PDA

View Full Version : The Silence of the Antiwar Movement is Deafening



handy
08-27-2009, 09:12 AM
Walsh is spot on. The supposed "anti-war" party is fully supporting WAR by obama. They're exactly as monstrous as the Bush crowd. NO difference!
(I'll take that back; they're less honest about what they're doing.)


John V. Walsh: Cindy Sheehan's Lonely Vigil in Obamaland (https://www.counterpunch.com/walsh08262009.html)


August 26, 2009

The Silence of the Antiwar Movement is Deafening

Cindy Sheehan's Lonely Vigil in Obamaland

By JOHN V. WALSH

Cindy Sheehan will be at Martha’s Vineyard beginning August 25 a short way from Obama’s vacation paradise of the celebrity elite but very far from the Afghanistan and Pakistan and Iraq where the body bags and cemeteries fill up each day as Obama’s wars rage on. She will remain there from August 25 through August 29 and has issued a call for all peace activists to join her there. For those of us close by in the New England states and in New York City, there would seem to be a special obligation to get to Martha’s Vineyard as soon as we can.

A funny thing has happened on Cindy Sheehan’s long road from Crawford, Texas, to Martha’s Vineyard. Many of those who claim to lead the peace movement and who so volubly praised her actions in Crawford, TX, are not to be seen. Nor heard. The silence in fact is deafening, or as Cindy put it in an email to this writer, “crashingly deafening.” Where are the email appeals to join Cindy from The Nation or from AFSC or Peace Action or “Progressive” Democrats of America (PDA) or even Code Pink? Or United for Peace and Justice. (No wonder UFPJ is essentially closing shop, bereft of most of their contributions and shriveling up following the thinly veiled protest behind the “retirement” of Leslie Cagan.) And what about MoveOn although it was long ago thoroughly discredited as principled opponents of war or principled in any way shape or form except slavish loyalty to the “other” War Party. And of course sundry “socialist” organizations are also missing in action since their particular dogma will not be front and center. These worthies and many others have vanished into the fog of Obama’s wars.

Just to be sure, this writer contacted several of the “leaders” of the “official” peace movement in the Boston area – AFSC, Peace Action, Green Party of MA (aka Green Rainbow Party) and some others. Not so much as the courtesy of a reply resulted from this effort - although the GRP at least posted a notice of the action. (It is entirely possible that some of these organizations might mention Cindy’s action late enough and quickly enough so as to cover their derrieres while ensuring that Obama will not be embarrassed by protesting crowds.) We here in the vicinity of Beantown are but a hop, skip and cheap ferry ride from Martha’s Vineyard. Same for NYC. So we have a special obligation to respond to Cindy’s call.

However, not everyone has failed to publicize the event. The Libertarians at Antiwar.com are on the job, and its editor in chief Justin Raimondo wrote a superb column Monday on the hypocritical treatment of Sheehan by the “liberal” establishment. (1) As Raimondo pointed out, Rush Limbaugh captured the hypocrisy of the liberal left in his commentary, thus:

“Now that she’s headed to Martha’s Vineyard, the State-Controlled Media, Charlie Gibson, State-Controlled Anchor, ABC: ‘Enough already.’ Cindy, leave it alone, get out, we’re not interested, we’re not going to cover you going to Martha’s Vineyard because our guy is president now and you’re just a hassle. You’re just a problem. To these people, they never had any true, genuine emotional interest in her. She was just a pawn. She was just a woman to be used and then thrown overboard once they’re through with her and they’re through with her. They don’t want any part of Cindy Sheehan protesting against any war when Obama happens to be president."

Limbaugh has their number, just as they have his. Sometimes it is quite amazing how well each of the war parties can spot the other’s hypocrisy. But Cindy Sheehan is no one’s dupe; she is a very smart and very determined woman who no doubt is giving a lot of White House operatives some very sleepless nights out there on the Vineyard. Good for her.

