[Peace-discuss] Fw: Weekend Mysteries Scandals & Speculation

[unionyes]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <moderator at PORTSIDE.ORG>
To: <PORTSIDE at LISTS.PORTSIDE.ORG>
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 9:49 AM
Subject: Weekend Mysteries Scandals & Speculation


> Left Margin
> 
> Weekend Mysteries Scandals and Speculations
> 
> By Carl Bloice - Black Commentator Editorial Board 
> Black Commentator 
> December 4, 2009
> 
> http://www.blackcommentator.com/353/353_lm_weekend_mystries.php
> 
> Thanksgiving weekend was an active time for the news
> junkies and armchair analysts of my acquaintance. First,
> there was the suggestion that racial profiling works in
> reverse. The question spread through cyberspace was,
> imagine what would have happened had the White House
> party crashers been black - how far would they have
> gotten? Then there was the Tiger Woods story. Early on
> there was little doubt in the minds of my correspondents
> that the story being given out wasn't the real one. For
> myself, there was wonderment that the governments of
> Panama and Costa Rica had decided to go along with the
> U.S. State Department and declare in advance that they
> would accept the results of Sunday's bogus election in
> Honduras. That the New York Times wouldn't explore the
> question was not surprising given the generally sorry
> state of the paper's Latin American reporting (That the
> editors chose to downplay for four days the Dubai
> economic developments remains a mystery). But the most
> intriguing question was raised by a good friend across
> the Bay who obviously read with bitter consternation
> Saturday morning's news report that jobs were being
> offered to members of the Taliban. With the U.S.
> prepared to spend one million dollars each to send
> military personnel to Afghanistan, and additional cash
> to employ Afghans, one has to wonder why the country
> can't provide jobs for the nearly 50 percent of African
> American youngsters who can find any, he wanted to know?
> 
> "The nation's unemployment rate is at 10.2 percent, a
> 26- year high. These people will be waiting to hear
> Obama explain how adding to the $10 billion monthly
> price tag for Iraq and Afghanistan will help them find
> work. African American men, 17.1 percent of whom are
> unemployed, want a word from Obama on this," wrote
> Columnist Colbert King in the Washington Post last week.
> 
> 'The White House has said that every increase of 1,000
> troops will cost $1 billion. So if the Administration
> sends 34,000 more troops to Afghanistan, as rumored,
> that's an additional $34 billion.
> 
> '"Where's it going to come from, Mr. President?" the
> unemployed and their families will want to know. Obama
> needs to address that question. This country has an
> accumulated debt of $12 trillion that is forecast to
> rise to $21 trillion in 10 years. '
> 
> There is nothing new about U.S. tax receipts to buy off
> members of insurgencies. The celebrated success of the
> "surge" in Iraq was to a large extent the result of
> dollars paid out to opposition fighters who agreed to at
> least pretend to switch sides in the conflict there.
> Most were young men rendered jobless by the war. "This
> is not about handing bags of money to an insurgent," a
> U.S. official said about the Afghan job offers. However,
> that exactly what has happened in Iraq.
> 
> It is not at all clear that all of the funds dispersed
> to Afghan insurgents will be in the form of paychecks
> either.  "In a defense appropriations bill recently
> approved by Congress, lawmakers set aside $1.3 billion
> for a program known by its acronym, CERP, a
> discretionary fund for American officers," reports the
> Times. "Ordinarily, CERP money is used for development
> projects, but the language in the bill says officers can
> use the money to support the "reintegration into Afghan
> society" of those who have given up fighting."
> 
> Now get this: According t o the Times, the jobs are
> being offered the Taliban rank and file "in development
> projects that Afghan tribal leaders help select, paid by
> the American military and the Afghan government." "Most
> of the Taliban in my area are young men who need jobs,"
> said one tribal leader.  "We just need to make them
> busy. If we give them work, we can weaken the Taliban."
> You can bet that there are a lot of U.S. mayors that
> could make similar statements and would just love to
> initiate work-creating development projects of their own
> choosing. Lord knows, there's a lot that needs doing.
> 
> On the other hand, I don't need to cite the obvious: as
> long as the employment situation facing young people in
> the U.S. remains in the pits there should be an ample
> supply of fresh men and women to go to Afghanistan.
> 
> Finally, as the Administration prepares to escalate the
> conflict in Afghanistan and offer jobs to young Afghans
> who can find none in the war-torn country, came Sunday's
> new report that: "'With food stamp use at record highs
> and climbing every month, a program once scorned as a
> failed welfare scheme now helps feed one in eight
> Americans and one in four children."  Terribly, things
> seem to be going in the wrong direction
> 
> President Obama has made his decision. He has been
> convinced to, or conned into, escalating the war in
> Afghanistan. He is sending thousands of young women and
> men off to fight and die in the name of "finishing the
> job" - whatever that job is. It's said to be fighting
> the Taliban; actually its waging war on the Pashtun
> people - that make up 42 percent of the Afghans -- who
> view our presence there as an occupation and will go on
> resisting it as they did the Soviets.  It will result in
> nothing good for Afghanistan, Obama or us.  And, it will
> be costly.
> 
> Of course, those in Washington opposing healthcare
> reform or effective action to put the unemployed back to
> work on grounds that such measures would involve deficit
> spending and push up the nation debt remain silent about
> the cost of the two ongoing wars.
> 
> The other day I was riding around listening to the late
> Donny Hathaway singing Marvin Gaye's "What's Going On."
> It was written in 1970 during the escalation of the war
> in Vietnam and a lot of troubles here at home. The
> message: We don't need to escalate. War is not the
> answer.
> 
> _____________________________________________
> 
> Portside aims to provide material of interest
> to people on the left that will help them to
> interpret the world and to change it.
> 
> Submit via email: moderator at portside.org
> Submit via the Web: portside.org/submit
> Frequently asked questions: portside.org/faq
> Subscribe: portside.org/subscribe
> Unsubscribe: portside.org/unsubscribe
> Account assistance: portside.org/contact
> Search the archives: portside.org/archive