[Peace-discuss] [Peace] Fw: Money Can't Vote

Thu Oct 21 08:05:49 CDT 2010

Well, that strikes me as quite a stretch to lay responsibility for the Iraq and 
Afghanistan wars on the back of Jimmy Carter.  I could take your logic just a 
small step further and put it on FDR.  Or William McKinley.  Or James K. Polk.  
Plus it ignores the question of why three subsequent Republican presidents 
failed to end it, as your premise indicates they should have done.  It is a sad 
fact that since the disastrous and misguided McGovern campaign (God bless him), 
Democrats have been so bullied and intimidated by charges of being anti-military 
(not that there's anything wrong with that) that they too often feel compelled 
to prove they have gonads.  I thought Clinton kept Saddam around just to have 
somebody to bomb when he needed to look tough.  That's murderous and deplorable 
and certainly won't get him into heaven, but that's the political landscape we 
find ourselves in.  Deal with it.  Anyway, wealth and power breed arrogance.  
Americans, like the British, Spanish, Romans, and every great empire before us, 
think we should have our way just because God obviously loves us so.  (If He 
didn't, we wouldn't be an empire.)  That's human nature, and liberals are just 
as susceptible to it as conservatives.  More often than not, Democratic 
militarism just takes the form of seeing to it that veterans actually receive 
the benefits they've been promised, for which they get no credit whatsoever.  
And "spineless" is not the same as "evil" in my eyes.  The "spineless" need to 
be encouraged.  The "evil" need to be stopped.  Who can blame the Democrats for 
being spineless?  Who's got their backs?  The left?

I'm a Bernie Sanders kind of guy.  I don't really consider myself a Democrat, 
but I caucus with them because I think the alternative is so much worse.  But if 
you really can't see any difference between, say, Karl Rove and Dennis Kucinich, 
I'm not going to waste any more time arguing with you.  You're not serious.

________________________________
From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
To: Gregg Gordon <ggregg79 at yahoo.com>
Cc: Jenifer Cartwright <jencart13 at yahoo.com>; Peace List 
<peace at lists.chambana.net>; Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
Sent: Wed, October 20, 2010 11:09:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Fw: Money Can't Vote

First, Iraq and Afghanistan are both part of what the Pentagon calls "The Long 
War" (for oil) in the Mideast.  So far, the US has killed a million people in 
Iraq under Clinton (whose Secretary of State said that the tens of thousands of 
dead children were "worth it"); a million under Bush; and apparently hundreds of 
thousands in AfPak under Bush and his third (Obama) term.

That falls short of the perhaps 4 million we killed in SE Asia, but of course 
Obama's escalated murders in SW Asia are in no way justified by being fewer in 
number than Kennedy-Johnson-Nixon's in Vietnam. 

It's difficult to determine when the Long War begins, but it takes a tick up in 
the Carter administration when Carter (and Obama's) adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski 
sends Osama bin Laden and friends into Afghanistan (before the Russian invasion) 
"to give the Russians a Vietnam of their own," as he said at the time, in the 
most expensive CIA operation to date.

If a Republican administration after 2012 brings Obama's AfPak war to an end, 
then we'll have a third example of a Democratic war concluded by Republicans in 
as many generations. But that may not be likely. The news suggests that the 
Obama administration is looking to expand the war with an attack on Pakistan 
and/or Iran.  It certainly isn't looking to abandon the world's greatest 
energy-producing region.

Control of Mideast energy resources has been a cornerstone of US foreign policy 
since 1945. Obama is simply lying when he says the war is to "stop terrorism" - 
it obviously increases terrorism - but he has to lie, because the only 
Constitutional authority he has to wage war in the Mideast is Congress' 
"Authorization for the Use of Military Force" of September 2001 - which is 
directed against terrorism. 

Something positive to do: years ago, there was a great debate in America, "How 
do we get out of Vietnam?"  The best answer was given by Herb Caen: "Ships and 
planes." Load up the troops and bring them home.  The Russians did - and 
survived and prospered from the end of their war.

Eventually we did, but it took two presidents' being driven from office and 
(even more important) a revolt of the American conscript army  to do it.   

