Thursday, May 13, 2010

Obama loves the war in Iraq too.

Iraq violence set to delay US troop withdrawal from the Guardian.

The White House is likely to delay the withdrawal of the first large phase of combat troops from Iraq for at least a month after escalating bloodshed and political instability in the country.

Here's what no Democrat wants to admit. From the day he took office, Obama has followed the same policy on Iraq as Bush.

Bush and the generals always promised a withdrawal. Bush always promised a withdrawal of some troops at some future date. The date was always dependent on some future milestone, usually an election of some sorts. Bush always said that some day in the future the Iraqis will be dancing around with purple ink on their fingers, and that will be the sign that Iraq has now 'stabilized' and that we can withdraw some, but not all of our troops.

For all of his faux anti-war rhetoric back in the primaries, Obama has continued exactly the same policy in Iraq. Obama promised exactly the same troop drawdowns as Bush, and the milestone that Obama was always pointing too was this recent round of elections. It took a long time for this to occur. First the elections were postponed from last summer (always a sign of a free and democratic country). Then they were finally held in March. And now there's been a long round of playing games with the election results, disqualifying candidates only after they won, and negotiations for a coalition.

But, the milestone is finally here. The Iraqis have formed their new government, and so now its time for the US to finally start withdrawing some troops..... Not!

It turns out that Obama has run exactly the same con Bush always ran. Now that the milestone is passed, suddenly we are told that the security situation is still dangerous and that we still have to keep all of our young Americans in Iraq.

Surprise, surprise, surprise.

What people have to wake up to is the fact that the Democrats have supported this war completely from the beginning. The Democrats voted to authorize this war. The Democrats regularly all line up and vote to fund this war. The Democrats have religiously protected war funding from any opposition since they took control of Congress in 2006. And Obama has firmly supported this war since taking office.

And now Obama has taken a page straight from the Bush playbook and is now announcing that because the CIA's candidate (Allawi) hasn't taken control of the country in the 'free' elections we've allowed them, that suddenly we have to keep a hundred thousand or more Americans in Iraq ... until the next mythical milestone/withdraw date that they come up with next. The message seems to be that American troops will stay until the Iraqis 'freely' decide to put the CIA's man back into power.

The Democrats have only been an 'anti-war' party for two brief periods of their nearly 200 years of existence as a political party. During the height of popular rebellion against the Vietnam war, the Democrats became anti-war from 1972-76. Then, when the party hacks retook control of their party, they changed the rules to ensure that this doesn't happen again (see 'super-delegates' for an example). The only other time the Democrats were anti-war was when they opposed Lincoln's call for the Civil War since the Democrats were the party of the slave owners.

The Democrats are not and have only rarely been an anti-war party.

Are the American people finally ready to wake up to the fact that the Democrats love these wars just as much as the Republicans. The war in Afghanistan has been massively escalated. A year of drone strikes has killed some 700 civilians and expanded the war to Pakistan. Now, Obama seems to want to use the Times Square dud bomb as an excuse to put 'boots on the ground' in Pakistan. And the threats to start a war with Iran haven't even slowed down as the (D)'s trade places with the (R)'s in the White House. One could seemingly make a 'morphing' video of SOS Hillary and SOS Rice doing the same saber rattling towards Iran. And his promises to withdraw some, but not all, troops from Iraq are now being revealed as a fraud. And least we somehow seem to have avoided a war with Yemen.

If the American people are sick of these wars, they have to start voting for someone besides Democrats or Republicans.

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Obama's War Drums

The war drums are beating loudly.  An incompetent bomber in Times Square appears to be leading to yet another round of war, death, destruction, maiming, torture and murder.

Clinton: Pakistan Officials ‘Harboring’ Bin Laden

'Consequences' if Pakistan car bomb link - Hillary Clinton 

US Threatens Pakistan Over Times Square Bomb

Of course, we've been bombing Pakistan for a year and a half now.
US Killed 700 Civilians in Pakistan Drone Strikes in 2009

So, if we are going to escalate and prove how tough we are over this sputtering amateur dud of a bomb, we have to do more that just our usual going and killing a few hundred (or a few thousand) innocent civilians in retaliation.

U.S. Urges Action in Pakistan After Failed Bombing

“We are saying, ‘Sorry, if there is a successful attack, we will have to act’ ” within Pakistan, one of the American officials said.

Does 'Sorry' cover murdering innocent people? Apparently so. If only Charlie Manson had figured that out, he could probably be Secretary of State today.

Of course, these post-bomb escalations almost always involve the US trying to use them to do what it had already been trying to do. In this case, its apparently the war-loving Obama's administration's wet dream to have American soldiers on the ground fighting in Pakistan.

That issue has been a source of growing tension between the countries. Pakistani officials, already alarmed by the increase in American drone aircraft attacks against militants in northwestern Pakistan, have been extremely sensitive about any hint that American ground troops could become involved in the fight. And attempts by the United States to increase the presence of Special Operations forces there even in an advisory or training role have been met with great resistance by the Pakistanis.

Of course, on the 'sunday news shows', you can't just declare war.  You also have to say you are going to take rights away from people.  That's the only way to get the approval of such corporate opinion monitors as Tim Russert and Wolf Blitzer.  

Holder Backs a Miranda Limit for Terror Suspects

Be careful not to get whiplash if you are trying to follow along at home.  For in this story the AG is now saying that this incompetent bomber is now part of a complicated plot based in, you guessed it, Pakistan.  Pay no attention to the minor detail that just a few days ago officials were telling us with great certainty that the bomber worked alone.  After all, its obvious to everyone that it took weeks of sophisticated 'terrorist training' for this bomber to try to strap together propane tanks and fireworks.

And of course no mention of how all the domestic spying and torture and video cameras on every corner didn't do a lick of good in preventing this attempt.  Instead, only cries that we must all give up even more of our basic rights as free Americans in order to make sure that this never happens again.

Israel of course can't stand it if they hear other war drums beating and not be beating their own.

Deputy PM: Israel ‘Primed’ for War With Iran

Of course, as time passes, we always start to learn that the previous war drums and war plans weren't all they were cracked up to be.

Pentagon Doubts Grow on McChrystal War Plan

And the wars we've already started keep adding to their running tolls of death, destruction, maiming and murder.

At Least 126 Killed in Attacks Across Iraq

Quick pop quiz.  Point out how the Obama administration sounds any different from Bush.  Doesn't it seem like one could make a 'morphing' video that goes back and forth between SOS Hillary beating the war drums and SOS Rice beating the war drums without, shall we say, a beat being missed between them.

Isn't everyone glad they voted for the candidate that was against the wars in the last election?  The big question is this.  Will the people who oppose these wars, and that's some 70% of the American people according to the pollsters, will they vote Democrat again?  Or will they vote for some real anti-war party further down the ballot?

If you keep voting for people who back and fund and continue the wars, then the wars will continue.