<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.aolmailapple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:aolmail_apple-converted-space;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>That is the tricky part.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Pushing for reforms that also empower people.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>David J.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram@hotmail.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, October 10, 2017 9:10 AM<br><b>To:</b> C G Estabrook<br><b>Cc:</b> Mildred O'brien; David Johnson; davegreen84@yahoo.com; Francis A Boyle<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Peace-discuss] Disturbing but unfortunately accurate !<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Carl is right, I see “universal income” as a neoliberal attempt to pacify the people from “system change”, but it maybe a first and necessary step in the process given our lack of jobs. <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Oct 10, 2017, at 07:03, C G Estabrook <<a href="mailto:cgestabrook@gmail.com">cgestabrook@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>J. K. Galbraith used to say that no one turns down a check signed by the US government. (Translation: we’ve got the money for good social programs.) <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The thousand US overseas bases is a jobs program, so bringing all US military home would require a new WPA - and a universal basic income at a living wage.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>That’s what we should be demanding. —CGE<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Oct 10, 2017, at 8:45 AM, Mildred O'brien <<a href="mailto:moboct1@aim.com">moboct1@aim.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Bacevich has cogently categorized my answers to the question why Americans don't react to end (or prevent) the wars we conduct. I would add one more: Wars/Pentagon produce jobs for a lot of folks (grunts as well as officers) who otherwise would likely be unemployed. If all the military personnel from all over the world were brought home, how could they find jobs? Politicians are not inclined to expend budgetary allocations on infrastructure and many other critical domestic needs--because "we can't afford it"--because of the defense budget, of course. The old circuitous argument, the proverbial elephant in the living room!<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Midge<br><br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: Karen Aram via Peace-discuss <<a href="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net">peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net</a>><br>To: David Johnson <<a href="mailto:davidjohnson1451@comcast.net">davidjohnson1451@comcast.net</a>><br>Cc: peace-discuss <<a href="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net">peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net</a>><br>Sent: Mon, Oct 9, 2017 8:59 pm<br>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Disturbing but unfortunately accurate !<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div id="AOLMsgPart_1.2_0227a8c7-5daa-499c-b9ce-c50a97e98e6e"><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Excellent article, and as you say, unfortunately accurate. <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>On Oct 9, 2017, at 08:57, David Johnson via Peace-discuss <<a href="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net" target="_blank">peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Disturbing but unfortunately accurate !</span></i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'> </span></i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>By Andrew J. Bacevich, an author, most recently, of<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span></span></i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0553393952/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20" target="_blank">America’s War for the Greater Middle East: A Military History</a>. Originally published at<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/176335/" target="_blank">TomDispatch</a></span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Consider, if you will, these two indisputable facts. First, the United States is today more or less permanently engaged in hostilities in not one faraway place, but<b> </b><a href="http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/scary-fact-america-dropped-26171-bombs-7-countries-2016-18961" target="_blank">at least seven</a>. Second, the vast majority of the American people could not care less. </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Nor can it be said that we don’t care because we don’t know. True, government authorities withhold certain aspects of ongoing military operations or release only details that they find convenient. Yet information describing what U.S. forces are doing (and where) is readily available, even if buried in recent months by barrages of presidential tweets. Here, for anyone interested, are press releases issued by United States Central Command for just one recent week:</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><a href="http://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/1324264/september-26-military-airstrikes-continue-against-isis-terrorists-in-syria-and/" target="_blank">September 19</a>: Military airstrikes continue against ISIS terrorists in Syria and Iraq</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><a href="http://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/1317427/september-20-military-airstrikes-continue-against-isis-terrorists-in-syria-and/" target="_blank">September 20</a>: Military airstrikes continue against ISIS terrorists in Syria and Iraq</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><a href="http://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/1318986/iraqi-security-forces-begin-hawijah-offensive/" target="_blank">Iraqi Security Forces</a> begin Hawijah offensive</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><a href="http://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/1319013/september-21-military-airstrikes-continue-against-isis-terrorists-in-syria-and/" target="_blank">September 21</a>: Military airstrikes continue against ISIS terrorists in Syria and Iraq</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><a href="http://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/1320711/september-22-military-airstrikes-continue-against-isis-terrorists-in-syria-and/" target="_blank">September 22</a>: Military airstrikes continue against ISIS terrorists in Syria and Iraq</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><a