Obama: War and Peace

I wonder if the herring-smoking Norwegian judges could pull a Lucy/Charlie Brown football routine and pull the award back at the last minute.

Frankly I'd just as soon have Bill Moyers be commander in chief. This isn't a slam against Obama, who despite the constant yammering of his critics (who are mostly either armchair quarterbacks or simply bent on demonization) is likely among the best of a bad lot. I just happen to have a lot of respect for Bill Moyers. I hope Obama is making a wise choice, but I have doubts about the wisdom of remaining in Afghanistan very much longer.

"pull the award back at the last minute"

My guess is, they won't. It's too important that the world Feel Good and the USA be rewarded in a "symbolic" way for electing our President. And if that's not more than enough, he is actually going to try to get something tangible, of substance (a serious US commitment to serious reduction of "greenhouse" emissions), at Copenhagen. Sympathy for a tardy or insufficient health care outcome (at least he tried, and made people Feel Good, if nothing else) is the backup rationalization. And of course, there's the commitment already being made to put some terrorists on civilian trial in New York, which is an appeal again to people with just the Nobel PC Committee's leanings. The Prize is secure.

I don't buy the "Holy War to the death," part. It is a euphemism for the nobility of their cause. There are plenty of Christians in the US Army willing to comply with that analogy, willing to be Christian soldiers, fighting a holy war.

Call them whatever you want, but there is one place it is difficult to deny, and on this, I believe Moyers either did, or would agree-- They are an occupied country. They want the occupiers out. Their cause is more noble than ours.......they want freedom on their terms. We want their natural resources, military presence, and our form of Mcdemocracy, with our corporations at the ready to come in and teach them how to serve and buy services/products.

Imagine, if you can, what would happen if America were occupied? Millions of us would pick up our bebeguns and sling shots, whatever was available, and head for the woods. We would call ourselves freedom fighters.

Another ill-advised Obama conceit.
1.) c.1840 Brit's sent 6,500 troops, with 10,000 family members, aides, servants, etc.; 16,490 would perish while attempting to exit Afghanistan.
2.) in the 1980's, the Soviet Union fielded a force level of 100,000 troops for 10 years, ( about 35,000 more troops than we have there.) failed to secure a
victory, became bankrupted by the effort, and 4 years later, POOF, there was NO MORE SOVIET UNION.
3.) Remember the so-called "Strategic Hamlet Program" during the Vietnam war? We've been trying the same thing in Afghanistan, and just like what happened before...DOH!... most of the weapons the U.S. taxpayer furnishes to our "allies" end up in the hands of Taliban militants, who routinely use them against our troops.
4.) Did you know that Pakistan CONTINUES TO FUND several Anti-U.S. Taliban factions (It was Pakistan which covertly provided the original seed capital to form the Taliban, after all) using some of the 12.5 BILLION DOLLARS provided Pakistan by the U.S. TAXPAYERS ostensibly to FIGHT the Taliban?
5.) And, yes, you DID know that the Afghan troops we're training have an 80% illiteracy rate, and about a 0% allegiance rate to the corrupt Afghan central government of Pres. Kharzai, the U.S.-installed puppet.
6.) You knew that a.) the trillion U.S. dollars blown so far in Afghanistan was borrowed money, so the payoff price will be MUCH HIGHER. b.) that it helped trigger a global liquidity crisis AND drive up the price of oil, as so many oil exporting nations view our conduct in Afghanistan as CONFIRMING their worst fears about U.S. intentions in the region. c.) has provided our enemies world-wide with a virtual TUTORIAL on how to beat us, because after 8 years, the TALIBAN CONTROLS MORE TERRITORY
in Afghanistan than the U.S. does, whereas 4 years ago WE held the most provinces. Geez, at this rate, if we spend ANOTHER trillion dollars, and a couple thousand more U.S troops KIA, they -- meaning the Taliban -- will control ALL the Afghan provinces.

They've "adjusted" faster than we have.

Obama should have relieved Stanley MacCrystal on the day he was sworn in, based on the General's
participation in the cover-up of the circumstances of Pat Tillman's friendly-fire death. The there's the matter of a.) The General's insubordination and press leaks, b.) his blatant, flagrant careerist motives,
c.) his poor command performance in surrendering to the enemy those previously held provinces.

Apologists for Obama's continued involvement in this conflict have a lot to answer for. This "welfare for the military industrial complex" has ALREADY brought our economy to its knees. It is un-american and anti-american to support this war. When all is said and done, EVERY SINGLE CASUALTY will have been in vain. We are talking about Afghanistan, after all...

