Nader Was Right: Liberals Are Going Nowhere With Obama

By Chris Hedges

The American empire has not altered under Barack Obama. It kills as brutally and indiscriminately in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan as it did under George W. Bush. It steals from the U.S. treasury to enrich the corporate elite as rapaciously. It will not give us universal health care, abolish the Bush secrecy laws, end torture or "extraordinary rendition," restore habeas corpus or halt the warrantless wiretapping and monitoring of citizens. It will not push through significant environmental reform, regulate Wall Street or end our relationship with private contractors that provide mercenary armies to fight our imperial wars and produce useless and costly weapons systems.

The sad reality is that all the well-meaning groups and individuals who challenge our permanent war economy and the doctrine of pre-emptive war, who care about sustainable energy, fight for civil liberties and want corporate malfeasance to end, were once again suckered by the Democratic Party. They were had. It is not a new story. The Democrats have been doing this to us since Bill Clinton. It is the same old merry-go-round, only with Obama branding. And if we have not learned by now that the system is broken, that as citizens we do not matter to our political elite, that we live in a corporate state where our welfare and our interests are irrelevant, we are in serious trouble. Our last hope is to step outside of the two-party system and build movements that defy the Democrats and the Republicans. If we fail to do this, we will continue to undergo a corporate coup d’etat in slow motion that will end in feudalism.

Read the entire article Here

::::

I still support Barack Obama, I would like to see him succeed but he seems to be making decisions just to make the moderates and right wing nutcases feel at ease. People on the left have been waiting 8 long years for a liberal champion to come along. We thought we had a champion in Mr. Obama but he seem to have traded his core values for political reason similar to what Bill Clinton did when he was president, and look how the right wing did him. Fraze2K

Addicted to War: America's Brutal Pipe Dream in Afghanistan

Looks like the "Good War" in Afghanistan is morphing even more directly into the "Drug War" that the U.S. government has been waging all over the world -- and especially against its own people -- for almost 40 years now, with all the attendant aggrandizement of authoritarian powers and degradation of civil liberties and human rights.

As The Times reports, and Pentagon brass confirmed, the "continuity government" of the Obama Administration has drawn up yet another "hit list" of people to be arbitrarily assassinated: 50 "drug lords" allegedly associated with the Taliban. No doubt the many drug lords associated with the American-installed Afghan government -- and those cooperating directly with the Western occupation -- are exempt from this dirty laundry list.

Of course, the runaway cultivation of opium in Afghanistan -- which is now flooding not only the West but also vast swathes of Central Asia with cheap heroin -- is a direct result of the American invasion in 2001: an operation ostensibly designed to capture Osama bin Laden, who somehow curiously slipped away from the Americans' curiously porous encirclement, never to be seen again (except of course for a few curiously timed transmission that seemed, curiously enough, to be geared to the domestic political needs of America's militarist factions). Of course, before the invasion, the Taliban had largely -- if ruthlesssly -- eliminated the cultivation of opium in the areas under its control. But the American military -- and its gung-ho CIA operatives ("We're killing people!" as one CIAer exulted to the Boston Globe) -- instead empowered the Northern Alliance: the Russian-backed conglomerate of warlords and druglords who were freely growing opium in their territories.

Now the Afghan insurgents -- themselves a loose conglomeration of factions given the conveniently misleading monolithic moniker of "the Taliban" -- have taken up the opium trade to help finance their operations as well. Meanwhile, poor Afghans are dependent on the opium trade, which fetches prices far above anything else they can grow. After all, their society and economy have been systematically destroyed by 30 years of savage war, kicked off not by the Soviet intervention in 1980 but by a terrorist campaign by religious extremists armed, funded and encouraged by the good Christian administration of Jimmy Carter, whose "national security" honcho, Zbigniew Brzezinski, wanted to draw the Soviets into "their own Vietnam" in support of their client regime in Kabul. Now, as Jason Ditz – an indispensible chronicler of the Terror War in Central Asia – points out, the Americans are adopting the Soviets' own failed strategy in Afghanistan: death-dealing military "surges" combined with wads of cash thrown blindly into the economic chaos caused by the military action.

But you can't "build" a state while you are simultaneously waging war inside it. And you certainly can't build it by killing cucumber farmers, as U.S. forces did the other day. Expect even more of this as the Pentagon gears up its "Drug War" weaponry to eliminate the rivals of its favored criminals – sorry, I mean to wipe out the scourge of Afghanistan's Taliban drug lord devils.

