[Peace-discuss] Street on Obama on the war

[Randall Cotton]

Mark, you're confusing analysis with stenography.

You are free to disregard Carl's analysis if you wish.

R

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chas. 'Mark' Bee" <c-bee1 at itg.uiuc.edu>
To: "Peace Discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Street on Obama on the war


: ----- 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 12:11 PM
: Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Street on Obama on the war
:
:
: > 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
:
:   Cite?
:
: , 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
:
:   Uh, what 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
:
:   Cite?
:
:  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."
:
:   Cite?
:
:  That way we can continue the policy under the cover of
: > responding to the "increased threat of terrorism." --CGE
:
:
:   Now you need a lot more cites.  Instead of showing that you are correct in
: your earlier descriptions, you appear to be digging yourself in deeper,
: apparently using the excuse that the positions you assign to Obama aren't
: available yet (in which case, one wonders how you arrived at your
conclusions).
:
:   You still need quotes of him saying that he thinks the US should retain
: control of the region and its oil, as you claimed in your previous response.
: Then you can back up your latest overblown characterizations above, if you
can.
:
:
: >
: >
: > 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