Obama is an enormous gift to the Empire. Just as he has silenced most of the single-payer movement, an effort characterized by its superb scholarship exceeded only by its timidity, Obama has shut down the antiwar movement, completely in thrall as it is to the Democrat Party and Identity Politics. Why exactly the peace movement has caved to Obama is not entirely clear. Like the single-payer movement, it is wracked by spinelessness, brimming with reverence for authority and a near insatiable appetite to be “part of the crowd.” Those taken in by Obama’s arguments that the increasingly bloody and brutal AfPak war is actually a “war of necessity,” should read Steven Walt’s easy demolition of that “argument.” (2) Basically Obama’s logic is the same as Bush’s moronic rationale that “We are fighting them over there so we do not have to fight them over here.” There is a potential for “safe havens for terrorists,” as the Obamalogues and neocons like to call them, all over the world; and no one can possibly believe the US can invade them all. However, the ones which Israel detests or which allow control of oil pipelines or permit encirclement of China and Russia will see US troops sooner or later.

The bottom line is that everyone in New England and NYC who is a genuine antiwarrior should join the imaginative effort of Cindy Sheehan in Obamaland this week and weekend. We owe it to the many who will otherwise perish at the hands of the war parties of Bush and Obama.

1.See: War Coverage and the Obama Cult by Justin Raimondo -- Antiwar.com (https://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/08/23/war-coverage-and-the-obama-cult/)

Or go to Antiwar.com and make a contribution while you are there. It’s almost as good as CounterPunch.com.

2.See:https://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/08/18/the_safe_haven_myth

John V. Walsh can be reached at [email protected] He welcomes comments, and he looks forward to seeing crowds of CounterPunchers at Martha’s Vineyard this week and weekend.

Braggi
08-27-2009, 09:28 AM
Walsh is spot on. The supposed "anti-war" party is fully supporting WAR by obama. They're exactly as monstrous as the Bush crowd. NO difference!
(I'll take that back; they're less honest about what they're doing.)
...

There are actually a lot of people who were against the Bush war in Afghanistan that Obama inherited that have been speaking out all along. I'm one of them. I agree that a lot of the voices against war are silent against the Obama administration and I agree that's wrong. There are a lot of ways to reduce the hostilities in Afghanistan and these ways are not being implemented. I don't like it not one little bit.

OTOH, there are a lot of people in Afghanistan who are calling for the US intervention and are glad we're there. I find that hard to imagine though I've heard their voices on the radio and read their articles. I wish the US corporate media would focus more attention on this war and present a more complete picture to the people of the US.

I blame the corporate media and the Military Industrial Political Complex for the escalation in Afghanistan. I don't think it would be happening if we really knew what was going on there. Afghanistan is a thousand local problems not one central problem so I understand it's a big problem to do comprehensive reporting. We the People should still know more about the place and the issues because our children are dying there and we are once again destroying a country and smashing an economy that has suffered constant war for decades.

I don't have all the solutions but I know sending drones to attack wedding parties creates a lot of bad press. We should stop that immediately, withdraw our soldiers to "safe zones" and rethink our approach. Tossing out Bush era military "leaders" will be a step in the right direction including the Secretary of "Defense."

And yes, Code Pink and all the others should be out there demonstrating against this Bush war as well as calling for the closing down of most of our unnecessary foreign military bases. The current behavior on Obama's part looks really bad to me.

-Jeff

Clancy
08-27-2009, 10:15 AM
Walsh is spot on. The supposed "anti-war" party is fully supporting WAR by obama. They're exactly as monstrous as the Bush crowd. NO difference!
(I'll take that back; they're less honest about what they're doing.)

We don't have opposition parties, we have the greatest propaganda machine in the history of the world, promoting an elaborate illusion of democracy.

Progressives are still giddy over replacing Bush with a bright, articulate black man (truth be told, I am too) and they just don't have the stomach to accept that Obama is just another corporate puppet.

At least this puppet can read his lines and supports a more humanistic milieu at home than the conservative freakshow the GOP hosts, but I'm not holding my breath for universal health care or any of the other carrots the democrats dangle in front of us every election cycle.

handy
08-27-2009, 11:05 AM
We don't have opposition parties, we have the greatest propaganda machine in the history of the world, promoting an elaborate illusion of democracy.

True. And the propaganda machine works very well. 97% of the votes cast were for MORE government (Obama - McCain). Only 3% voted for smaller government (Green, Libertarian, Ron Paul).


Progressives are still giddy over replacing Bush with a bright, articulate black man (truth be told, I am too) and they just don't have the stomach to accept that Obama is just another corporate puppet.

True. And I'm not seeing any growth in stomachs, yet. Can't say I really expect to, either. Sad.


At least this puppet can read his lines and supports a more humanistic milieu at home than the conservative freakshow the GOP hosts, but I'm not holding my breath for universal health care or any of the other carrots the democrats dangle in front of us every election cycle.

True. And given public (state operated) education (propaganda/brainwashing), I see no trend toward learning to "grow our own carrots". Too many people still think they have a "right" to handouts (theft and redistribution from the productive to the "entitled").

So, the question remains. When will the so-called anti-war crowd realized that they just voted for the other wing of the War Party? When will they understand that they have been just as badly duped as the people who voted for Bush? When will they get pissed off enough to say,"Enough!!"?.

I don't see it happening...

Clancy
08-27-2009, 11:18 AM
So, the question remains. When will the so-called anti-war crowd realized that they just voted for the other wing of the War Party? When will they understand that they have been just as badly duped as the people who voted for Bush? When will they get pissed off enough to say,"Enough!!"?.

I don't see it happening...

I don't either. Might as well enjoy the spectacle, and, if you are so inclined, do what you can with the lives you actually touch.