Read the entire article Here

American's are some stupid fucks. If it wasn't for the goddamn wars, the fucking military bases all around the fucking globe, we could afford health care for all citizens, we could afford to send young people to college for free if they met set requirements. Life would be a lot better in this country if we were not trying to maintain a fucking empire and the people here were not so fucking selfish - Fraze2K

Chirac: Bush Said Invasion Of Iraq Was Biblical Mission To Stop Armageddon

The president of the United States, in a top-secret phone call to a major European ally, asked for French troops to join American soldiers in attacking Iraq as a mission from God.

Now out of office, Chirac recounts that the American leader appealed to their ‘common faith’ (Christianity) and told him: ‘Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East…. The biblical prophecies are being fulfilled…. This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins.’

This bizarre episode occurred while the White House was assembling its ‘coalition of the willing’ to unleash the Iraq invasion. Chirac says he was boggled by Bush’s call and ‘wondered how someone could be so superficial and fanatical in their beliefs.’

Source

Obama to CIA: Bombs Away! No Let Up in US Drone Attacks

From ABC News:

The CIA's bombing campaign against al Qaeda leadership in Pakistan continued with two more attacks today, an indication, senior officials say, that President Barack Obama has approved the U.S. strategy that has killed at least eight of al Qaeda's top 20 leaders since July 2008.

The two attacks today in Pakistan were the first since President Obama took office on Tuesday.

Asked about it at his daily press briefing, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said, "I'm not going to discuss that matter."

During the campaign, Obama called for cross-border attacks against high-value al Qaeda targets in Pakistan, even before the CIA campaign began.

Pakistani officials and villagers told ABCNews.com that 17 people were killed in two successive strikes against compounds in North and South Waziristan.

A senior U.S. official said one of al Qaeda's top 20 leaders may be among the dead today, although it is too soon to be certain.

Since July, the CIA has carried out a relentless bombing campaign against that has targeted the top leadership of al Qaeda, based on a sophisticated intelligence collection effort similar to what was used against insurgents in Iraq.

Eight of the top 20 have been killed in the attacks, according to the U.S. official.

What are we doing in Afghanistan? It is becoming exactly like Bush's Iraq war. Are we there to find Bin Laden? Are we there to bring democracy? Are we there to protect women from the Taliban? Or are we just there to kill muslims to make us feel like we are doing something? Why is the richest country in the world always killing the poorest people in the world? The US spends billions to ship Pizza Huts and Burger Kings to the other side of the earth to feed troops who kill people who run around barefoot and live in dirt-floored mud huts. What a country.

British Prime Minister condemns Israel's attack on UN

From Mail Online:

Israel shelled the UN headquarters in Gaza yesterday - a move condemned as 'indefensible' by Gordon Brown.

As the bombardment intensified, two hospitals were also hit.

And using unusually strong language, the Prime Minister said: 'UN staff are working on behalf of the international community.


Chaos: An injured boy is taken to hospital in Gaza after the bombardment on Thursday


'Indefensible': A woman flees the UN building in Gaza as fire-fighters battle to put out the flames after an Israeli attack

'Any attack on them is unacceptable, as Israel has acknowledged.'

Hours before, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon had said: 'I conveyed my strong protest and outrage to the defence minister and foreign minister.'

The shelling engulfed in fire the UN compound and a warehouse, destroying thousands of pounds of food and humanitarian supplies intended for Palestinian refugees.

About 700 Palestinians had been sheltering in the building.


Sorry: Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak, left, has apologised to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, right, over the shelling of the UN compound

Israel's attack was another blow to efforts to ease the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.
The compound houses the UN Works and Relief Agency, which distributes food aid to hundreds of thousands of destitute Gazans in the tiny seaside territory of 1.4million.

John Ging, director of the Agency's operations in Gaza, said the attack caused a 'massive explosion' which wounded three.

Shells first hit the courtyard filled with refugees, then struck garages and the UN's main warehouse.

Later, fuel supplies went up in flames, sending up a thick black plume of smoke.


UN workers fight to put out the flames inside their headquarters. The UN claimed Israel had used white phosphorous in the attack


Outside the compound Palestinian fire-fighters joined in the battle to save the UN building

'It's a total disaster for us,' Mr Ging said. The Israeli military knows the precise location of the compound.

