<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On the Carter administration, see the famous interview his National
Security Adviser gave to Le Nouvel Observateur in 1998:
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html"><http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html></a> (in
English)...<br>
<br>
"Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic
fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?<br>
"B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban
or the collapse of the Soviet empire? <i>Some stirred-up Moslems</i>
[sic] or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold
war?..."<br>
<br>
It's true that the US has been committing crimes in order to control
Mideast oil since the Truman administration, when we saw that we
could displace an exhausted Britain in the region. First, British
oil companies were replaced with American ones, and concomitantly
the US began the policy - which Obama continues - of controlling the
countries of the region by alliance, subversion, or aggressive war
(= what we were busily condemning German leaders for, at Nuremberg).
<br>
<br>
Benchmarks are our destruction of democratic government in Iran
(1953), which Americans have forgotten but the Iranians haven't;
adoption of Israel as our "cop on the beat" (as the Nixon
administration said) after they launched their 1967 war to destroy
secular Arab nationalism; our sponsorship of Saddam Hussein in the
Iraq-Iran war, 1980-88; our covert sponsorship of the
religious-based Hamas to undercut the secular PLO; and Clinton's
murderous sanctions on Iraq (by which he killed as many people as
Bush did, many of them children whose deaths were "worth it,"
according to Clinton's Secretary of State).<br>
<br>
The US has consistently demanded control of Mideast energy resources
since WWII, not because we need them - the US was a net exporter of
oil until recently, and now imports less than 10% of the oil we use
at home from the Mideast, mostly from our ally Saudi Arabia - but
because control of world hydrocarbon supplies gives us an advantage
over our real economic rivals, the EU and East Asia (China and
Japan). That's what Obama (and other presidents) is sending
Americans to kill and die for, so it's obvious that he like the
others has to invent excuses, especially when two-thirds of the US
public, even though they're being lied to, thinks the war a bad
idea. <br>
<br>
When Al Qaeda launched their criminal raids on US cities in 2001,
they were clearly and consciously staging a counter-attack to more
than a generation of US crimes in the Mideast. They said at the
time that there were three reasons for their counterattack: (1) the
sanctions on Iraq, called "genocidal" by successive UN overseers;
(2) the suppression of h the Palestinians by America's chief client,
Israel; and (3) the occupation of Saudi Arabia (and the Muslim holy
places) by American troops after Bush I's Gulf war, in 1991. <br>
<br>
It's not just those who point out that the Obama administration is,
by and large, Bush's third term who note the continuity of US policy
in the Mideast, which Obama if anything has intensified - as he said
he would, as far back as his campaign for the Senate, when he
discussed "surgical strikes" on Iran, still I think a real
possibility, along with open war with Pakistan. BHO is down with
the program, and only a few are criticizing it - of course many more
in the country that in Congress.<br>
<br>
<br>
On 10/21/10 8:05 AM, Gregg Gordon wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:984432.44559.qm@web114405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style>
<div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif;
font-size: 12pt;">
<div>Well, that strikes me as quite a stretch to lay
responsibility for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars on the back
of Jimmy Carter. I could take your logic just a small step
further and put it on FDR. Or William McKinley. Or James K.
Polk. Plus it ignores the question of why three subsequent
Republican presidents failed to end it, as your premise
indicates they should have done. It is a sad fact that since
the disastrous and misguided McGovern campaign (God bless
him), Democrats have been so bullied and intimidated by
charges of being anti-military (not that there's anything
wrong with that) that they too often feel compelled to prove
they have gonads. I thought Clinton kept Saddam around just
to have somebody to bomb when he needed to look tough. That's
murderous and deplorable and certainly won't get him into
heaven, but that's the political landscape we find ourselves
in. Deal with it. Anyway, wealth and power breed arrogance.
Americans, like the British, Spanish, Romans, and every great
empire before us, think we should have our way just because
God obviously loves us so. (If He didn't, we wouldn't be an
empire.) That's human nature, and liberals are just as
susceptible to it as conservatives. More often than not,
Democratic militarism just takes the form of seeing to it that
veterans actually receive the benefits they've been promised,
for which they get no credit whatsoever. And "spineless" is
not the same as "evil" in my eyes. The "spineless" need to be
encouraged. The "evil" need to be stopped. Who can blame the
Democrats for being spineless? Who's got their backs? The
left?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I'm a Bernie Sanders kind of guy. I don't really consider
myself a Democrat, but I caucus with them because I think the
alternative is so much worse. But if you <em>really</em>
can't see <em>any</em> difference between, say, Karl Rove and
Dennis Kucinich, I'm not going to waste any more time arguing
with you. You're not serious.<br>
</div>
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times new roman,new
york,times,serif;"><br>
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times new roman,new
york,times,serif;"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">
<hr size="1">
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b> C. G.
