret missions of mayhem. Local resentment and anger continues to boomerang against the U.S. occupiers.
U.S. Army truckloads of hundred dollar bills are paying off various personages of uncertain reliability. At the same time, Obama’s representatives regularly accuse President Karzai of rampant corruption. In between, civilian Americans and USAID try to dig wells and construct clinics and schools that might not be there very long in the anarchic, violent, nightfall world of the Afghan tribal areas.
More military force is expected to clear the way for the assumption of Afghan-run duties and security in 2014 by a central government that is neither central, nor governmental. The locals loath the government’s attempt to collect taxes, and continue to survive by growing poppies (opium).
In early 2001, George W. Bush awarded the Taliban $40 million for stamping out the poppy trade; now Afghanistan is the number one narco grower in the world. U.S. soldiers walk right past the poppy fields so as not to turn the locals against them.
U.S. dollars pay warlords and the Taliban in order for them not to blow up U.S. conveys going through mountain passes, some carrying fuel that costs taxpayers $400 per delivered gallon. The Taliban receive half the electricity from a U.S. built power plant and collect the monthly electric bills in their controlled areas. The more electricity, the more money for the Taliban to fight the American and British soldiers.
Last year, over three billion dollars in cash moved out of Kabul’s airport unaccounted for, while billions of US dollars flow into Kabul for undocumented purposes.
Despite fighting against “insurgents” possessing rifles, propelled grenades and suicide vests, the Obama administration—with an arsenal of massive super-modern weaponry at hand—keeps saying there is no military solution and that only a political settlement will end the conflict.
Tell that to the Afghan people, who suffer from brutal sectarian struggles fueled by American and coalition occupiers and invaders. To them, there’s a disconnect between what Obama does and what he says he wants.
Meanwhile, the war spills ever more into Pakistan and its turbulent politics generates more hatred against Americans. These people had nothing to do with 9/11 so why, they ask, are the Americans blowing up their neighborhood?
President Obama says the soldiers should start coming home in July 2011, depending on conditions on the ground. He wants the Taliban commanders, whom he is destroying one by one, to agree to negotiations with Kabul that requires their subservience. His formula is peace through more war. But the Taliban are not known to surrender. They know the terrain where they live and they believe they can wear Obama down, notwithstanding U.S. special forces and drones expected to stay there for years.
Congress—an inkblot so far—needs to assert its constitutional authority over budgets and policy toward the war. Members are regular rubber-stamps of White House recklessness under Bush and Obama.
Furthermore, nothing will happen without a few million Americans back home stomping, marching and bellowing to end the boomeranging, costly invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and concentrate on America’s needs at home.
Comments are closed
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


110 Comments so far
Show All"Neatly dressed Generals—who probably would never have gotten into this mess if they, not the civilian neocon draft dodgers in the Bush regime, had made the call—regularly trudge up to Congress to testify. There they caveat their status reports, keeping expectations alive, while cowardly politicians praise their bravery."
That's worth a second reading.
Tic-toc...tic-toc
Mordechai - see Joe Bageant: "Waltzing at the Doomsday Ball" - I believe you will find a kindered spirit. http://www.joebageant.com/joe/2010/07/waltzing.html
All the best my friend.
thanks kalki for that link.................
if mordechai didn't appreciate it...........i did.
Mr. Nader forgets to address the primary reason the US went in Afghanistan, to secure the oil and natural gas pipeline and therefore maintain the American hegemony in the region, as determined by the Cheney's energy task force meetings in 2001.
Without addressing the cause, it's hard to understand or remedy the problem, don't you think, Mr. Nader?
The cost in dollars and blood means nothing to politicians and the corporations when so much profit's at stake and when they're personally out to make billions. Casualties, armaments and expenditures at record levels mean nothing when compared to the financial goals already achieved, and the ones which will be achieved in the next few years. The US will not leave.
Delia-
I wholeheartedly agree, notwithstanding the comment from Lingum.
Whatever Mr Nader actually "knows" to be true needs to be stated over and over till the cows come home.