But although prime minister Ehud Olmert apologised, he said the bombardment had been in response to fire from Palestinian gunmen at the compound.

The Al-Quds and Red Crescent hospitals, and a tower block housing journalists, were also hit, as the death toll rose to at least 1,073 with more than 5,000 wounded.

Meanwhile, Israeli forces pushed deeper into Gaza city, unleashing their heaviest shelling yet.


Ablaze: Palestinians gather as firefighters try to control the fire after an Israeli airstrike in the Rafah refugee camp

Hamas's interior minister, Saeed Seyyam, was killed in an air strike.

Analysts believe that Israel is stepping up military operations to complete its action before Tuesday's inauguration of Barack Obama as U.S. president.

It began the offensive on December 27, saying it aimed to end Hamas rocket


Deadly: Flares light up the sky during shelling over Gaza City

Rockets have killed 13 Israelis since then. Police said 20 rockets hit southern Israel yesterday, injuring ten.

Israel and Hamas have met with Egyptian mediators who are proposing a truce.
But diplomats said the two sides remained at odds over the fine print.


Dazed: Palestinian families flee their homes as the war continued to ravage Gaza


'The gates of Hell': An explosion tears through the sky after an Israeli air strike in Rafah

Thousands of Afghans enlist to fight US after Israels attack on Gaza

Excerpts from Daily Kos:

As you may have heard, the US Senate and House yesterday voted nearly unanimously in support of Israels attacks on Gaza, which are responsible for killing of 800 Palestinians and destroying large amounts civilian infrastructure. Israel is using American planes, helicopters and bombs, payed for with American money. As a result, the Muslim world sees the US and Israel as being one and the same and equally responsible for that is happening.

In addition to giving blood and donating money, 10,000 Afghans have signed up in the past several days (1000 on Thursday alone) in order to fight against the United States.

My question is, what kind of control do Israel have on the U.S. Government in which members of congress unanimously vote to support Israel criminal regime's slaughter of the the helpless people in Gaza? This unwavering support of Israel's action not only further hurts our reputation around the world but it also puts our troops stationed in Afghanistan and Iraq in more jeopardy. Are there any adults with morals left in the US Government?

Excerpt from Reuters UK:

"The acts of Israel against the innocent Muslims of Gaza are barbaric and inhumane and widely helped by the Americans," Assam said, adding that nearly 10,000 people across Afghanistan had so far volunteered to fight in Gaza.

...

While reaching Gaza from Afghanistan is all-but impossible, many of the volunteers said they would take revenge on U.S. troops inside Afghanistan instead.

"Infidels are killing Muslims everyday and the United States is saying Israel's offensive is just," said Mohammad Akram, a shopkeeper. "If we can't reach Gaza, we should seek revenge on Israel's allies in our own country like the Taliban do."

Our complicity with what is going on in Gaza, when the entire rest of the world is trying to stop it, undermines our standing in the world, and makes us far, far less safe as a nation.

The only excuse for not being closer to the European position on this issue, which is to try to STOP the massacre immediately, is the gutlessness of most American politicians to stand up to rank racism, and the American Israeli Lobby.

Israel Is A Rogue Nation That's Committing War Crimes

By George Bisharat from The Wallstreet Journal:

Israel's current assault on the Gaza Strip cannot be justified by self-defense. Rather, it involves serious violations of international law, including war crimes. Senior Israeli political and military leaders may bear personal liability for their offenses, and they could be prosecuted by an international tribunal, or by nations practicing universal jurisdiction over grave international crimes. Hamas fighters have also violated the laws of warfare, but their misdeeds do not justify Israel's acts.

You know it makes me sick to my stomach the way the American Media and the American Politician takes Israel side no matter what they do. You have politicians from both sides of the isle from the so called liberals to moderates and conservatives lining up to express their support for Israel's actions in Gaza. WTF do the Zionist control the American government?

Israel had not suffered an "armed attack" immediately prior to its bombardment of the Gaza Strip. Since firing the first Kassam rocket into Israel in 2002, Hamas and other Palestinian groups have loosed thousands of rockets and mortar shells into Israel, causing about two dozen Israeli deaths and widespread fear. As indiscriminate attacks on civilians, these were war crimes. During roughly the same period, Israeli forces killed about 2,700 Palestinians in Gaza by targeted killings, aerial bombings, in raids, etc., according to the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem.

