Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Obama, War President
In 2008, many voters viewed Barack Obama as the peace candidate, but he’s turned into a war president.
On the campaign trail, he promised to get all combat troops out of Iraq by the spring of 2010. Then he extended that to the end of this year, and now his administration is trying to persuade the Iraqi government to sign an agreement extending the presence of U.S. troops there indefinitely.
And in Afghanistan, where Obama has tripled the number of U.S. troops, his administration is again backpedaling on withdrawal. Obama said he’d start bringing troops home this July, but that seems more and more likely to be just a token number.
He had vowed that all U.S. troops would be out of there by the end of 2014, but now his administration is negotiating with Kabul to have long-term military bases in Afghanistan.
And, of course, a month ago, Obama launched the war on Libya, which shows no signs of ending any time soon.
From his Nobel Prize speech to his Libya speech, Obama has become the chief advocate of war, boasting of its utility and expanding its justifications.
He’s turned into a better salesman for war than his predecessor, and he’s running the empire more efficiently—and with less antagonism.
More bombs, less bombast: That’s the Obama doctrine for you.
45 Comments so far
Show AllObama should have received the Nobel War Monger prize....oh, they don't have one yet!
Mat,
We've all made mistakes, the only thing that is really of consequence is that we learn from them.
The Progressive backed this enabler of the war machine in 2008. Please help us to fight it in 2012 and to build a movement against empire and the associated wars of aggression in the years to come.
That was no common "we've all made mistakes" mistake. It might be forgiveable for those who were ignorant of Obama's FISA vote, but for those in the media, they knew who and what they were backing.
They just don't want to take responsibility for it, because they like cashing it in. They'll do it again and again.
Exactly.
Brace yourself for the coming onslaught of "Obama may have disappointed us, but we can't afford to let the Repubs win" propaganda from the self-described progressive media.
GG and alternate id,
You may be correct, but I like to be a little less judgmental and a little more optimistic.
We need rags such as the Progressive to be on ther right side of history if we hope to progress. And it's hard to say if they sold out or they were ridiculously optimistic.
Obama had some supporters in 2008 that I know were committed long-time progressives or even leftists and they fell for the scam.
Pete Seeger is the one who blows my mind the most. If anybody says one word against this man I'll fight em. Pete is my hero. And I hate to say it but he drank the kool-aid.
Fact is, The Progressive made a mistake. Lots of people did. If they compound that mistake in 2012 we should write them off. Not yet, the enemy is strong and we need every ally we can find. This is the time to build bridges not close ranks.
No need to introduce "committed long-time progressives or even leftists" into this as it was clearly the media we were referencing.
So relax. I am not being judgmental and optimism has nothing to do with it. I am, however, predicting the future behavior of the media based on the past and present behavior of the media. Nothing exotic about that.
The msm has supported the duopoly for the entire history of the republic. Without exception. What's the revelation you are making?
One revelation is that your statement is false. Throughout our history there have been numerous occasions where the MSM got behind an independent candidate. It's not like you have to be a student of history to know this, ever heard of Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman? Of course you have. Do yourself a favor and next time skip the bombast.
Another revelation is that your reading comprehension needs tweaking. My comment referred to the "self-described progressive media". In other words, media that professes to be progressive yet supports non-progressive politicians when convenient. Parse that phrase again, it seems pretty clear.
In my follow-up comment, I shortened "self-described progressive media" to "media" mistakenly thinking you'd realize the subject had not changed. My bad.
Third revelation: Bernie and Joe are a part of the duopoly.
Fourth revelation: this dialogue is remarkably tiresome. Ta ta.
"Bernie and Joe are a part of the duopoly."
By whose definition? I could just as easily say they are part of the uniparty. So what? What does that have to do with you running in circles trying to misconstrue my original comment?
"this dialogue is remarkably tiresome"
But you made yourself respond anyway. You are such a trooper.
I suggest that the best way for The Progressive to make up for its mistake is by supporting a genuine third party leftist candidate in 2012. But one suspects that there is about as much chance of that occurring as there is of seeing The Nation abandon the Democrats and likewise throw their support behind a leftist candidate.
Supporting Obama was no "mistake" for those who's job it was to monitor politics.
