[Peace-discuss] Re: Suggested text for Main Event flyer
C. G. Estabrook
galliher at uiuc.edu
Tue Sep 30 21:07:21 CDT 2008
The colors are just bold and underlinings in the original. I wasn't suggesting
the hand-out be anything but black and white.
We could cut the sentence Barbara questions (it's complicated...) and then be
sure that it would fit one page. Win-win, so to speak. --CGE
Barbara kessel wrote:
> What are we to make of the black text and the magenta text? Do you think
> you can get the entire text on one page? I like Chalmers Johnson and
> find the pentagon budget figure quite a stunner. However, I do not like
> the following sentence,
> "He seems to be unaware that these troops are actually volunteers, not
> draftees, and that they joined the armed forces as a matter of career
> choice, rather than because the nation demanded such a sacrifice from
> them." The words, "career choices" makes it sound like they had a lot of
> choices, which is not true for the low income people, particularly those
> from the rust-belt. It also ignores that those in the National Guard did
> not sign up for fighting foreign wars at all; never before have we
> fought foreign wars with the national guard.
>
> ....just one opinion. Barbara
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:25 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at uiuc.edu
> <mailto:galliher at uiuc.edu>> wrote:
>
> WE HAVE THE MONEY - IF ONLY WE DIDN'T WASTE IT ON THE DEFENSE BUDGET
> by Chalmers Johnson, author of Blowback (2000), The Sorrows of Empire
> (2004), and Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic (2006) --
> all on US militarism and imperialism
>
>
> There has been much moaning, air-sucking, and outrage about the $700
> billion that the U.S. government is thinking of throwing away on
> rich New York bankers who have been ripping us off for the past few
> years and then letting greed drive their businesses into a variety
> of ditches. In fact, we dole out similar amounts of money every year
> in the form of payoffs to the armed services, the
> military-industrial complex, and powerful senators and
> representatives allied with the Pentagon.
>
> On Wednesday, September 24th, right in the middle of the fight over
> billions of taxpayer dollars slated to bail out Wall Street, the
> House of Representatives passed a $612 billion defense authorization
> bill for 2009 without a murmur of public protest or any meaningful
> press comment at all. (The New York Times gave the matter only three
> short paragraphs buried in a story about another appropriations
> measure.)
>
> The defense bill includes $68.6 billion to pursue the wars in Iraq
> and Afghanistan, which is only a down-payment on the full yearly
> cost of these wars. (The rest will be raised through future
> supplementary bills.) It also included a 3.9% pay raise for military
> personnel, and $5 billion in pork-barrel projects not even requested
> by the administration or the secretary of defense. It also fully
> funds the Pentagon's request for a radar site in the Czech Republic,
> a hare-brained scheme sure to infuriate the Russians just as much as
> a Russian missile base in Cuba once infuriated us. The whole bill
> passed by a vote of 392-39 and will fly through the Senate, where a
> similar bill has already been approved. And no one will even think
> to mention it in the same breath with the discussion of bailout
> funds for dying investment banks and the like.
>
>
> This is pure waste. Our annual spending on "national security" --
> meaning the defense budget plus all military expenditures hidden in
> the budgets for the departments of Energy, State, Treasury, Veterans
> Affairs, the CIA, and numerous other places in the executive branch
> -- already exceeds a trillion dollars, an amount larger than that of
> all other national defense budgets combined. Not only was there no
> significant media coverage of this latest appropriation, there have
> been no signs of even the slightest urge to inquire into the
> relationship between our bloated military, our staggering weapons
> expenditures, our extravagantly expensive failed wars abroad, and
> the financial catastrophe on Wall Street.
>
> The only Congressional "commentary" on the size of our military
> outlay was the usual pompous drivel about how a failure to vote for
> the defense authorization bill would betray our troops. The aged
> Senator John Warner (R-Va), former chairman of the Senate Armed
> Services Committee, implored his Republican colleagues to vote for
> the bill "out of respect for military personnel." He seems to be
> unaware that these troops are actually volunteers, not draftees, and
> that they joined the armed forces as a matter of career choice,
> rather than because the nation demanded such a sacrifice from them.