Hotspring 44
08-27-2009, 12:55 PM
<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CSH%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} table.MsoTableGrid {mso-style-name:"Table Grid"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; border:solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-border-insideh:.5pt solid windowtext; mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> <link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CSH%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="Edit-Time-Data" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CSH%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_editdata.mso"><!--[if !mso]> <style> v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} </style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> <table class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style=""> <td style="border: 1pt solid windowtext; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 316.45pt;" valign="top" width="422">
… “We should stop that immediately withdraw our soldiers to "safe zones" and rethink our approach.”<o:p></o:p>
</td> </tr> </tbody></table> I agree with the vast majority of what was said except the withdrawing of our soldiers to “safe zones” (I am assuming by “safe zones” you mean within the borders of Afghanistan.). That is actually one of the main things that the Afghanis specifically and unanimously deplore.
Even the ones that do like us and want us there to help them would be absolutely disgusted if we did that. To them, that is extremely disrespectful, chicken hearted, and reminds them of the British when they attempted to take over Afghanistan many years ago. To them that would have the smack of imperialism and would only strengthen the very neo-religious, fractious, terrorist organizations into more of a solidarity and actually strengthen it to the demise of what were supposedly trying to do in the first place, which in itself is questionable. In reality, the only “safe zone” is back here at home in the United States. But we can be pretty certain that Obama won't do that anytime soon. <o:p></o:p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style=""> <td style="border: 1pt solid windowtext; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 316.45pt;" valign="top" width="422"> [quote=Braggi;96417] “There are actually a lot of people who were against the Bush war in Afghanistan that Obama inherited that have been speaking out all along.” <o:p></o:p>
</td> </tr> </tbody></table> When somebody inherits something, it then belongs to them.
For better or worse, those wars now belong to Obama.
Yes, Obama is winding down the war in Iraq. It is yet to be seen what will happen with regards to the US military bases in that area.<o:p></o:p>
As far as Afghanistan and Pakistan are concerned, considering the rhetoric coming from Obama I would say that at this point in time those belong to him now. In my humble opinion, Afghanistan and Pakistan war/s is/are no longer belonging to G.W. Bush et al. <!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shapetype id="_x0000_t75" coordsize="21600,21600" o:spt="75" o:preferrelative="t" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" filled="f" stroked="f"> <v:stroke joinstyle="miter"/> <v:formulas> <v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"/> <v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"/> <v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"/> <v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"/> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"/> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"/> <v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"/> <v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"/> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"/> <v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"/> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"/> <v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"/> </v:formulas> <v:path o:extrusionok="f" gradientshapeok="t" o:connecttype="rect"/> <o:lock v:ext="edit" aspectratio="t"/> </v:shapetype><v:shape id="_x0000_i1025" type="#_x0000_t75" alt="" style='width:17.25pt; height:11.25pt'> <v:imagedata src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\SH\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip_image001.gif" o:href="https://www.waccobb.net/forums/images/NewSmilies/2cents.gif"/> </v:shape><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]-->:2cents:<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style=""> <td style="border: 1pt solid windowtext; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 316.45pt;" valign="top" width="422"> [quote=Braggi;96417] “And yes<o:p></o:p>
Code Pink and all the others should be out there demonstrating against this Bush war as well as calling for the closing down of most of our unnecessary foreign military bases. The current behavior on Obama's part looks really bad to me.”<o:p></o:p>
</td> </tr> </tbody></table> Unfortunately, code pink and other antiwar groups all too often stand-alone.<o:p></o:p>
More regular people need to understand what's going on and send letters objecting to the war/s to their representatives and show up at vigils, etc. for their to be any iota of chance of that changing. <o:p></o:p>
I saw it coming during the election last November; people were acting like they were “high” on Obama, overly euphoric and not being realistic enough to see the politician through the euphoria. <o:p></o:p>
First and foremost; when people asked me what I thought about Obama last November, I told them that first and foremost he is a politician and it is yet to be seen, what kind of a leader he will be if he gets elected. <o:p></o:p>
Now that he has been elected we have some patterns that we can assess what kind of a “leader” he will be.<o:p></o:p>
Example: in regards to torture (and the rule of law for that matter, I might add); he wants to look “forward and move on” and “doesn't want to look back”. Personally, that attitude from the country's top law enforcement officer is absolutely disgusting and deplorable. <o:p></o:p>
My question is; does it mean that now that he has become one of the elite, has he become more of an elitist? What does it all mean is he more of a constitutional “scholar” or instead is he going to perform as the top law enforcement officer of the Constitution? Does he in fact believe that certain entities once they become in certain positions within the government are immune to the rule of law? Can anybody really adequately explain the rule of law when it comes to the torture issue relating to “national security”? <o:p></o:p>
I don't think this is too far off topic, because that is one of the most concerning issues facing the wartime situation since just after the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York happened. <o:p></o:p>
It really is a hugely concerning issue because respect for the rule of law (international law; Geneva Convention rules.) worldwide is at a minimum since World War II as far as I can tell. <o:p></o:p>
After all, we did, in essence “sacrifice” military personnel for the sake of rooting out and doing a regime change militarily in regards to Saddam Hussein in Iraq; insofar as, for example; somebody within the government illegally gave information to somebody and rooted out a CIA official for political gains, misled the American public and in so doing, lied about weapons of mass destruction, and (also) stating that those W.O.M.D. were in Saddam Hussein's control, and that they (WOMD) were presenting an “eminent threat” to Americans (on American soil, I might add) very specifically. Therefore I at this point will mention; the “fact” that there were no WOMD found in Iraq; nor was there any substantial evidence whatsoever that there ever was; or, America (or American interests overseas) was ever in “imminent danger” from “Iraqi WOMD”.<o:p></o:p>
That situation was used in a manipulative, abhorrent, and devious way to frighten the American public into allowing extraordinary rendition, torture, illegal spying on American citizens, the violation of 1st, 9th, 15th, amendments of the United States Constitution, and the right to habeas corpus, etc.(not to mention war crimes committed by Americans; and the vast amount of money squandered on Black-water and Halliburton et al etc.). <o:p></o:p>
So as far as I can tell, the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan has more to do with what happens at home then we might think.<o:p></o:p>
There is a certain status quo. It has to be undone, if we want to keep our democratic republic from getting taken over by oligarchs and American warlords.<o:p></o:p>
I think the first thing we have to do isn't necessarily protest wars, but we have to figure out a way to get the media into giving real information rather than infotainment. <o:p></o:p>
When it comes to certain things there should be more regulation, not less or none at all; (also more freedom to do more in-depth, investigative reporting without being threatened from extremists, or Dick Cheney's and Donald Rumsfeld's of the elite class) (Whole programs should be either known as, news, or opinions based on the news when they have the word and or meaning “news” given to program names specifically.
Such programs should have very clear and concise disclaimers in words and in writing at the beginning, sometime in the middle, and at the end of the program stating that they (the whole “Program/s) are primarily based on somebody's opinion regarding the (actual) news.
Also, large mass media corporations that have anything at all whatsoever that they call “news gathering” should be required to simply state the news as news without interjecting any opinions, unless they specifically state that this is the opinion of so and so; example: when a news anchor state's his or her opinion or reiterates that (opinion) for somebody else, they must say, whose opinion that it was and that it was an opinion and that it is not the product of an investigative report.<o:p></o:p>
Also, government should reinstate the equal time aspect of airtime when it comes to opposing opinions. And there should be at least 3 opposing opinions, not just 2. (So long is that there is a third opinion available.).<o:p></o:p>
We have a very long ways to go in very short time to get<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <u2:WordDocument> <u2:View>Normal</u2:View> <u2:Zoom>0</u2:Zoom> <u2:PunctuationKerning/> <u2:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <u2:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</u2:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <u2:IgnoreMixedContent>false</u2:IgnoreMixedContent> <u2:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</u2:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <u2:Compatibility> <u2:BreakWrappedTables/> <u2:SnapToGridInCell/> <u2:WrapTextWithPunct/> <u2:UseAsianBreakRules/> <u2:DontGrowAutofit/> </u2:Compatibility> <u2:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</u2:BrowserLevel> </u2:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <u3:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </u3:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--> there. The best time to start was yesterday, but the only time to start we have is right now. <o:p></o:p>
If “we the people” want to implement “change”, “we the people” will have to insist upon it without compromise or ever giving up.<o:p></o:p>