His FISA vote - retroactive immunity for the telecoms, for gods sake - made it clear.
It was not a mistake - it was either a deep pathology, which negates him as trusted source, OR a cynical maneuver. Either way, he needs to get out of the way,
and you need to quit living in denial.
Mr. GoingGreen
Here is a little suggestion. Instead of coming across as being unjustifiably angry and hostile you might, if your re-read my comment, realize that my comment was directed at Iowapinko who observed that The Progressive had made a "mistake" by endorsing Obama. Instead of stupidly lashing out at me with your supposed super intelligence, why not take the time in addressing what I had actually written and that is that The Progressive and The Nation would do much better by endorsing an independent third party anti-war candidate in 2012.
The reason Obama experiences "less antagonism" against his wars is that Liberals are blind when one of their own commits crimes. Yes, Obama's an SOB, but he's their SOB and they'll stand by him and his morally bankrupt party. Liberals, unlike progressives, have allegience only to their party, not to truth, justice or the greater good. Liberals are the ultimate political opportunists--no values, no substance, just keep the power going.
Short, sweet and to the point about the current Liar-in-Chief, far worse than his predecessor. I read a brief line this morning about that "line in the sand" regarding the tax cuts for the rich, that Obama unequivocally will not support another extension? You want to bet on that one, too? In my inbox there was a plea from Sherrod Brown to sign a letter to Obama to plead with him not to accept the GOP proposal to private Medicare. Obama, if he even read such a letter, I imagine would give that cynical chuckle that he's known for when he thinks that progressives are being childish or silly in their demands. Kucinich just sent out another plea for donations so he can stay in Congress to fight to end the wars. Oh, please.
When these people make a very public statement citing their defection from the Democratic Party to join the Green Party or another progressive third party, then I will take them seriously. I am tired of the letters, the hand wringing and various instances of these same Dems voting to "save the Obma Presidency." These guys need to step back and do as Greenwald suggests -- accept what you see and the situation in D.C. will become a lot clearer.
How anyone fell for this carnival barker as "the peace candidate" back when he was glibly lying about what he believed and what he would do as president is the truly bewildering thing to contemplate. And watch how it will happen all over again next year, when he stands there lying his ass off and his clueless "base" comes rallying back to get him reelected. Anyone but (whatever Repugthug is coughed up)! Let's have more and more WAR administered by Democrats! We can call it progressive war!
He was screened and vetted. Obama had the qualities they sought. He was the perfect candidate. He still is. In fact, he's the perfect republican candidate. That's why the MIC and Wall Street will see to it he serves another term. Obama is like an intelligent Bush.
Imagine, 16 years of GWB.
I don't think that's what J. Lennon had in mind when he sang "Imagine".
Obama did not "turn into" a war president.
He always was one.
Those of us who clearly read his record and vow to expand the Afghan war were not fooled by his smooth rhetoric. My vote for Cynthia McKinney was a vote for someone who TRULY represented my beliefs, values, and interests, not someone who pretended to.
And, lest we forget, the peace candidate is also bombing Pakistan, maybe even literally if it's late and he's bored of 'Call of Duty'.
I use to say; atleast he didn't start these wars (Afghan/Pak, Iraq and terror) he just inherited them. But now Obama invaded Libya and lost all credibility. He is just another puppet for the Military industrial complex!
When Barack Obama voted for the FISA Bill and for continued funding for our war on Iraq, promised to ante up and expand our war in Afghanistan (which he's most certainly done), and took the exact same positions as John McCain during the pre-POTUS Election Foreign Policy debate, these things said it all for me. I didn't vote for Obama this time around, and won't do it the next time, either.
Being a third party voter, I must say it is wonderful that Democrats are seeing Obama for what he really is.
Nobama!
The frenzied, uncritical adulation for Bonnie Prince Obama, aka "Obamamania", that erupted during the 2008 campaign spiraled along a double helix: not only were so many voters sick to death of that creepy gringo Dubya-- Obama was a captivating abstraction, an optimistic Rorschach image rife with possibilities.
Team Obama carefully marketed the latter quality, but a desperate and needy public made the process that much easier.