Virtually everyone I know on a casual speaking basis in my small town (100K pop) knows absolutely NOTHING about the Afghan War(Imperial Colonization). They still spout drivel like "we're still searching for ObL" or, my favorite Bushism "we have to fight them there so we don't have to fight them here".
I kid you not - these idiotic pre-school, short-bus, rationales have been mouthed by our wonderful citizens as reasons to be killing untold civilians in countries these fools could not identify on a world map.
AND, for the most-part, these insipid comments come from civilians working for the DOD (White Sands, New Mexico - test ground for new-tech weaponry)... by the way, Sarah Palin is considered an American Godess and Profit among this crowd.
As a nation we are certainly doomed - we are swirling the drain of history... as It Should Be!
"Sarah Palin is considered an American Godess and Profit among this crowd."
When I first read this, I thought you didn't spell the word "Prophet" correctly. But on second thought, since you were talking about Sarah, I think you got it just right.
"Mr. Nader forgets to address the primary reason the US went in Afghanistan, to secure the oil and natural gas pipeline and therefore maintain the American hegemony in the region, as determined by the Cheney's energy task force meetings in 2001."
True. You are right about the reason why the US imperialists *went* to Afghanistan. And no doubt they will *stay* to continue to protect this particular energy interest.
However, there is a NEW reason to continue the occupation of Afghanistan. And I think it is important to add this reason to the list of why the US imperialists are over there occupying Afghanistan.
The US imperialists have discovered about 1 trillion dollars worth of untapped mineral deposits. check it out. This NYTimes article is even pretty brazen about it. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world
/asia/14minerals.html
I can guarantee that this amount of 'untapped resources' will keep the US imperialists in Afghanistan for many many more years to come.
That post is totally on the money!!!!!!!!!
Our Goverment sucks, and our people are either cowards, or monsters, to do nothing, and let this absurb shit go on and on. I hang my head in shame.
Well, what do you suggest? I hear this over and over--anger at the people for not "doing something"--but how do you begin? Where do you begin? I doubt people have the money to march on Washington these days.
Ralph Nader should organize rallies and speak. Surely many great writers on the internet from Antiwar to FDL would speak. Again, how and where do you suggest we begin? I really want to know.
Do you really enjoy poking in an open wound?
Do you think we need to be reminded that we have no voice...no representation...in our government?
That's truly not what I was doing. I was expressing the idea that, instead of blaming the American people for inaction, we need ideas to start movements and give people the venues to protest and speak (and, with any luck, scare those bastards who ignore and dismiss us).
We have a venue to speak, it's called the ballot box. Too many of us use it to say "aye" to the war parties ....
Let me repeat a phrase I've seen lately...If voting made a DIFFERENCE...it would be illegal.
The way we've been voting, you are correct, but that doesn't mean it couldn't make a difference ......
Voting is rigged, and besides, it doesn’t matter who you vote for on the ballot, they’re all the same. Ask Ralph how difficult it is to get your name on the ballot and to get into the TV debates. I’m tired of trying to pick the lesser of two evils while the person I want to vote for has strategically had their name removed from the ballot. That’s all arranged long before voting day. And if someone does, by a miracle, get their name on the ballot and should happen to win the vote, then the opposing (controlling) side just changes the numbers. And I still haven’t figured out how that Electoral College thingy works.
Voting isn’t going to change anything until voting is legitimized.
lefttown
I meant no criticism of you. I was using your comment as a springboard into my intended irony (which I don't think I carried off that badly), hoping that you wouldn't take it literally. Well, we all know about hope, don't we?
You don't have to explain your idea...it was crystal clear the first time...and meritorious.
Sorry if I gave offense...none was intended.
Live and be well (or whatever Spock used to say)
Thanks for replying. I didn't take offense. I just become so frustrated. I talk to so many people (and not just liberals) who say: "Something's going to happen. This sh*t can't keep happening." Then I think: "How? Who's going to light the spark that begins the nationwide protest?" I think when/if the marches and protests start, people will say: "That wasn't so hard, after all. Why didn't we do this sooner?" I guess maybe I'm just dreaming.
