[Peace-discuss] [sf-core] couple things

[C. G. ESTABROOK]

It is certainly "a bit perverse" to assert that the present administration 
represents any improvement over that last in, say, the matter of killing people. 
In fact, it's a good deal worse.  Obama has continued the Bush policy in Iraq 
(and Palestine) and greatly expanded it in AfPak.  He's put a assassin and death 
squad leader in charge of Afghanistan and expanded the assassinations in 
Pakistan. (The Obama administration sneers at the killing Bush did in Pakistan 
as "baby steps" while making sure many real babies will not take any more 
steps.) And Obama expands the Mideast war in Somalia and Yemen.

"...Not much more than a year later, Obama has smoothed off the rough edges of 
Bush-era foreign policy, while preserving and, indeed, widening its goals, those 
in place through the entire postwar era since 1945...

"With Iran, there is absolute continuity with the Bush years, sans the noisy 
braggadocio of Cheney: assiduous and generally successful diplomatic efforts to 
secure international agreement for deepening sanctions; disinformation campaigns 
about Iran’s adherence to international treaties, very much in the Bush style of 
2002. In the interests of overall U.S. strategy in the region, Israel is held on 
a leash.

"No need to labor the obvious about Afghanistan: an enlarged U.S. expeditionary 
force engineered with one laughable pledge – earnestly brandished by the 
progressives – that the troops will be home in time for the elections of 2012. 
The U.S. and, indeed, world anti-war movements live only in memory. Earlier this 
week, Congressional Democrats in the House could barely muster 60 votes against 
the Afghan war.

"...Obama is just what the Empire needed. Plagued though it may be by deep 
structural problems, he has improved its malign potential for harm – the first 
duty of all U.S. presidents of whatever imagined political stripe."

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn03122010.html


james barrett wrote:
> 
> 
> I take the criticism of the current administration and I have all of my own,
> but if the equation is between Obama (or better Democrats than him) and Karl
> Rove, then I guess I find that a bit perverse.
> 
> Jim Barrett
> 
> At 04:54 PM 3/10/2010, C. G. ESTABROOK wrote:
>> What's the point of demonstrating against Republicans at this point?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Belden Fields wrote:
>>> 
>>> [Attachment(s) <#TopText> from Belden Fields included below]



-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.