As CommonDreams veterans know all too well, hard-eyed skepticism was rejected, discouraged, and vilified as unredeemed, self-indulgent "negativity" or "nihilism" both in and out of Internet comments forums.
I've written often about a relative who in many ways shares my political outlook, but who became captivated by Obama in 2008; like many others, he's much sadder but wiser now.
When reading articles and comments threads like this one, I recall the kinds of discussions we had during the campaign before things became too strained, and we simply agreed to disagree.
Like an infatuated lover who seeks to affectionately tolerate, discount, or deny his beloved's flaws, my relative was skilled at explaining away troubling statements, positions, and actions at every turn.
For instance, when confronted with Obama's naked militarism-- his confident assertion that he would prosecute a "smart" war in Afghanistan although he opposed the foolish Iraq misadventure-- my relative had a ready disclaimer: yes, Obama HAD to do a little "saber-rattling" to persuade a fearful and insecure public and even a dubious military that he was "serious" about national defense and security.
All this was part and parcel of the normative "inside politics" or pop-realpolitik that is still the staple of corporate media mainstream political analysis-- and Internet/"alternative" media analysis, for that matter.
My relative internalized a million sound bites from the likes of Michael Beschloss and Doris Kearns Goodwin to Mark Shields, and tendentiously explained that Democratic presidential candidates in particular must defend against the "historic perception" that they are weak on defense, blah, blah, blah...
So when Obama twirled his War Boner like a champeen drum-major, his wishful followers attributed it to his reputed skill as a Master Ninja Stealth Politician. Once he captured the Historic Presidency and assumed the Oval Office Throne, the rational, enlightened, pacifistic Obama would show his true colors.
Most, though not all, are now disillusioned, appalled, and heartbroken that the color turned out to be blood-red after all.
Very well said. You clearly get it. Does it puzzle you that so many don't?
I'll "third" it. Excellent prose & documentary, Obedient... you're becoming our forum's best political satirist. Perhaps you should self-publish a collection, "Obedient Servant No More!"
Obama's departure from his campaign persona has mystified, enraged and saddened...leaving many of us knowing even less about which way is up or down about life in general as we watch the unfolding of his 'regime's' part in the story.
I was awed and hopeful with the masses...for a minute. I dutifully read a couple of his books and as many praising articles as came my way. He was such a breath of fresh air in the fetid cloud that engulfs Washington. I felt empowered by his rise. His entire campaign was so full of promise and talk of change...almost mesmerizing in his delivery of hope. Just when we, especially the more down-trodden and disenfranchised, most needed it!
It was too good to be true!
How many times do we have to be at the butt end of that truth?
Maybe it is because we have been taught to hope. Hope is the beacon that has inured us to even the most intolerable and inhumane of human behaviors. It starts as insidiously as telling our children we hope the bedbugs don't bite (did parents really joke about THAT if they had bedbugs?)...we hope you do well in school (so you won't be a complete failure in our corporate providers' eyes)...we hope you find a good-paying job (so you can pursue the Great American Dream just like your Mom and I did).
We learn the hope lesson well. We believe in mythological texts that explain our existence through riddles and larger-than-life tales that will curl your hair or make your jaw drop in disbelief...because of how well we learned to hope. Shouldn't have to go much farther than that, but...fact is, we almost always believe the grass IS greener on the other side...because we have hope. We trust what the ''expert' media voices tell us...because we have hope...and we trust they would not knowingly deceive us. Then we hope we will not be deceived again next time.
Now, I'm not saying hope and trust are inherently bad...my life has been even more enriched through allowing myself to trust and to feel hopeful. I'm just saying when hope is masterfully crafted and wielded as a tool to deceive...to break that trust...that is where the problem lies.
Concerning the president...like I said, I felt uncomfortably hopeful with him. That feeling lasted less long on the inside than I let show. I think my real "oh-oh!" moment came when he was awarded the Noble Peace Prize. It wasn't the awarding of the prize...it was his strong references to the use of military power and war in the achievement of peace during his acceptance speech that I was most convinced we had another puppet...an even more clever and dangerous one.