Others say you have to start at the local level, but I think we need more happening nationwide. We don't have the time to begin at the city or county level. Maybe it can be done in tandem. The guys who have Obama's and Congress' ear are grabbing everything in sight, like scavengers, and it has to be stopped before there's nothing left, including our liberty.
Don't vote for any of the bastards in Federal office now. Both the House and the Senate is corrupt to the core. Those 'honored' members are corporate pawns. Our government has been purchased by the wealthiest people in the land and is working for those people. Look at the voting record of Congress. Tons of money for the wars, the banksters and protections for the corporations. Hell, corporations have been given the rights of persons by the Supremos.
Democracy demands that representatives heed the people. This is not the case now, and you know it. We are on our way to Neo-Fuedalism. You must stop voting for the two corporate parties. How can you hope for any change if you keep thinking that one of these is better (or not as bad) as the other one? They are the SAME. Don't vote for either a D or an R. That is how we can begin to change things. First, kick out the corrupt and then we can start over.
Nice pen name, but you don't seem to realize that democracy is the structure in which there are no representatives; people express their political authority in person, as in Athens during the time of Pericles.
One votes to settle questions, not for one party vs. the other, because parties have no role to play in a real democracy. We can begin to change things by first putting in place a better system; this one mitigates against change.
You are correct that change is certainly desirable, even necessary, but it needs to be a lot more sweeping and fundamental than you know.
In every other country of the world, particularly the most problem-ridden ones, nobody asks: What can we do? Where do we begin? They just do what has to be done to make their life better locally, where they can actually have the power to change something. They don't worry about the problems of the world, only what they can realistically change. Only in America do they wait for a consultant, or the 'experts', or some corporation, or the messiah to fix things for them. Only in America do they take on the insoluable 'global' problems--failure is so much easier to excuse that way.
I would say we're slothful dolts.
People cant even connect the dots between our "war on terror" and their ever diminishing opportunities....
People can't connect the dots between "Capitalism" and their ever diminishing opportunities....
Delia,
I'm sure Mr. Nader understands better than most that we're there to protect "our" natural resources. I think his point here is what our presence there is doing to that unfortunate country.
Does he really, why doesn't Nader clearly state it then, why not call a spade a spade? What is he afraid of?
We need voices like his to expose the criminals and the reason behind their crimes.
100,000 US soldiers and 100,000 contractors versus 50 to 100 Al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan and 300 to 400 members of the group in Pakistan. What’s wrong with this picture?
Although a minor detail, why is Nader, along with so many others in the media, peddling revisionist history? Dating the war from the Gulf of Tonkin 1964 incident is incorrect since American casualties started in 1961. The first names on the Vietnam War Memorial begin from 1961 with the last after 1973.
The Afghan war will eventually become the longest in American history.
"The Afghan war will eventually become the longest in American history"
Don't look now... but it already is!
Once UncaSam comes to "visit" he tends to stay... sort of like the "White-trash distant relatives who are just passing thru and wanna say "Hi"...but then the van breaks down and lil Goober seems to be feverish, and sista Sophie-the-slut got knocked up by the local gas station attendent... Well, you know... we didn't mean to stay so long but... the circumstances, ya know.
Just imagine the Chinese building a mega-base on the outskirts of (insert your towns name here) insisting that they just "wanna protect you from the evil which surrounds you".
Get the picture???
"Although a minor detail, why is Nader, along with so many others in the media, peddling revisionist history? Dating the war from the Gulf of Tonkin 1964 incident is incorrect since American casualties started in 1961. The first names on the Vietnam War Memorial begin from 1961 with the last after 1973."
While this is true, I was in college during the early 1960's, and Vietnam was a minor feature of those times. We had a reversible involvement of up to 5000 "advisors" in country, no "combat brigades", and no major logistical commitment before 1964-65. The change under Johnson after Kennedy's death was overwhelming and all consuming.
