[Peace-discuss] Kinzer: Surge Diplomacy, Not Troops, in Afghanistan

[C. G. Estabrook]

On the contrary, I was urging a particularly vigorous debate. I was objecting to 
the tacit assumption that we were debating strategical and/or tactically 
options, within a general agreement on goals -- like Obama's fake opposition to 
the Iraq war. We should as clearly as possible expose and condemn the US war in 
the Middle East. --CGE


Robert Naiman wrote:
> So, you're against promoting a vigorous national debate? I mean,
> suppose we don't think a threat of civil unrest is plausible. Then why
> bother do anything, right? Might as well go back to bed.
> 
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 3:40 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at uiuc.edu> wrote:
>> The problem is that the new administration is committed to this plan -- as
>> they have said for a while.  It seems that a national debate would have to
>> be quite vigorous -- involving a threat of civil unrest, as in 1968 -- to
>> blunt the incoming administration's enthusiasm.
>>
>> (The Pentagon Papers describe how the Pentagon told President Johnson in
>> 1968 that it could not send more troops to Vietnam and still have enough to
>> control the US domestic population.  But we've not gotten to that point
>> today.)
>>
>> <http://www.stwr.org/the-un-people-politics/noam-chomsky-on-1968-/-vive-la-revolution.html>
>>
>>
>> Robert Naiman wrote:
>>> USA Today reports that Gen. McKiernan - top U.S. commander in
>>> Afghanistan - "has asked the Pentagon for more than 20,000 soldiers,
>>> Marines and airmen" to augment U.S. forces. McKiernan says U.S. troop
>>> levels of 55,000 to 60,000 in Afghanistan will be needed for "at least
>>> three or four more years." He added: "If we put these additional
>>> forces in here, it's going to be for the next few years. It's not a
>>> temporary increase of combat strength."
>>>
>>> We should have a vigorous national debate before embarking on this
>>> course. Contrary to what one might think from a quick scan of the
>>> newspapers, there are knowledgeable voices questioning whether
>>> increasing the deployment of U.S. troops to Afghanistan is in our
>>> interest, or is in the interest of the Afghan people.
>>>
>>> Bestselling author and former longtime New York Times foreign
>>> correspondent Stephen Kinzer argues the opposite in this five minute
>>> video...
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/kinzer-surge-diplomacy-no_b_149364.html
>>>
>>> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/12/8/15317/1502
>>>
>>> http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/38127
>>>
>>> --
>>> Robert Naiman
>>> Just Foreign Policy
>>> www.justforeignpolicy.org
>>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
>>>
>>> Ambassador Pickering on Iran Talks and Multinational Enrichment
>>> http://youtube.com/watch?v=kGZFrFxVg8A
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> 
> 
>