href="http://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/1322796/september-23-military-airstrikes-continue-against-isis-terrorists-in-syria-and/" target="_blank">September 23</a>: Military airstrikes continue against ISIS terrorists in Syria and Iraq</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><a href="http://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/1322828/operation-inherent-resolve-casualty/" target="_blank">Operation Inherent Resolve</a> Casualty</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><a href="http://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/1322838/september-25-military-airstrikes-continue-against-isis-terrorists-in-syria-and/" target="_blank">September 25</a>: Military airstrikes continue against ISIS terrorists in Syria and Iraq</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><a href="http://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/1324264/september-26-military-airstrikes-continue-against-isis-terrorists-in-syria-and/" target="_blank">September 26</a>: Military airstrikes continue against ISIS terrorists in Syria and Iraq</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Ever since the United States launched its war on terror, oceans of military press releases have poured forth. And those are just for starters. To provide updates<b> </b>on the U.S. military’s various ongoing campaigns, generals, admirals, and high-ranking defense officials regularly testify before congressional committees or brief members of the press. From the field, journalists offer updates that fill in at least some of the details — on civilian casualties, for example — that government authorities prefer not to disclose. Contributors to newspaper op-ed pages and “experts” booked by network and cable TV news shows, including passels of retired military officers, provide analysis. Trailing behind come books and documentaries that put things in a broader perspective.</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>But here’s the truth of it. None of it matters.</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Like traffic jams or robocalls, war has fallen into the category of things that Americans may not welcome, but have learned to live with. In twenty-first-century America, war is not that big a deal. </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>While serving as defense secretary in the 1960s, Robert McNamara<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="https://quotefancy.com/quote/1322097/Robert-McNamara-The-greatest-contribution-Vietnam-is-making-right-or-wrong-is-beside-the" target="_blank">once mused</a><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>that the “greatest contribution” of the Vietnam War might have been to make it possible for the United States “to go to war without the necessity of arousing the public ire.” With regard to the conflict once widely referred to as McNamara’s War, his claim proved grotesquely premature. Yet a half-century later, his wish has become reality.</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Why do Americans today show so little interest in the wars waged in their name and at least nominally on their behalf? Why, as our wars drag on and on, doesn’t the disparity between effort expended and benefits accrued arouse more than passing curiosity or mild expressions of dismay? Why, in short, don’t we give a [<i>expletive deleted</i>]?<b> </b></span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Perhaps just posing such a question propels us instantly into the realm of the unanswerable, like trying to figure out why people idolize Justin Bieber, shoot birds, or watch golf on television. </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Without any expectation of actually piercing our collective ennui, let me take a stab at explaining why we don’t give a @#$%&! Here are eight distinctive but mutually reinforcing explanations, offered in a sequence that begins with the blindingly obvious and ends with the more speculative.<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><b> </b></span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Americans don’t attend all that much to ongoing American wars because: </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>1.<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>U.S. casualty</i><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>rates are low</i>. By using proxies and contractors, and relying heavily on airpower, America’s war managers have been able to keep a tight lid on the number of U.S. troops being killed and wounded. In all of 2017, for example, a<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://icasualties.org/oef/" target="_blank">grand total</a><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>of 11 Americansoldiers have been lost in Afghanistan — about equal to the number of shooting deaths<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2017-chicago-murders" target="_blank">in Chicago</a><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>over the course of a typical week. True, in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other countries where the U.S. is engaged in hostilities, whether directly or indirectly, plenty of people who are not Americans are being killed and maimed. (The estimated number of Iraqi civilians killed this year alone<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="https://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/" target="_blank">exceeds 12,000</a>.) But those casualties have next to no political salience as far as the United States is concerned. As long as they don’t impede U.S. military<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space><b> </b></span>operations, they literally don’t count (and generally aren’t counted).</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>2.