[Peace-discuss] Scahill: What Obama's appointments signify

[Morton K. Brussel]

 From Jeremy Scahill in the Guardian, UK.

I agree with Scahill in his convincing condemnation of the OB  
appointments, and what they imply, but I still harbor the thought  
that the proof will come after the inauguration (and such protests as  
the anti-war demonstration in DC on March 19th, anniversary of the  
Iraq aggression).  --mkb

…
>     Obama's starry-eyed defenders have tried to downplay the  
> importance of his cabinet selections, saying Obama will call the  
> shots, but the ruling elite in this country see it for what it is.  
> Karl Rove, "Bush's Brain", called Obama's cabinet selections,  
> "reassuring", which itself is disconcerting, but neoconservative  
> leader and former McCain campaign staffer Max Boot summed it up  
> best. "I am gobsmacked by these appointments, most of which could  
> just as easily have come from a President McCain," Boot wrote. The  
> appointment of General Jones and the retention of Gates at defence  
> "all but puts an end to the 16-month timetable for withdrawal from  
> Iraq, the unconditional summits with dictators and other  
> foolishness that once emanated from the Obama campaign."
>
>     Boot added that Hillary Clinton will be a "powerful" voice "for  
> 'neoliberalism' which is not so different in many respects from  
> 'neoconservativism.'" Boot's buddy, Michael Goldfarb, wrote in The  
> Weekly Standard, the official organ of the neoconservative  
> movement, that he sees "certainly nothing that represents a drastic  
> change in how Washington does business. The expectation is that  
> Obama is set to continue the course set by Bush in his second term."
>
>     There is not a single, solid anti-war voice in the upper  
> echelons of the Obama foreign policy apparatus. And this is the  
> point: Obama is not going to fundamentally change US foreign  
> policy. He is a status quo Democrat. And that is why the mono- 
> partisan Washington insiders are gushing over Obama's new team. At  
> the same time, it is also disingenuous to act as though Obama is  
> engaging in some epic betrayal. Of course these appointments  
> contradict his campaign rhetoric of change. But move past the  
> speeches and Obama's selections are very much in sync with his  
> record and the foreign policy vision he articulated on the campaign  
> trail, from his pledge to escalate the war in Afghanistan to his  
> "residual force" plan in Iraq to his vow to use unilateral force in  
> Pakistan to defend US interests to his posturing on Iran. "I will  
> always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend  
> our security and our ally Israel," Obama said in his famed speech  
> at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee last summer.  
> "Sometimes, there are no alternatives to confrontation."

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20081202/48f2d816/attachment.html