Estabrook <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:galliher@illinois.edu"><galliher@illinois.edu></a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> Gregg
Gordon <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ggregg79@yahoo.com"><ggregg79@yahoo.com></a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cc:</span></b> Jenifer
Cartwright <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jencart13@yahoo.com"><jencart13@yahoo.com></a>; Peace List
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:peace@lists.chambana.net"><peace@lists.chambana.net></a>; Peace-discuss
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net"><peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net></a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Wed,
October 20, 2010 11:09:24 PM<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b>
Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Fw: Money Can't Vote<br>
</font><br>
First, Iraq and Afghanistan are both part of what the
Pentagon calls "The Long War" (for oil) in the Mideast. So
far, the US has killed a million people in Iraq under
Clinton (whose Secretary of State said that the tens of
thousands of dead children were "worth it"); a million under
Bush; and apparently hundreds of thousands in AfPak under
Bush and his third (Obama) term.<br>
<br>
That falls short of the perhaps 4 million we killed in SE
Asia, but of course Obama's escalated murders in SW Asia are
in no way justified by being fewer in number than
Kennedy-Johnson-Nixon's in Vietnam. <br>
<br>
It's difficult to determine when the Long War begins, but it
takes a tick up in the Carter administration when Carter
(and Obama's) adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski sends Osama bin
Laden and friends into Afghanistan (before the Russian
invasion) "to give the Russians a Vietnam of their own," as
he said at the time, in the most expensive CIA operation to
date.<br>
<br>
If a Republican administration after 2012 brings Obama's
AfPak war to an end, then we'll have a third example of a
Democratic war concluded by Republicans in as many
generations. But that may not be likely. The news suggests
that the Obama administration is looking to expand the war
with an attack on Pakistan and/or Iran. It certainly isn't
looking to abandon the world's greatest energy-producing
region.<br>
<br>
Control of Mideast energy resources has been a cornerstone
of US foreign policy since 1945. Obama is simply lying when
he says the war is to "stop terrorism" - it obviously
increases terrorism - but he has to lie, because the only
Constitutional authority he has to wage war in the Mideast
is Congress' "Authorization for the Use of Military Force"
of September 2001 - which is directed against terrorism. <br>
<br>
Something positive to do: years ago, there was a great
debate in America, "How do we get out of Vietnam?" The best
answer was given by Herb Caen: "Ships and planes." Load up
the troops and bring them home. The Russians did - and
survived and prospered from the end of their war.<br>
<br>
Eventually we did, but it took two presidents' being driven
from office and (even more important) a revolt of the
American conscript army to do it. <br>
<br>
Regards, CGE<br>
<br>
On 10/20/10 7:15 PM, Gregg Gordon wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times new
roman,new york,times,serif;">
<div>So I conclude from your statement that you don't
consider either Iraq or Afghanistan to be "major"
wars. So why are you so worked up about them? I
think you're just still mad at Lyndon Johnson.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>And please, don't accuse me of being some kind of
racist who doesn't mind us murdering brown people.
That is <em>so</em> lame. It's just that not all of
us see the world in as simple terms as you seem to.
Simple solutions are nice, but they're mainly for the
simple-minded.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>All I'm saying is if you're so gung-ho on stopping
the war, why don't you come up with something positive
to do (as opposed to sniping from the sidelines) that
might help get us closer to that goal? We'll all get
behind you.<br>
</div>
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times new
roman,new york,times,serif;"><br>
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times new
roman,new york,times,serif;"><font face="Tahoma"
size="2">
<hr size="1">
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b>
C. G. Estabrook <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:galliher@illinois.edu"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:galliher@illinois.edu"><galliher@illinois.edu></a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b>
Gregg Gordon <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:ggregg79@yahoo.com" target="_blank"
rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:ggregg79@yahoo.com"><ggregg79@yahoo.com></a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cc:</span></b>
Jenifer Cartwright <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:jencart13@yahoo.com"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:jencart13@yahoo.com"><jencart13@yahoo.com></a>;
Peace List <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:peace@lists.chambana.net"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:peace@lists.chambana.net"><peace@lists.chambana.net></a>;
Peace-discuss <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net"><peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net></a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b>
Wed, October 20, 2010 5:10:40 PM<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b>
Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Fw: Money Can't Vote<br>
</font><br>
You are aware, are you not, that America's major
wars since WWII - called by synecdoche "Korea" and
"Vietnam" - were started by Democratic
administrations and ended by Republican
administrations. Since the current Democratic
administration has greatly expanded the killing in
AfPak, it's hard to argue that they're going to
reverse their policies. Voting for them is an
acquiescence to those policies. <br>
<br>
To say of Obama and the Democrats, "Let them kill
some Asians, because they might do some good
someplace else," is at best a counsel of despair, if
not an outright criminal attitude. Particularly
when it seems that they're doing precisely the wrong
things elsewhere, too - not surprisingly, because
they're working for the owners of the banks, the
insurance companies, the oil and construction
companies, etc. --CGE<br>
<br>
<br>
On 10/20/10 4:48 PM, Gregg Gordon wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times
new roman,new york,times,serif;">
<div>Maybe because there are other important
issues that she <em>does</em> agree with him
on. The only way you're going to find a
candidate you're in 100% agreement with is to
run for office. If support for the war is an
absolute deal breaker for you, fine. Not
everybody sees it that way. But if you think
the war will end sooner if more Republicans
get elected, I think you're out of your mind.<br>
</div>
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times
new roman,new york,times,serif;"><br>
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family:
times new roman,new york,times,serif;"><font
face="Tahoma" size="2">
<hr size="1">
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b>
C. G. Estabrook <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:galliher@illinois.edu"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:galliher@illinois.edu"><galliher@illinois.edu></a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b>
Jenifer Cartwright <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:jencart13@yahoo.com"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:jencart13@yahoo.com"><jencart13@yahoo.com></a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cc:</span></b>
Peace List <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:peace@lists.chambana.net"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:peace@lists.chambana.net"><peace@lists.chambana.net></a>;
Peace-discuss <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net"><peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net></a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b>
Wed, October 20, 2010 4:33:52 PM<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b>
Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Fw: Money
Can't Vote<br>
</font><br>
This guy supports the war. I can't see why
anyone on an anti-war list would contribute
to him.<br>
<br>
<br>
On 10/20/10 4:28 PM, Jenifer Cartwright
wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><font
class="Apple-style-span"
size="4"><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="font-size: 10pt;">Another
request for help...</span></font>
<div><font
class="Apple-style-span"
size="3"><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="font-size: 13px;">I
love this guy!</span></font></div>
<div><font
class="Apple-style-span"
size="3"><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="font-size: 13px;"> --Jenifer</span></font><br>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>