>
>
> We would better respect our armed forces by bringing the futile and
> misbegotten wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to an end. A relative
> degree of peace and order has returned to Iraq not because of
> President Bush's belated reinforcement of our expeditionary army
> there (the so-called surge), but thanks to shifting internal
> dynamics within Iraq and in the Middle East region generally. Such
> shifts include a growing awareness among Iraq's Sunni population of
> the need to restore law and order, a growing confidence among Iraqi
> Shi'ites of their nearly unassailable position of political
> influence in the country, and a growing awareness among Sunni
> nations that the ill-informed war of aggression the Bush
> administration waged against Iraq has vastly increased the influence
> of Shi'ism and Iran in the region.
>
> In the past year, perhaps most disastrously, we have carried our
> Afghan war into Pakistan, a relatively wealthy and sophisticated
> nuclear power that has long cooperated with us militarily. Our
> recent bungling brutality along the Afghan-Pakistan border threatens
> to radicalize the Pashtuns in both countries and advance the
> interests of radical Islam throughout the region. The United States
> is now identified in each country mainly with Hellfire missiles,
> unmanned drones, special operations raids, and repeated incidents of
> the killing of innocent bystanders.
>
> ###
>
>
> Randall Cotton wrote:
>
> This goes right along with one of the suggestions made at the
> meeting
> (something on the economy), is also strongly anti-war and seems
> to me to
> be an excellent idea. Barbara is supplying electronic content
> for the
> Kenney events to Durl, who has volunteered to run off the
> copies, so it
> should be just a matter of posting the edited text to
> peace-discuss and
> Durl could take it from there. Someone pipe up if I'm wrong on
> any of this
> 8-)
>
> Thanks
> R
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "C. G. Estabrook"
> <galliher at uiuc.edu <mailto:galliher at uiuc.edu>>
> To: "Randall Cotton" <recotton at earthlink.net
> <mailto:recotton at earthlink.net>>
> Cc: <Peace at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace at lists.chambana.net>>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 11:37 AM
> Subject: Suggested text for Main Event flyer
>
>
> : Randall Cotton wrote:
> : >
> : > Someone is needed to create content for AWARE's "Main Event"
> flyer.
> : > One side of the flyer will contain publicity for AWARE's
> upcoming Dan
> : > Kenney events, but though there were suggestions for content
> for the
> : > flipside (see below in the minutes, under "Main Event"), no
> one has
> come
> : > forward yet to put this together.
> : > Contact: Randall Cotton, recotton at earthlink.net
> <mailto:recotton at earthlink.net>, 351-8644/722-8470
> :
> : > ...
> : > Flyer page 1 will be advertisement for Dan Kenney events
> : > Suggestions for the other side of the flyer:
> : > Something on the economy
> : > Something on local armed forces leaving this week to go to
> Afghanistan
> : > Something including the statistics that we disseminate via the
> anti-war
> : > electronic billboard
> : >
> : > Volunteer needed to assemble a second side for the flyer
> :
> : [Page 2 of the flyer should complement Kenney's topic by
> connecting the
> war and
> : the bailout (which is not dead). I'm willing to edit (and
> format) a
> selection
> : from the following piece by Chalmers Johnson (which is too
> long to fit
> on one
> : page). Johnson is the author of three linked books on the
> crises of
> American
> : imperialism and militarism. They are Blowback (2000), The
> Sorrows of
> Empire
> : (2004), and Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic
> (2006). --CGE]
> :
> : We Have the Money.
> : If only we didn't waste it on the defense budget
> : Chalmers Johnson
> :
> : There has been much moaning, air-sucking, and outrage about
> the $700
> billion
> : that the U.S. government is thinking of throwing away on rich
> New York
> bankers
> : who have been ripping us off for the past few years and then
> letting
> greed drive
> : their businesses into a variety of ditches. In fact, we dole
> out similar
> amounts
> : of money every year in the form of payoffs to the armed
> services, the
> : military-industrial complex, and powerful senators and
> representatives
> allied
> : with the Pentagon.