<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>The true costs of Washington’s wars go untabulated. <span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span></i>In a<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://www.edchange.org/multicultural/speeches/ike_chance_for_peace.html" target="_blank">famous speech</a>, dating from early in his presidency, Dwight D. Eisenhower said that “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.” Dollars spent on weaponry, Ike insisted, translated directly into schools, hospitals, homes, highways, and power plants that would go unbuilt. “This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense,” he continued. “[I]t is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.” More than six decades later, Americans have long since accommodated themselves to that cross of iron. Many actually see it as a boon, a source of corporate profits, jobs, and, of course, campaign contributions. As such, they avert their eyes from the opportunity costs of our never-ending wars. The dollars expended pursuant to our post-9/11 conflicts will ultimately number in<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/" target="_blank">the multi-trillions</a>. Imagine the benefits of investing such sums<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space><b> </b></span>in upgrading the nation’s aging<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/" target="_blank">infrastructure</a>. Yet don’t count on Congressional leaders, other politicians, or just about anyone else to pursue that connection. </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0553393936/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20" target="_blank"><span style='color:purple'><image002.jpg></span></a></span><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>3.<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>On matters related to war, American citizens have opted out. <span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span></i>Others have made the point so frequently that it’s the equivalent of hearing “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” at Christmastime. Even so, it bears repeating: the American people have defined their obligation to “support the troops” in the<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175912/tomgram%3A_rory_fanning,_why_do_we_keep_thanking_the_troops/" target="_blank">narrowest</a><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>imaginable<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175423/tomgram%3A_andrew_bacevich,_playing_ball_with_the_pentagon/" target="_blank">terms</a>, ensuring above all that such support requires absolutely no sacrifice on their part. Members of Congress abet this civic apathy, while also taking steps to<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/gop-leaders-quietly-remove-language-repealing-post-911-military-authorization-from-defense-bill/article/2629075" target="_blank">insulate</a>themselves from responsibility. In effect, citizens and their elected representatives in Washington agree: supporting the troops means deferring to the commander in chief, without inquiring about whether what he has the troops doing makes the slightest sense. Yes, we set down our beers long enough to applaud those in uniform and<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/patriots/the_blitz/2017/09/devin_mccourty_explains_why_patriots_knelt_during_national_anthem" target="_blank">boo</a><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>those who decline to participate in mandatory rituals of patriotism. What we don’t do is demand anything remotely approximating actual accountability.</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>4.<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>Terrorism gets hyped and hyped and hyped some more.<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span></i>While international terrorism isn’t a trivial problem (and wasn’t for decades before 9/11), it comes<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/you-re-more-likely-die-choking-be-killed-foreign-terrorists-n715141" target="_blank">nowhere close</a><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>to posing an existential threat to the United States. Indeed, other threats, notably the impact of climate change, constitute a far greater danger to the wellbeing of Americans. Worried about the safety of your children or grandchildren? The opioid epidemic constitutes an infinitely greater danger than “Islamic radicalism.” Yet having been sold a bill of goods about a “war on terror” that is essential for “keeping America safe,” mere citizens are easily persuaded that scattering U.S. troops throughout the Islamic world while dropping bombs on designated evildoers is helping win the former while guaranteeing the latter. To question that proposition becomes tantamount to suggesting that God might not have given Moses two stone tablets after all.</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>5.<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>Blather crowds out substance.<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span></i>When it comes to foreign policy, American public discourse is — not to put too fine a point on it — vacuous, insipid, and mindlessly repetitive. William Safire of the<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>New York Times<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span></i>once characterized American political rhetoric as BOMFOG, with those running for high office relentlessly touting the Brotherhood of Man and the Fatherhood of God. Ask a politician, Republican or Democrat, to expound on this country’s role in the world, and then brace yourself for some variant of WOSFAD, as the speaker insists that it is incumbent upon the World’s Only Superpower to spread Freedom and Democracy. Terms like<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>leadership<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span></i>and<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>indispensable<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span></i>are introduced, along with warnings about the dangers of<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>isolationism<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span></i>and<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>appeasement,<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span></i>embellished with ominous references to<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>Munich</i>. Such grandiose posturing makes it unnecessary to probe too deeply into the actual origins and purposes of American wars, past or present, or assess the likelihood of ongoing wars ending in some approximation of actual success. Cheerleading displaces serious thought.</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>6.<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>Besides, we’re too busy.