Hotspring 44.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p> </o:p>


[quote=Braggi;96417]There are actually a lot of people who were against the Bush war in Afghanistan that Obama inherited that have been speaking out all along. I'm one of them. I agree that a lot of the voices against war are silent against the Obama administration and I agree that's wrong. There are a lot of ways to reduce the hostilities in Afghanistan and these ways are not being implemented. I don't like it not one little bit.

OTOH, there are a lot of people in Afghanistan who are calling for the US intervention and are glad we're there. I find that hard to imagine though I've heard their voices on the radio and read their articles. I wish the US corporate media would focus more attention on this war and present a more complete picture to the people of the US.

I blame the corporate media and the Military Industrial Political Complex for the escalation in Afghanistan. I don't think it would be happening if we really knew what was going on there. Afghanistan is a thousand local problems not one central problem so I understand it's a big problem to do comprehensive reporting. We the People should still know more about the place and the issues because our children are dying there and we are once again destroying a country and smashing an economy that has suffered constant war for decades.

I don't have all the solutions but I know sending drones to attack wedding parties creates a lot of bad press. We should stop that immediately, withdraw our soldiers to "safe zones" and rethink our approach. Tossing out Bush era military "leaders" will be a step in the right direction including the Secretary of "Defense."

And yes, Code Pink and all the others should be out there demonstrating against this Bush war as well as calling for the closing down of most of our unnecessary foreign military bases. The current behavior on Obama's part looks really bad to me.

-Jeff