> :
> : On Wednesday, Sept. 24, right in the middle of the fight over
> billions
> of
> : taxpayer dollars slated to bail out Wall Street, the House of
> Representatives
> : passed a $612 billion defense authorization bill for 2009
> without a
> murmur of
> : public protest or any meaningful press comment at all. (The
> New York
> Times gave
> : the matter only three short paragraphs buried in a story about
> another
> : appropriations measure.)
> :
> : The defense bill includes $68.6 billion to pursue the wars in
> Iraq and
> : Afghanistan, which is only a down-payment on the full yearly
> cost of
> these wars.
> : (The rest will be raised through future supplementary bills.)
> It also
> included a
> : 3.9 percent pay raise for military personnel and $5 billion in
> pork-barrel
> : projects not even requested by the administration or the
> secretary of
> defense.
> : It also fully funds the Pentagon's request for a radar site in
> the Czech
> : Republic, a hare-brained scheme sure to infuriate the Russians
> just as
> much as a
> : Russian missile base in Cuba once infuriated us. The whole
> bill passed
> by a vote
> : of 392-39 and will fly through the Senate, where a similar
> bill has
> already been
> : approved. And no one will even think to mention it in the same
> breath
> with the
> : discussion of bailout funds for dying investment banks and the
> like.
> :
> : This is pure waste. Our annual spending on "national security"
> – meaning
> the
> : defense budget plus all military expenditures hidden in the
> budgets for
> the
> : departments of Energy, State, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, the
> CIA, and
> numerous
> : other places in the executive branch – already exceeds a trillion
> dollars, an
> : amount larger than that of all other national defense budgets
> combined.
> Not only
> : was there no significant media coverage of this latest
> appropriation,
> there have
> : been no signs of even the slightest urge to inquire into the
> relationship
> : between our bloated military, our staggering weapons
> expenditures, our
> : extravagantly expensive failed wars abroad, and the financial
> catastrophe on
> : Wall Street.
> :
> : The only congressional "commentary" on the size of our
> military outlay
> was the
> : usual pompous drivel about how a failure to vote for the defense
> authorization
> : bill would betray our troops. The aged Sen. John Warner
> (R-Va.), former
> chairman
> : of the Senate Armed Services Committee, implored his Republican
> colleagues to
> : vote for the bill "out of respect for military personnel." He
> seems to
> be
> : unaware that these troops are actually volunteers, not
> draftees, and
> that they
> : joined the armed forces as a matter of career choice, rather than
> because the
> : nation demanded such a sacrifice from them.
> :
> : We would better respect our armed forces by bringing the
> futile and
> misbegotten
> : wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to an end. A relative degree of
> peace and
> order has
> : returned to Iraq not because of President Bush's belated
> reinforcement
> of our
> : expeditionary army there (the so-called surge), but thanks to
> shifting
> internal
> : dynamics within Iraq and in the Middle East region generally. Such
> shifts
> : include a growing awareness among Iraq's Sunni population of
> the need to
> restore
> : law and order, a growing confidence among Iraqi Shi'ites of
> their nearly
> : unassailable position of political influence in the country, and a
> growing
> : awareness among Sunni nations that the ill-informed war of
> aggression
> the Bush
> : administration waged against Iraq has vastly increased the
> influence of
> Shi'ism
> : and Iran in the region.
> :
> : The continued presence of American troops and their heavily
> reinforced
> bases in
> : Iraq threatens this return to relative stability. The refusal
> of the
> Shia
> : government of Iraq to agree to an American Status of Forces
> Agreement –
> much
> : desired by the Bush administration – that would exempt
> off-duty American
> troops
> : from Iraqi law is actually a good sign for the future of Iraq.