But on June 19, 2008, Hamas and Israel commenced a six-month truce. Neither side complied perfectly. Israel refused to substantially ease the suffocating siege of Gaza imposed in June 2007. Hamas permitted sporadic rocket fire -- typically after Israel killed or seized Hamas members in the West Bank, where the truce did not apply. Either one or no Israelis were killed (reports differ) by rockets in the half year leading up to the current attack.

Israel then broke the truce on Nov. 4, raiding the Gaza Strip and killing a Palestinian. Hamas retaliated with rocket fire; Israel then killed five more Palestinians. In the following days, Hamas continued rocket fire -- yet still no Israelis died. Israel cannot claim self-defense against this escalation, because it was provoked by Israel's own violation.

An armed attack that is not justified by self-defense is a war of aggression. Under the Nuremberg Principles affirmed by U.N. Resolution 95, aggression is a crime against peace.

Israel has also failed to adequately discriminate between military and nonmilitary targets. Israel's American-made F-16s and Apache helicopters have destroyed mosques, the education and justice ministries, a university, prisons, courts and police stations. These institutions were part of Gaza's civilian infrastructure. And when nonmilitary institutions are targeted, civilians die. Many killed in the last week were young police recruits with no military roles. Civilian employees in the Hamas-led government deserve the protections of international law like all others. Hamas's ideology -- which employees may or may not share -- is abhorrent, but civilized nations do not kill people merely for what they think.

Deliberate attacks on civilians that lack strict military necessity are war crimes. Israel's current violations of international law extend a long pattern of abuse of the rights of Gaza Palestinians. Eighty percent of Gaza's 1.5 million residents are Palestinian refugees who were forced from their homes or fled in fear of Jewish terrorist attacks in 1948. For 60 years, Israel has denied the internationally recognized rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes -- because they are not Jews.

Although Israel withdrew its settlers and soldiers from Gaza in 2005, it continues to tightly regulate Gaza's coast, airspace and borders. Thus, Israel remains an occupying power with a legal duty to protect Gaza's civilian population. But Israel's 18-month siege of the Gaza Strip preceding the current crisis violated this obligation egregiously. It brought economic activity to a near standstill, left children hungry and malnourished, and denied Palestinian students opportunities to study abroad.

Israel should be held accountable for its crimes, and the U.S. should stop abetting it with unconditional military and diplomatic support.

It would be nice to see some members of the US government get tried for aiding and abetting the criminal regime in Israel. When is the fucking International Community going to stand up and enforce international law on all leaders that violate the law?

Obama to Escalate Afghan War With A 20,000 Troop Surge

Well if you thought Obama was the guy to bring change to US foreign policy then I must say you were sadly mistaking or worse mislead. It seems every American president has got to get their war on, I guess to show the world that they're not to be fucked with. While the American presidents shows the world his bonafides you are going to have some non white people in some far off land being used as live battlefield targets for the US Military. The US Military Industrial Complex is a very powerful and influential business organization and Barack know not to cross the UMIC unless he want to end up like JFK.

From The Telegraph UK:

Barack Obama is preparing to send at least 20,000 more US soldiers into Afghanistan in a "surge" similar to the deployment that contributed to security improvements in Iraq.

:::

The President-Elect's intention to shift the focus of the fight against terrorism to Afghanistan has been bolstered by Robert Gates agreement to stay on as Defence Secretary.

Mr Gates is a strong believer in an Afghan surge, which would not only put thousands more boots on the ground but involve negotiations with malleable branches of the Taliban

:::

A spokesman said the final number was likely to be "well north of 20,000", and indicated that countries such as Britain already fighting in the south would not face strong US demands to provide more troops.

Defence department staff members are privately delighted Mr Obama has chosen to retain a popular boss in the interests of stability. Mr Gates is expected to be officially introduced as part of an experience and centrist national security team on Monday.

"The president-elect has already indicated that he wants to put additional troops in Afghanistan," said an official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Over the weekend Mr Obama reiterated that he wanted to begin drawing down the 146,000 US troops in Iraq as soon as he takes office, saying he wanted to "shore up efforts" in Afghanistan.

The economy is about to go bottom up, people are losing their homes and their jobs, there is no money for health care or college tuition but our govrnment always have money to wage wars. What a fucking shame.

Endless war for endless profit

From Unknownnews.com
Our current set of wars don't make sense, largely because they are not wars in the normal sense. They are actually just gigantic business opportunities.