"I don't buy the "Holy War to the death," part. It is a euphemism for the nobility of their cause."

I have to disagree with you, spirasol.
Al Quaida and the Taliban continue to use this method as their primary means of recruitment in nearly every Muslim nation. There may be a scant percentage of "get the occupiers out" recruitment attempts, but they remain just that....scant. The longer we stay there, however, the more prevalent it will become.

and one more thing:

"Millions of us would pick up our bebeguns and sling shots, whatever was available".

Thanks to the 2nd Amendment, I'm able to defend myself, my community, my state, and (if need be) my nation with much greater weapons than BB guns and slingshots. Thank goodness.

Sorry Jefferson, that's the way it goes. Welcome to the disagreement
table. Your opinion is duly noted. Next..........

Hey Jefferson, Here's a little taste of the secular side of the aisle.........zealots one and all

http://sheilastuff.blogspot.com/

"The conservative religious right is a frightening political force driven in its efforts to divide and conquer by greed, an insatiable lust for power, and an ideology of hate. Its members, unable to drag God down to their level, have no qualms about elevating themselves to what they perceive as His level. They succeed in controlling the flock because fear -- especially fear of God -- is a great motivator. They use God not only as a weapon against millions who stand between them and their goals of replacing democracy with theocracy and of controlling the worlds resources and its people -- but as a divine justification for the destruction they leave in their wake.

No one was more adept at giving God credit for his killing fields than former president George W. Bush, who openly bragged that God had hired him to remove evil from the face of the earth. "I trust God speaks through me," Bush said in 2004. "Without that, I couldn't do my job." And, even before that, in 2003, Bush tried to round up a "coalition of the willing" for his Iraq slaughter on God's behalf. According to Charleston Gazette editor James A. Haught, Bush told then French President Jacques Chirac that "Iraq must be invaded to thwart Gog and Magog, the Bible’s satanic agents of the Apocalypse." Haught wrote."

I've always known that religious zealots exist in all facets of society. These zealots include Christians, Muslims, Humanists, and just about ever other belief group. I also know that these groups are dangerous when given power as is illustrated through world history.

I think the biggest mistake is for anyone on the left to assume that because someone is Christian, guides their life by the Bible, and also happens to be politically minded (care for the workings of their Democracy through action); that they represent the "religious right". That simply isn't the case.

Likewise, for someone like me to assume that a humanist automatically represents the political arm of the liberal movement is also wrong.

But the main focus of this article has to do with Al Quaida, the Taliban, and Afghanistan. In this particular example, the "religious zealots" are recruiting to fight Americans based upon the "will" of Allah - not based upon occupation.

The article makes no mention of the use of religion in recruitment
practices covertly or directly, consciously and unconsciously in the USA
military. So I ask what do we use a recruitment tools? That is what my
comment was about. I don't assume. I have read elsewhere of Christian
fundamentalist higherup military personnel giving speeches to line
soldiers, characterizing the enemy in negative religious terms and
elevating themselves in religious terms as "holy warriors." Hell, it is
the same principle in Dylan's old song, "With God on our side." Whose
side is God on?-- our side. Bush and the Neocons described it elsewhere
as a holy war. If the loyal opposition is Islam-- who do we describe
ourselves in this equation?

In addition to our prevailing religions, the western world is in the
grip of other pseudo-religious groups; technology, science, consumerism,
etc, but also Christianity. I assume our side uses whatever it can to
recruit soldiers (and for that you'll have to read elsewhere as to just
what they promise, how fat fetched and how much they deliver). I
suspect like any good salesmen, they size up their customer, what it is
they want, and set out to shape the package to their liking, so if it is
a religious context the conscript is interested in, that is very likely
what they get. Where I and the article part company, is the manner which
it sets out to demonize Islam as a recruiting tool, with nary a mention
of how our soldiers are religiousized in and out of theater.

I think I understand what you are saying. I've seen what you've described firsthand. In the past ten years, however, I have not. The last ten years happens to be most of the period since 9/11, so you'd expect it to be worse, but it is not. The military walks a tight rope with religion. Case in point: Major Nidal Hasan. It's a tough slope these days with PC and all the baggage that goes along with it.

I agree that indoctrination goes on everywhere as you have stated. But I have seen no "this is a holy war, boys.....God is our side" stuff in my tenure int he military. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, just not in front of or by me. I do know, however, that the Muslim extremists are recruiting using that very tactic in madrasas in many nations.

You already know I'm a man who is devoted to Christ. But our government should seek out all people who claim to kill in the name of God and destroy them. That goes for Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and anyone else who embraces extremism to justify terrorist activity. All governments should.