Regards, CGE

On 10/20/10 7:15 PM, Gregg Gordon wrote: 
So I conclude from your statement that you don't consider either Iraq or 
Afghanistan to be "major" wars.  So why are you so worked up about them?  I 
think you're just still mad at Lyndon Johnson.
>
>And please, don't accuse me of being some kind of racist who doesn't mind us 
>murdering brown people.  That is so lame.  It's just that not all of us see the 
>world in as simple terms as you seem to.  Simple solutions are nice, but they're 
>mainly for the simple-minded.
>
>All I'm saying is if you're so gung-ho on stopping the war, why don't you come 
>up with something positive to do (as opposed to sniping from the sidelines) that 
>might help get us closer to that goal?  We'll all get behind you.
>
>
>
>
________________________________
From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
>To: Gregg Gordon <ggregg79 at yahoo.com>
>Cc: Jenifer Cartwright <jencart13 at yahoo.com>; Peace List 
><peace at lists.chambana.net>; Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>Sent: Wed, October 20, 2010 5:10:40 PM
>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Fw: Money Can't Vote
>
>You are aware, are you not, that America's major wars since WWII - called by 
>synecdoche "Korea" and "Vietnam" - were started by Democratic administrations 
>and ended by Republican administrations.  Since the current Democratic 
>administration has greatly expanded the killing in AfPak, it's hard to argue 
>that they're going to reverse their policies. Voting for them is an acquiescence 
>to those policies.  
>
>
>To say of Obama and the Democrats, "Let them kill some Asians, because they 
>might do some good someplace else," is at best a counsel of despair, if not an 
>outright  criminal attitude.  Particularly when it seems that they're doing 
>precisely the wrong things elsewhere, too - not surprisingly, because they're 
>working for the owners of the banks, the insurance companies, the oil and 
>construction companies, etc.  --CGE
>
>
>On 10/20/10 4:48 PM, Gregg Gordon wrote: 
>Maybe because there are other important issues that she does agree with him on.  
>The only way you're going to find a candidate you're in 100% agreement with is 
>to run for office.  If support for the war is an absolute deal breaker for you, 
>fine.  Not everybody sees it that way.  But if you think the war will end sooner 
>if more Republicans get elected, I think you're out of your mind.
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________
From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
>>To: Jenifer Cartwright <jencart13 at yahoo.com>
>>Cc: Peace List <peace at lists.chambana.net>; Peace-discuss 
>><peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>>Sent: Wed, October 20, 2010 4:33:52 PM
>>Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Fw: Money Can't Vote
>>
>>This guy supports the war. I can't see why anyone on an anti-war list would 
>>contribute to him.
>>
>>
>>On 10/20/10 4:28 PM, Jenifer Cartwright wrote: 
>>Another request for help... 
>>>I love this guy!
>>> --Jenifer
>>>
>>>--- On Wed, 10/20/10, Rep. Alan Grayson 
>>><alangrayson at graysonforcongress.com>wrote: 
>>>
>>>CallforGrayson.com
>>>>Make 10 calls now! 
>>>>Dear Jenifer,
>>>>This election is about the people standing against corporate special interests, 
>>>>which are trying to bury me with lying ads because they know I can’t be bought. 
>>>>But money can’t vote – people can.
>>>>This week is the first week of Early Vote, which means people in Central Florida 
>>>>are voting right now.  
>>>>Getting our supporters to the polls now could make up our winning margin, and 
>>>>that's why we need you calling supporters and asking them to vote.
>>>>You can start calling whenever you like, butwe really need people to start 
>>>>calling at 4 p.m. Eastern Time.
>>>>Can you sign up for a shift today from 4-6 p.m. ET, or this evening 6-8 p.m. 
>>>ET?
>>>>We'll give you suggestions on what to say, and a reporting tool so it's easy to 
>>>>let us know how it's going.
>>>>Thank you.
>>>>Truth,
>>>>Alan Grayson
>>>>P.S. -- If you don't have time today, please sign up to make calls on another 
>>>>day between now and Election Day, November 2. Every voter you talk to will make 
>>>>a difference.
>>>>Sign up now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Paid for and Authorized by the Committee to Elect Alan Grayson 
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list 
>>>Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net 
>>>http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss 
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list 
>>Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net 
>>http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss 
>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20101021/2b81a488/attachment-0001.html>