The so-called news about these wars is not news, it is carefully designed advertising for the businesses involved in the so called war-making.

The soldiers are not really soldiers, they are paid extras on a movie set where the advertising occurs.

Consequently, nothing that is not productive of profits receives any significant attention, beyond what is necessary to maintain the pretense that a real war is actually occurring. International law and rules of war have the same relation to these wars as a novel that is adapted to the screen.

Patriotic pretense is elevated over patriotic feeling. Wounded soldiers are not honored as heroes, they are just shuffled off the set like used and damaged props, abandoned and ignored as avoid-
able costs that threaten profits. Strategic military goals become meaningless as the overriding strategic goal is to keep the profit making business going.

Victory, in this setting, is the last thing desired, as it would mean an end to the flow of profit. Defeat and retreat, likewise, are unthinkable for the same reason. The business plan is endless war for endless profit.

Anything in these so-called wars that enhances profit or furthers the career goals of the major players is good. Anything that threatens profit or the anticipated lucrative careers of the military, industrial and congressional leaders is bad.

These wars, as they are being conducted, are best understood as a self-contained horizontally and vertically integrated industry, for whom the nation is merely a befuddled customer.

SADDAM HANGED FOR BUSH’S CRIMES

Below you will find enough evidence that George W. Bush is the enemy of the Iraqi people, not Saddam Hussein as he would like us to believe…

While the majority of Iraqis know that the current Sunni-Shiites tension did not exist before 2003, no one can deny that after five years of U.S. occupation, sectarian tension is now a reality. Sectarianism is another disaster that was brought to Iraq by the war and occupation of Iraq.

The U.S.-led invasion did not only destroy the Baath political regime, it also annihilated the entire public sector including education, health care, food rations, social security, and the armed forces. The Iraqi public sector was a great example of how millions of Iraqis: Arabs and Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites, Muslims and Christians, religious and secular, all worked together in running the country. The myth that the former Iraqi government was a “Sunni-led dictatorship” was created by the U.S. government. Even the Iraqi political regime was not “Sunni-led,” let alone the rest of the public sector. A good way to debunk this fairy tale is through a close look at the famous deck of cards of the 55 most wanted Iraqi leaders. The cards had the pictures of Saddam, his two sons, and the rest of the political leadership which most Iraqis would recognize as the heads of the political regime. What is noteworthy is that 36 of the 55 were Shiites. In fact, the two vice presidents were a Christian and a Shiites Kurd.

Tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians also have been killed since the U.S.-led invasion on March 20, 2003, although estimates of a specific figure vary widely because of the difficulty in collecting accurate information.

Source

Four US soldiers killed in Iraq

Excerpt Four more US soldiers have been killed in Iraq, bringing the death toll since the invasion in 2003 close to 4,000.

The US military said that in the latest incident on Saturday, three soldiers died when their vehicle was struck by a roadside bomb north-west of Baghdad.

Another soldier died from injuries sustained in an attack south on Friday.

The latest deaths would bring the total of US fatalities to 3,996, according to a count kept by the independent website icasualties.org.

Global protests against Iraq war

Excerpt Tens of thousands of protesters across the world have taken part in a day of protests demanding the withdrawal of US and British troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The World Against War action was organised to mark the fifth anniversary of the US-led invasion of Iraq on March 20.

In London, police said that 10,000 activists had rallied at Trafalgar Square before marching the short distance to parliament. Organisers said that between 30,000 and 40,000 people had gathered.

A spokesman for The Stop The War coalition said that five years after the invasion of Iraq, military action had only managed to make the world "a much more dangerous place".

"Estimates suggest as many as one million people have died violent deaths as a result of the occupation of Iraq," Paul Collins said.

He said that Gordon Brown, Britain's prime minister, was sending more troops to Afghanistan and claimed "this hidden war is fast becoming a disaster mirroring Iraq".

Demonstrators outside parliament waved placards which said "Troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan", "Don't attack Iran" and "Freedom for Palestine".

'War crimes'

Caroline Lucas, the Green Party's member of the European Parliament, called for Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, and Gordon Brown to be prosecuted for war crimes.

"They need to know you cannot bomb your way to peace," she said.

Tony Benn, a former Labour Party minister, said that Britain's involvement in Iraq, where the country has 4,100 troops, and Afghanistan, where it has 7,800, had caused "devastation".

