[Peace-discuss] What's Obama up to?

[C. G. Estabrook]

The child-killer in the Rose Garden is terrified of being driven from office like Johnson and NIxon. (See Obama's discussion of the anti-Vietnam War movement in 'The Audacity of Hope.') And although I've not read that he's mentioned it, Clinton's impeachment (for crimes of which official Washington knows he was guilty) must weigh upon Obama, because the Clinton/Obama parallels are so often drawn (and should be, especailly in re war crimes).

The White House reads the polls, that less than 10% of Americans support an attack on Syria, and 60% are opposed - in spite of the massive government & media propaganda campaign. (E.g., a 'debate' between representatives of the 'left' and the 'right' on CNN - agreeing that Syria should be attacked!) And the British vote was a shock. (One that Cameron allowed for? He didn't have to recall Parliament.) 

Obama wants to continue his Mideast war for control of hydrocarbons, because that's what the 1% want, and he wants to continue his assassination terrorism, because that's what fuels the rage in the Mideast that justifies our military occupation and intimidation ("fighting terrorism"). Obama's general policy for dealing with the Arab Spring, from the Maghreb to the Levant (including Syria), is to "bleed both sides indefinitely, and then maybe pick up the pieces when there is not much left of either" [M. Weisbrot quoting war advocate Edward Luttwak in the NYT].

But he can't do that unless he mollifies and misleads the US public, which can't be told the real reason for US war in the region, even though that reason has been clear since WWII, when the State Department pronounced Mideast energy resources "the world's greatest material prize." But that he's reduced to the threadbare denunciation of 'weapons of mass destruction' is an indication of his desperation. (Cf. his dreadful lie that he "ended one war in Iraq and is now ending another in Afghanistan.")

We can hope that the left-right consensus over against the neoliberal 'major' parties - which are bleeding support on both sides - and the general opposition to Obama's military and economic policies can be translated into a defeat for him in Congress. But it won't be easy, because "we are no longer a democracy," as ex-president Carter says.

============
"Barack Obama’s dramatic gamble on Syria" 

"The US president's decision to seek Congress’s approval for strikes on Syria ranks as the least expected moment of his presidency – and probably his riskiest, says Edward Luce" [in the Financial Times: <http://link.ft.com/r/QM42II/WHYEC7/VBMLY/A5MHIQ/Q3I6B3/QR/h?a1=2013&a2=8&a3=31>]. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20130831/dfb07b17/attachment.html>