It's also true that the original involvement dates from our support of South Vietnam's repudiation of the 1954 accords which called for nationwide elections shortly thereafter. That was under Ike ...
The argument that we are in Afghanistan because of the pipeline is partially true - IMHO we could "secure" the future pipeline and whatever else we need to secure with a lot less effort and cost. No need for an all-out war with 200,000 occupation forces and billions in wasted money. This war is obscene! No other word will suffice.
Mr Nader's article is one of the best, succinct summaries of the situation in Afghanistan - everybody should read and digest it. Pass it on! I did!
Cosmaustrian believes that "we could 'secure' the future pipeline and whatever else we need to secure with a lot less effort and cost." What should be pointed out is that this future pipeline is not for the United States to secure because [shockingly] of the simple reason that future pipeline does not belong to the United States just as the oil in Iraq does not belong to the United States. That is why, as cosmaustrian accurately notes, the war is obscene as is the occupation in Iraq.
"What a country calls its vital... interests are not things that help people live, but things that help it make war. Petroleum is a more likely cause of international conflict than wheat."-Simone Weil, Ecrits historiques et politiques, 1960
If more were able to walk the walk in the way that Weil did, change might be possible. But that's a tall order.
Bomb them with water purifiers and solar panels. Drop pre-fab school houses and books. Let money and apologies rain down on them.
Then say goodbye.
Why not?
Back at the beginning of all this I used to see bumper stickers that read, "All we are saying is give WAR a chance." Nine years later, I don't see them any more. So why not give something else a chance?
There may be billions in natural resources down the line but there are billions in the war, right now. It is no longer clear to me that there is any end, for TPTB, other than making war and making profits from doing so. The natural resources, pipelines, etc., are all just marketing tools, cover.
I am reminded of an article I read, possibly in The Nation, when I was a kid, (so we're talking a long time ago) entitled, "Bait the Hook with Merchandise" which made it clear that it was credit that was the product and the interest paid was where the real profits lay. Very good article, I never forgot it.
"I never forgot it." You SHOULD forget it. "...it was credit that was the product and the interest paid was where the real profits lay."
What are "real" profits? I suggest reading the Joe Bageant article that Kalki links to above or below, depending on your settings. Oh, hell. Here it is again:
http://www.joebageant.com/joe/2010/07/waltzing.html
An excellent article except I disagree that the generals would do anything differently.
The generals are as complicit as Bush and Obama.
These are generals for crying out loud!
What they say carries weight.
The goal of this war is not so much minerals extraction or oil.
The goal is to provide a huge bonanza for corporations like Hallliburton and Black & Veatch.
The goal is for the war to drag on as long as possible so these corporations make money building power plants, blowing up roads and buildings then rebuilding them.
General McChrystal's COIN strategy was an absolute guarantee for war without end.
Just like the concept of "We will leave when it is stable" or "We will leave when the Afghan Army is trained to take over."
Endless war.
Trillions of US dollars thrown into the bottomless pit of Afghanistan.
jstevens July 31st, 2010 1:44 pm -- I agree that "The goal of this war is not so much minerals extraction or oil. The goal is to provide a huge bonanza for corporations . . ." The warning of Eisenhower against the domination of the military industrial complex should resonate louder today than ever.
I don't think Nader made this point clearly enough. The Afghanistan war is another way of feeding the MIC monster. The reality is that al Qaeda is but a rag-tag gang of criminals (under U.S. law, at least) that has harmed us relatively little. Preventing terrorist operations is a job for law enforcement, not huge military establishments designed to oppose other military establishments. Americans must reject the MIC's myth that we can transform Middle East nations like Iraq and Afghanistan into western-style democracies using military force. We can't do that. We can enlist their help in using carefully organized law enforcement to prevent terrorists from carrying out plots against us from their territories. This while we make necessary changes in U.S. foreign policy to end the injustices, caused by the MIC's insatiable appetite, that motivate terrorists to attack us.
"To [Afghans], there’s a disconnect between what Obama does and what he says he wants."