But Britain's foreign office disputed Stop the War's conclusions.

"In Iraq, there is clear evidence we are making steady progress, particularly in terms of security," a spokesman said.

"In Afghanistan, Nato forces are winning the struggle against the Taliban."

Elsewhere in Europe, around 500 people opposed to the US presence in Iraq marched through Stockholm city centre in freezing rain carrying banners with messages including "Yankees Go Home" and "Five years of war, one million dead."

"I'm here because I think it is extremely important to demonstrate against American policy in Iraq, especially now that the media is focusing less on the tragedy there," Leif Staalhammer, a 67-year-old actor, said.

'Sorrow and anguish'

In Los Angeles, organisers said that up to 10,000 people took to the streets of Hollywood, many carrying banners denouncing George Bush, the US president, and calling for an end to the conflict.

Police said that around 2,000 protesters had turned out for the rally.

Ron Kovic, a Vietnam war veteran whose book Born on the Fourth of July was turned into a film with Tom Cruise, joined the march down Hollywood Boulevard in his wheelchair.

***

The march ended on Sunset Boulevard where organisers said that they hoped several California politicians and actors would join the demonstrators.

"We've been in the war for five years, right now we're about to be in a recession, and trillions of our dollars are going to a war we don't want to be in," one protestor told the crowd.

Demonstrations also took place Saturday across Canada, including in Toronto, where 1,000 people protested against parliament's decision last week to extend Canada's 2,500-strong deployment to Afghanistan.

Christine Jones, co-chairwoman of the Canadian Peace Alliance, said parliament's vote on Afghanistan was misguided.

"Afghanistan is worse off because of the military occupation and Canadians are more opposed to the war than ever before," she said.

Bush says Afghanistan challenge romantic

US President George W Bush says he would fight in Afghanistan if he was younger.

President Bush spoke of his dream to work on the frontline in Afghanistan during a video conference with US military and civilian personnel in the war-torn country.

"I must say, I'm a little envious," Bush said.

"If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed.

"It must be exciting for you ... in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks," President Bush said.

***

Read More

Can Old Europe Save America?

Excerpts:
Sure, we’ll drink their wine, eat their tappas and cheeses, and drive their BMWs. But when it comes to Europe, we refuse to adopt their most sensible refinements—the metric system, wise gun laws, better poverty programs, and inclusive medical care. The latest feather in our stubborn streak is our unwillingness to follow their practice of abstaining from war.


Out of the ashes of two world wars and a long history of barbaric warfare, western Europeans have finally made reliable peace with each other. The possibility of Englishmen, Frenchmen, and Germans killing each other in the fury of war is as remote now as it was predictable only 70 years ago.



Can Europe’s aversion to war be imported to America? Will it get here in time? Our totalitarian military-industrial complex, instinctively attuned to fear and greed, is devouring the civilian economy and crushing the spirit of our bedridden democracy.


Are we as blind about militarism as we were 150 years ago about slavery? Europeans of that era were also more enlightened than us about the practice of slavery.

America’s leaders react to Europe’s achievement by mocking their pacifism and lecturing them on how to be more warlike. A stark warning from Defense Secretary Robert Gates is a recent example. He told an international security conference in Munich this month that the safety of Europeans from terrorist attacks depends on NATO’s enhanced military presence in Afghanistan.

****

It’s true, of course, that during the Cold War we protected Western Europe from the need for militarization. However, both the Cold War and the rise of Islamic terrorism might have been avoided if the United States had shown more confidence in the power of diplomacy and statecraft rather than relying to such a degree on military might. People with integrity are more likely to believe in the power of diplomacy because they negotiate effectively in their personal relationships.


Oh, but how we love our guns! Last month, while the families of those murdered in last year’s Virginia Tech massacre looked on, Virginia legislators voted to block legislation that would have prevented deranged individuals and ex-felons from buying guns at gun shows. If we refuse to demilitarize at this level, we’re not likely to do so at the more profitable and thrilling level of advanced lethal weapons systems.


The one thing we love better than guns are profits. The bigger our empire, the greater the profits. Maintaining the commercialization of war is our Christian nation’s sacred vow. There was little danger that the end of the Cold War would interrupt that observance. It’s a case of the Mighty Right’s Illusionary Syndrome meets the National Disgrace Disorder. One of the symptoms of this confabulation is the claim that Old Europe offers nothing of value.