> :
> : In Afghanistan, our historically deaf generals and civilian
> strategists
> do not
> : seem to understand that our defeat by the Afghan insurgents is
> inevitable. Since
> : the time of Alexander the Great, no foreign intruder has ever
> prevailed
> over
> : Afghan guerrillas defending their home turf. The first
> Anglo-Afghan War
> : (1838-1842) marked a particularly humiliating defeat of British
> imperialism at
> : the very height of English military power in the Victorian
> era. The
> : Soviet-Afghan War (1978-1989) resulted in a Russian defeat so
> demoralizing that
> : it contributed significantly to the disintegration of the
> former Soviet
> Union in
> : 1991. We are now on track to repeat virtually all the errors
> committed
> by
> : previous invaders of Afghanistan over the centuries.
> :
> : In the past year, perhaps most disastrously, we have carried
> our Afghan
> war into
> : Pakistan, a relatively wealthy and sophisticated nuclear power
> that has
> long
> : cooperated with us militarily. Our recent bungling brutality
> along the
> : Afghan-Pakistan border threatens to radicalize the Pashtuns in
> both
> countries
> : and advance the interests of radical Islam throughout the
> region. The
> United
> : States is now identified in each country mainly with Hellfire
> missiles,
> unmanned
> : drones, special operations raids, and repeated incidents of
> the killing
> of
> : innocent bystanders.
> :
> : The brutal bombing of the Marriott Hotel in Pakistan's capital,
> Islamabad, on
> : Sept. 20, 2008, was a powerful indicator of the spreading
> strength of
> virulent
> : anti-American sentiment in the area. The hotel was a
> well-known watering
> hole
> : for American Marines, Special Forces troops, and CIA agents. Our
> military
> : activities in Pakistan have been as misguided as the
> Nixon-Kissinger
> invasion of
> : Cambodia in 1970. The end result will almost surely be the same.
> :
> : We should begin our disengagement from Afghanistan at once. We
> dislike
> the
> : Taliban's fundamentalist religious values, but the Afghan
> public, with
> its
> : desperate desire for a return of law and order and the curbing of
> corruption,
> : knows that the Taliban is the only political force in the
> country that
> has ever
> : brought the opium trade under control. The Pakistanis and their
> effective army
> : can defend their country from Taliban domination so long as we
> abandon
> the
> : activities that are causing both Afghans and Pakistanis to see the
> Taliban as a
> : lesser evil.
> :
> : One of America's greatest authorities on the defense budget,
> Winslow
> Wheeler,
> : worked for 31 years for Republican members of the Senate and
> for the
> General
> : Accounting Office on military expenditures. His conclusion,
> when it
> comes to the
> : fiscal sanity of our military spending, is devastating:
> :
> : "America's defense budget is now larger in inflation-adjusted
> dollars
> than at
> : any point since the end of World War II, and yet our Army has
> fewer
> combat
> : brigades than at any point in that period; our Navy has fewer
> combat
> ships; and
> : the Air Force has fewer combat aircraft. Our major equipment
> inventories
> for
> : these major forces are older on average than any point since
> 1946 – or
> in some
> : cases, in our entire history."
> :
> : This in itself is a national disgrace. Spending hundreds of
> billions of
> dollars
> : on present and future wars that have nothing to do with our
> national
> security is
> : simply obscene. And yet Congress has been corrupted by the
> military-industrial
> : complex into believing that, by voting for more defense
> spending, they
> are
> : supplying "jobs" for the economy. In fact, they are only diverting
> scarce
> : resources from the desperately needed rebuilding of the American
> infrastructure
> : and other crucial spending necessities into utterly wasteful
> munitions.
> If we
> : cannot cut back our long-standing, ever increasing military
> spending in
> a major
> : way, then the bankruptcy of the United States is inevitable.
> As the
> current Wall
> : Street meltdown has demonstrated, that is no longer an abstract
> possibility but
> : a growing likelihood. We do not have much time left.
> :
> : ###
> :
> :
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list