I've heard and read many comments wondering how the president, a scholar and teacher of Constitutional law, could be doing what he's doing to the Constitution and in the name of the Constitution. I'm thinking that is precisely what made him perfect for the job at hand. Who better to help bend, pound, flatten and reshape our Constitution than a president who just happens to be an authority on said document?
His foreign policy and warring ways may or may not reflect Obama the individual, the father and family man, but his actions and policies as the president seriously contradict what we were initially enticed by. Candidate Obama was but a shimmering holographic image. A beacon of hope.
And so we go full-circle...over and over again...each time we encounter the too-good-to-be-true syndrome. We know better...but we have HOPE.
Let's hope Commander-in-Chief Obama doesn't deploy us all right into oblivion!
"I've heard and read many comments wondering how the president, a scholar and teacher of Constitutional law . . . "
I'm a lawyer. I argue constitutional issues (I have a brief due on May 2). I was taught by constitutional law scholars. Obama is and was no more "a scholar and teacher of Constitutional law" than I am a violinist.
Don't worry, Palin will fix it
Party on dudes!
She'd never get close to Obama's record-breaking success at implementing right-wing policy. The Dems would be falling all over themselves to oppose her.
Joke's on you 'bot. Have another drink.
I never bought that peace candidate garbage, and I always saw Obama for what he is: a dedicated servant of Empire and thereby of militarism and war.
The Obama term is a third Bush term, with this difference, however, that Obama runs a much smoother imperialist show. In another words, he is Bush with style. He's a yuppie Bush, one might say.
He is very adroit at pulling the wool over many citizens' eyes.
Mr. Hope has cemented the hopelessness and desperation of Amerikkkan political life. It is now a kind of Chernobyl sarcophagus.
Dear fedup2:
The electorate is always prey to hope. Hope is the morning hard-on of the soul.
Yea, I can remember my democrat friends telling that I was throwing my vote away, supporting Nader...
Obama has been making me sick for quite a while with his subtle war-mongering and the way he sells it, and continues to make me sicker every day.
And God Bless Tim Hetherington-a true hero and Humanitarian.
Thank you Hector for helping to explain his lack in that regard....it may even help explain why his governing style and words often produce pain and discomfort similar to what one experiences being closed up in a small space with the most inept beginner on the violin. Maybe he is failing so completely in his efforts to be the president because he is really a violinist.
I have read the other comments that Obomb-ma is a war paint wearing puppet now. But this shouldn't surprise anyone because, he has surrounded himself with war-drum majors. Such as Hillery Clinton, General Betray-us, and the defense sec, from the Bush administration. Obomb-ma has sold his soul to the devil, he has bartered his dignity for a dollar. Obomb-ma is not a true leader, but a follower of the same evil spirit that plagued the last condemned war policy makers.
As I read about how disappointed people are in him, I realized that people had put way too much faith in a mortal political figure like him. Please allow me a moment to share with you an inconvenient truth concerning this man Barrack insane Obomb-ma. Psalm 60: 11) Give us aid against the enemy for the help of man is worthless.
Isaiah 2:22 ) Stop trusting in man, who has but a breath in his nostrils. Of what account is he? Put not your trust in princes, Rely on God rather than on man, however exalted he may be. There is a work of protection and salvation which no man, however exalted can perform for you. A work which God alone who is the maker of all things and who never dies, can accomplish. Psalm 118:8-9
No one should even be surprised that Bomb-ma, won the Nobel Peace Prize. Because near the end of times as we know it today, war will masquerade as peace, and peace like war. You will not even be able to tell one season from the next. Just look at the unprecedented abnormal weather, breaking records with unheard of abnormality.
Revelations 12:9 And the great dragon was cast down the old serpent. he that is called the devil and satan, the deceiver of the whole world, he was cast down to the earth, and his angels were cast with him. Satan needs and uses a human hand to pull a gun trigger, in order to carry out his wicked deeds. So there you have it, Barrack Obomb-ma is serving under the will of satan the great deceiver, the deceiver of this weak war-making deceiver.
Truth, obomber IS a Mass Murderer, just as deadly as never elected Mass Murderers bush/ cheney... fascist amerika continues its slide into the abyss of failed empires: all good, and necessary for World Peace !