The White House isn’t going to ask Europeans to send us teams of warfare deprogrammers. What might save us, in a self-defeating sort of way, is national bankruptcy or hyper-inflation. A less painful route would be the election of a reformist government.


To be effective, this government would need the passionate support of many millions of Americans who denounce the demonology of perpetual war. For this to happen, we will have to become more engaged and creative in spreading our ideals and values into the social and political sphere. If we come to our senses, there’s enough shame for the Iraq misadventure to make it America’s last war.

The three trillion dollar war

Excerpt: The cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts have grown to staggering proportions

The Bush Administration was wrong about the benefits of the war and it was wrong about the costs of the war. The president and his advisers expected a quick, inexpensive conflict. Instead, we have a war that is costing more than anyone could have imagined.

The cost of direct US military operations - not even including long-term costs such as taking care of wounded veterans - already exceeds the cost of the 12-year war in Vietnam and is more than double the cost of the Korean War.

And, even in the best case scenario, these costs are projected to be almost ten times the cost of the first Gulf War, almost a third more than the cost of the Vietnam War, and twice that of the First World War. The only war in our history which cost more was the Second World War, when 16.3 million U.S. troops fought in a campaign lasting four years, at a total cost (in 2007 dollars, after adjusting for inflation) of about $5 trillion (that's $5 million million, or £2.5 million million). With virtually the entire armed forces committed to fighting the Germans and Japanese, the cost per troop (in today's dollars) was less than $100,000 in 2007 dollars. By contrast, the Iraq war is costing upward of $400,000 per troop.

Most Americans have yet to feel these costs. The price in blood has been paid by our voluntary military and by hired contractors. The price in treasure has, in a sense, been financed entirely by borrowing. Taxes have not been raised to pay for it - in fact, taxes on the rich have actually fallen. Deficit spending gives the illusion that the laws of economics can be repealed, that we can have both guns and butter. But of course the laws are not repealed. The costs of the war are real even if they have been deferred, possibly to another generation.

***

Killings by war veterans on the rise

AP Story

At least 121 Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans have committed a killing or been charged in one in the United States after returning from combat, The New York Times reported Sunday.

The newspaper said it also logged 349 homicides involving all active-duty military personnel and new veterans in the six years since military action began in Afghanistan, and later Iraq. That represents an 89-percent increase over the previous six-year period, the newspaper said.

About three-quarters of those homicides involved Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans, the newspaper said. The report did not illuminate the exact relationship between those cases and the 121 killings also mentioned in the report.

***
The 121 killings ranged from shootings and stabbings to bathtub drownings and fatal car crashes resulting from drunken driving, the newspaper said. All but one of those implicated was male.

About a third of the victims were girlfriends or relatives, including a 2-year-old girl slain by her 20-year-old father while he was recovering from wounds sustained in Iraq.

A quarter of the victims were military personnel. One was stabbed and set afire by fellow soldiers a day after they all returned from Iraq.

This is another hidden cost of Mr. Bush's wars. They train these guys to be cold blooded killers, then they are placed in a pressure cooker like Iraq and some eventually snap. Since money is so tight, due to the fact all the money in the war budget is needed in the warzone, soldiers are being discharged without the proper mental health treatment they should be provided. So you have war veterans being released back into the community and some are mentally unstable. In other words it is a tragedy waiting to happen.

Giuliani's Official Advocates Ethnic Cleansing of all Muslims

This has already gotten some attention, but it deserves a lot more.

The Guardian of London is conducting video documentaries up in New Hampshire. And they did a segment on Rudy in which they got a very off-kilter quote about Muslims from a Rudy campaign official in the state. The Guardian identifies him as John Deady, the co-chair of state Veterans for Rudy.

Deady -- and the key here is that he is a Rudy campaign official -- says that Rudy should be our President because he has what it takes to tackle one of our "most difficult problems," which he identifies as the "rise of the Muslims." Deady adds that we need to "chase them back to their caves" or otherwise "get rid of them."

Here's the quote:

"He's got I believe the knowledge and the judgement to attack one of the most difficult problems in current history and that is the rise of the Muslims, and make no mistake about it, this hasn't happened for a thousand years. These people are very dedicated and they're also very very smart in their own way. We need to keep the feet to the fire and keep pressing these people until we defeat or chase them back to their caves or in other words get rid of them."