--So they've noticed the obvious about President Obamanation? His modus operandi for years has been saying he "wants" something and turning around and doing the EXACT OPPOSITE. This is conventionally called hypocrisy, but the thorough adherence to this mode of "leadership" defines Barack Obama. Whatever the word is for 'hypocrite' raised to some exponential power, that's what Obama is.
This is a good article, but Barakus Obombus isn't naive, he's a cynical Daley machine politician as I've been thinking for sometime and as Taiq Ali pointed out in a Laura Flanders interview he and Oliver Stone were in recently. This is the reason we need a progressives and peaceniks for Cpolin Powell. The GOP national chairman has already called Obombus out on the Afghan war being his war of choice. It's time for progressives to start thinking the way I F Stone had the guts to think in the 1950s when he said "Vote Ike for peace." Powell can be our black Ike. Damn it. Let's damn do it!
AD
Yes, lets not forget sbout Collin Powell's discracefull son, Michael Powell..
This piece of shit once chaired the FCC at A critical time when he and one discusting woman named Abernathy pressed for our MSM-MEDIA consolidation/monopolization.
Thanks to these two predator neo-con fixers our Radio, Television and Printed News is under A small handful of Corporate powerhouses such as Rhupert Murdoch and Fox News...
Collin Powell sold us out at the one critical moment when he could have spoken the truth about WMD's to the UN Secutity Council.
Powell and his Stooge sons actions represent all that is wrong in this country in my book...
i vote that he get "first chair" at the hague.....
This is a good article, but Barakus Obombus isn't naive, he's a cynical Daley machine politician as I've been thinking for sometime and as Taiq Ali pointed out in a Laura Flanders interview he and Oliver Stone were in recently. This is the reason we need a progressives and peaceniks for Cpolin Powell. The GOP national chairman has already called Obombus out on the Afghan war being his war of choice. It's time for progressives to start thinking the way I F Stone had the guts to think in the 1950s when he said "Vote Ike for peace." Powell can be our black Ike. Damn it. Let's damn do it!
AD
The same Powell who lied what was left of his reputation away at the UN for the guy he saluted as commander-in-chief?
Colin Powell is (was) part of the problem...NOT part of the solution.
Simply look at the second paragraph ... a single sentence that puts the whole mess in a teacup.
Nader was the presidential candidate of a recognized (Green) political party in the U.S. in 2004. The two-party "system" was so terrified of him that not only was he not allowed to be a part of the "debates", he was BARRED FROM ENTERING THE BUILDING BY POLICE, although he had a ticket for a seat in the audience.
If that doesn't send a message about how important it is to maintain the two- party system (so easy to control), nothing will.
Nader, a model of truth and clarity when it comes to articulating progressive views, is NOT A REGULAR ON, SAY, PBS NEWS HOUR. Why not? He, like Dennis Kucinich, is kept as far as possible from public view as possible, and that includes the inaccurately named "public" television.
If I recall correctly, the "debates" incident you refer to occurred in Miami...not in the United States.
And furthermore...
I'm no big fan of "public" television, but it was PBS that put on the first Dem debate in some junior college in AZ or NM...partly in Spanish? Richardson gave his whole spiel in Spanish? Dennis almost choked trying to get out the right answer to the one good question (asked by Ray Suarez), but he managed to spit it out.
As I recall, Dennis shined on that one...got (maybe) the highest approval rating among the candidates (and they were all there). It's my belief that it was when (and because) he looked so good there that the long knives came out.
Best damned description of the "war" (slaughter) in Afghanistan I've seen. I'd suggest all those "anti-war" congresspeople use it in their speeches, but that would be tipping the hat to their "real enemy" - an independent political voice, and, heaven forbid, we could never do that .....
Oh, and just for laughs, check out the new, bipartisan, piece of legislation just introduced - this'll crack you up ...
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s111-3665
probably the main reason for the 'official' concern about this war is that we need the resources freed up and available for the invasion of Iran.
"Congress — an inkblot"
Ralph, this is one of your better essays. Thanks.