<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span></i> Think of this as a corollary to point five. Even if the present-day American political scene included figures like Senators<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://progressive.org/dispatches/robert-la-follette-america-s-anti-imperialist-prophet/" target="_blank">Robert La Follette</a><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>or<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00G4JFCTK/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20" target="_blank">J. William Fulbright</a>, who long ago warned against the dangers of militarizing U.S. policy, Americans may not retain a capacity to attend to such critiques. Responding to the demands of the Information Age is not, it turns out, conducive to deep reflection. We live in an era (so we are told) when frantic multitasking has become a sort of duty and when being overscheduled is almost obligatory. Our attention span shrinks and with it our time horizon. The matters we attend to are those that happened just hours or minutes ago. Yet like the great solar eclipse of 2017 — hugely significant and instantly forgotten — those matters will, within another few minutes or hours, be superseded by some other development that briefly captures our attention. As a result, a dwindling number of Americans — those not compulsively checking Facebook pages and Twitter accounts — have the time or inclination to ponder questions like: When will the Afghanistan War end? Why has it lasted almost 16 years? Why doesn’t the<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175337" target="_blank">finest fighting force</a><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>in history actually win? Can’t package an answer in 140 characters or a 30-second made-for-TV sound bite? Well, then, slowpoke, don’t expect anyone to attend to what you have to say.</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>7.<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>Anyway, the next president will save us.</i> At regular intervals, Americans indulge in the fantasy that, if we just install the right person in the White House, all will be well. Ambitious politicians are quick to exploit this expectation. Presidential candidates struggle to differentiate themselves from their competitors, but all of them promise in one way or another to wipe the slate clean and Make America Great Again. Ignoring the historical record of promises broken or unfulfilled, and presidents who turn out not to be deities but flawed human beings, Americans — members of the media above all — pretend to take all this seriously. Campaigns become longer, more expensive, more circus-like, and ever less substantial. One might think that the election of Donald Trump would prompt a downward revision in the exalted expectations of presidents putting things right. Instead, especially in the anti-Trump camp, getting rid of Trump himself (Collusion! Corruption! Obstruction! Impeachment!) has become the overriding imperative, with little attention given to restoring the balance intended by the framers of the Constitution. The irony of Trump perpetuating wars that he once roundly criticized and then handing the conduct of those wars to generals devoid of ideas for ending them almost entirely escapes notice.</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>8.<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>Our culturally progressive military has largely immunized itself from criticism. <span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span></i>As recently as the 1990s, the U.S. military establishment aligned itself with the retrograde side of the culture wars. Who can forget the gays-in-the-military controversy that rocked Bill Clinton’s administration during his first weeks in office, as senior military leaders publicly denounced their commander-in-chief? Those days are long gone. Culturally, the armed forces have moved left. Today, the services go out of their way to project an<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/09/29/air-force-academy-head-tells-racists-get-oudelivers-stern-lecture-wake-racial-slurs-found-prep-schoo/715755001/" target="_blank">image of tolerance</a><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>and a commitment to equality on all matters related to race, gender, and sexuality. So when President Trump announced his opposition to transgendered persons serving in the armed forces,<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/26/politics/trump-military-transgender/index.html" target="_blank">tweeting</a><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>that the military “cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail,” senior officers politely but firmly disagreed and<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/29/us/politics/mattis-trump-transgender-ban.html" target="_blank">pushed back</a>. Given the ascendency of cultural issues near the top of the U.S. political agenda, the military’s embrace of diversity helps to insulate it from criticism and from being called to account for a less than sterling performance in waging wars. Put simply, critics who in an earlier day might have blasted military leaders for their inability to bring wars to a successful conclusion hold their fire. Having women<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/21/us/women-army-ranger-graduation/index.html" target="_blank">graduate</a><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>from Ranger School or<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/22/politics/marine-corp-female-infantry-officer/index.html" target="_blank">command</a><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>Marines in combat more than compensates for not winning.</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>A collective indifference to war has become an emblem of contemporary America. But don’t expect your neighbors down the street or the editors of the<span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span><i>New York Times</i><span class=aolmailapple-converted-space> </span>to lose any sleep over that fact. Even to notice it would require them — and us — to care.</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify'><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'>_______________________________________________<br>Peace-discuss mailing list<br></span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'><a href="mailto:Peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net" target="_blank"><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:purple'>Peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net</span></a></span><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'><br></span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'><a href="https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss" target="_blank"><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:purple'>https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>_______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-<a href="mailto:discuss@lists.chambana.net">discuss@lists.chambana.net</a> <a href="https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss" target="_blank">https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>