Source

****
Rudy Giuliani is one old creepy sick bastard, all he talks about is continuing and starting more wars. He must be desperately trying to get the southern racist voters. I think the international community is sitting back to see who we will pick to lead this country for the next 4 to 8 years and if we are dumb enough to pick another war monger I don't think China and Russia is going to sit back allow us to continue this "Cowboy" foreign policy of shoot first and ask questions later. I really think they will make moves to oppose and contain us.

The Vote for Endless War

On Tuesday, December 18, Republicans and Democrats in the Senate combined to give President Bush $70 billion to carry the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan into next summer. Only 23 Democrats and one independent supported an amendment by Senator Feingold that would have required the safe redeployment of troops from Iraq. Here are the senators who voted to end the war:

Akaka (D-HI) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Byrd (D-WV) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI) Harkin (D-IA) Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA) Klobuchar (D-MN) Kohl (D-WI) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT) Menendez (D-NJ) Murray (D-WA) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Sanders (I-VT) Schumer (D-NY) Stabenow (D-MI) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR)

Next summer, when the money runs out, a cutoff of funds will be unimaginable. The election will be too close. So our troops are committed till the end of the president's term; after all the talk, the Democrats have ended by obeying him. This capitulation marks the climax of one of the most extraordinary displays in history of a complex phenomenon: power wielded in the face of popular rejection, and power surrendered in spite of overwhelming public support. A president whose policy was disapproved by more than half of the American people chose to defy a majority whose midterm victory he himself had called "a rout." And the majority, saying they wished things were different, pleading the necessity of 60 rather than 50 votes, but never exacting reprisals or driving a hard bargain against defectors from their own ranks--the majority, again and again, backed down.

This definitive result of the 110th Congress will confirm the popular feeling that George W. Bush believes in his disaster more than the Democrats believe in anything.


Link

******

This Iraq debacle has got to be one of the biggest waste of money since the Vietnam War. It's a damn shame Americans never learn.

China deals blow to Western efforts to punish Iran

Excerpt


China has dealt a blow to Western efforts to increase diplomatic pressure on Iran over its nuclear programme by dropping out of a meeting to discuss tougher sanctions against Tehran.

Russia, which like China opposes further UN sanctions against Iran,added fuel to the fire by announcing on Friday that the UN nuclearwatchdog would soon start inspecting and sealing atomic fuel boundfor an Iranian reactor.

The West fears Iran wants to develop atomic weapons but Iran deniesthis. Tehran says it wants only to generate electricity.

Political directors from Britain, France, Germany, the United States,Russia and China were due to meet on November 19 to assess reportsabout Tehran's nuclear programme from the United Nations and fromEU foreign policy chief Javier Solana.
"I think it's partly related to genuine travel difficulties, but alsolinked to resistance on the broader question of sanctions from thatquarter," a European diplomatic source said of China's decision.

Russian state-owned nuclear fuel producer TVEL said inspectors fromthe International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will begin preparatorywork on November 26 until November 29 on a shipment of nuclear fuelbound for the Bushehr nuclear plant.

****

Hizbullah: If Israel attacks Syria, we'll respond

Senior members of Lebanese, Palestinian organizations vow to stand by Damascus if Jewish state launches war. 'Doors will be open which have not been open before. Israel will pay a heavy price,' they warn

"If Israel dares to make an adventurous move against Syria, it will pay a heavy price," a member of Hizbulla's political council warned Thursday.
In an interview with the Nazareth-based Kul al-Arab newspaper scheduled to be published on Friday, Dr Ahmad Malli warned Israel against considering an attack on Syria, saying that the Lebanese organization would respond to such an offensive with full force.

Tension
IAF sends fighter jets to Israeli-Syrian border / Hagai Einav
Syrian aircraft detected flying over Syrian part of border. After determining planes were not engaged in hostile activity, Israeli jets return to their base
Full story
"I believe that things have changed," Malli explained. "The times when everyone was afraid of the Israeli threats are over. The Zionist entity knows more than anyone that the price of such adventurousness would be heavy, and the Israelis know the price more than anyone.
"Since 2006 we have begun a new stage in the Arab-Israeli conflict and have demonstrated this during the Israeli aggression in July (the Second Lebanon War). If anyone wants to make an adventurous move, it will baer responsibility for this aggression."
Asked whether he was referring to aggression both against Lebanon and against Syria, Malli replied, "We are all in one Middle East."