[Peace-discuss] Street on Obama on the war

[C. G. Estabrook]

The text of the speech doesn't seem to have been posted yet, but the 
Trib headline unspins the article a bit: "Obama urges gradual withdrawal 
from Iraq."  In fact, he doesn't propose withdrawal at all in the sense 
of giving up control of Iraq and its resources, but "redeployment" that 
might begin in "four to six months."

Obama doesn't doubt that "it remains possible to salvage an acceptable 
outcome" -- acceptable in terms of traditional US policy.  He actually 
wants to *increase* the number of Special Forces troops: otherwise Iraq 
could become "another Afghanistan or a staging area" for attacks on Israel.

The Sun-Times' article makes clear that Obama did *not* call for 
"bringing the troops home, instead saying some would be redeployed to 
northern Iraq, others to other parts of the Mideast and still others to 
Afghanistan."

"Obama conceded 'there's going to be overlap' in the proposals being 
advanced."  That is, the problem is finding a form of words that will 
sell the common war policy of Republicans and Democrats to an American 
public that's turned against it.

Obama's repackaging the snake-oil because the present labels aren't 
working, as he says: "'cut and run,' 'stay the course' -- the American 
people have determined that all these phrases have become meaningless in 
the face of a conflict that grows more deadly and chaotic with each 
passing day -- a conflict that has only increased the terrorist threat 
it was supposed to help contain."

That is, he wants to make the real popular demand to get out 
"meaningless."  That way we can continue the policy under the cover of 
responding to the "increased threat of terrorism." --CGE


Chas. 'Mark' Bee wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu>
> To: "Chas. 'Mark' Bee" <c-bee1 at itg.uiuc.edu>
> Cc: "Peace Discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 11:30 AM
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Street on Obama on the war
> 
> 
>> Look what Obama actually says, not how his charm gets the media to 
>> spin it. People look at the headlines and say, "Oh, Obama has changed 
>> his mind and is now for getting out of Iraq, as 61% of Americans 
>> are."  But in fact his position hasn't changed from what he said when 
>> he last held a PR-style town meeting in C-U.  Far from getting out of 
>> Iraq -- lock, stock and mercenaries -- he thinks that the US must 
>> retain control of the region with its forces and those of others, 
>> e.g., an Iraqi government that will do what we want.
> 
>  You left off his quote saying so.  This makes it tough to "look at what 
> he actually says" on that matter.
> 
>>
>> That's what he calls a "realistic" strategy.  We have to find Iraqis 
>> "to form a viable government that can effectively run and secure Iraq" 
>> -- primarily, secure control of the oil for the US. US Middle east 
>> policy will continue to be what it's been for generations -- control 
>> ME energy resources, now under the cover of the "war on terror."
> 
>  Again, you need a cite for that.
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss