The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Dick Cheney and Barack Obama - polar opposites, right?

Who could be more different than the steely, surly torture-authorizing former V.P. and that cool, sophisticated shining embodiment of hope and change Barack Obama? If you were among the 74% or so who loathed Dick Cheney, than you may have been quite pleased to see Barack Obama become president.

Perhaps a more challenging recent political figure to pigeon hole is someone like George W. Bush's first Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Yet if we read the words of these three men with regards to nuclear weapons, especially the acquisition of these by some countries (but not others), the question changes to not "who could be more different," but "why are they so similar?"

Read the following three quotes - one from each of the above men - and see if you can match the words with the speaker.

"If the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards, if they put the pursuits of nuclear weapons ahead of regional stability and the security and opportunity of their own people, if they are oblivious to the dangers of escalating nuclear arms races in both East Asia and the Middle East, then they must be held accountable."

"The pursuit of weapons of mass destruction only invites isolation and carries with it great costs. Leaders who abandon the pursuit of those weapons will find an open path to far better relations with governments around the world."

"We want to engage our friends with respect to North Korea: these criminal activities that [it] participates in, as well as the large army it maintains at the expense of taking care of its people, and its proliferation of missiles and other technologies that can be used to develop weapons of mass destruction."

How did you do? (*answer at the bottom of this post) Was it obvious? Perhaps not.

All three speak out against certain countries (Iran, North Korea) pursuing nuclear weapons or maintaining a large military or weapons arsenal, painting such endeavors as tantamount to being "oblivious to the dangers of escalating nuclear arms," coming at the "expense of taking care of its people" and bringing with it "isolation" and diminished relations with governments around the world.

But who is the U.S. to lecture Iran, North Korea or any other country about the perils of nuclear weapons or maintaining a large military?

How can any one of these men or any other American politician stand before any world body or any television audience and wag their finger at other nations as the United States continues to maintain and protect its own massive nuclear and "conventional" weapons stockpiles?

In a country where we can't even offer our own citizens public health insurance or ensure that public libraries and schools will remain open for our own children, yet we can dump Trillions of dollars into maintaining over 700 military bases in foreign countries around the world, pay tens of millions per day to occupy and fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and still keep our nuclear weapons ready to fire in an instant, who would take what any of these men say for anything other than glaring hypocrisy?

And now we have the nuclear armed Barack Obama, Nicolas Sarkozy and Gordon Brown talking about sanctions and "lines in the sand" with regard to Iran's nuclear ambitions. Well, unfortunately, these men have no legs on which to stand.

So while we ponder the words of Obama, Cheney and Powell, really, with regards to America's own hypocrisy and its own WMD stockpiles, nothing has changed.


*First quote was Obama addressing the U.N. General Assembly on September 23, 2009. The second quote was former Vice President Dick Cheney in a speech before the Italian parliament and the third was then-Secretary of State Colin Powell in an appearance on Meet the Press.

Wrong again, stupid!

Okay, so admittedly we Americans may not be the most, uh...worldly people in the world. We trail behind other industrialized nations in our knowledge of foreign cultures and languages, civics, basic geography, math, and science. In a February 2009 Gallup poll, only 4 in 10 adults surveyed said they believed in the theory of evolution. In the 2006 National Geographic-Roper Survey of Geographic Literacy, only 37% of young Americans could find Iraq on a map. In a Zogby poll, only 42% of Americans surveyed could name the three branches of the federal government.

But Americans scored high in a 2008 poll that ranked "Bible literacy" and we continue to be the hands-down leader in global arms sales ($37.8 billion in 2008 versus #2 ranks Italy at a mere $3.7 billion). So never mind the popularity of the FOX television program Are you smarter than a 5th grader? -- of course we are! We just put our intellectual efforts into reading the Bible and building weapons systems instead of learning trigonometry and French.

Despite this, Bill Maher, appearing on CNN this summer, accused America of being a "stupid country." Regardless of what you think of that assessment, I can't help but wonder if the White House and the Pentagon don't agree with Bill -- that we are stupid -- really stupid. After all, look at the how they talk to us.

Here we are eight years to the week that the U.S. Congress voted to authorize launching a war in Afghanistan -- the so-called "Operation Enduring Freedom" -- and to date, the only thing enduring is misery in Afghanistan, and though we don't hear about it much any more, Iraq.

Just days ago Gen. Stanley McChrystal said, "I do not see indications of a large al-Qaida presence in Afghanistan now." Our man in Kabul, Hamid Karzai, is struggling to hang on to his narrow lead in election results amidst widespread fraud allegations, and the civilian population of that country is increasingly churning in violence as more foreign (especially American) troops flood the country and with them bring more civilian deaths and instability. Going back several years, a number of diplomats and high-ranking military personnel from both the U.S. and the U.K. have suggested NATO and the U.S. are fighting a losing battle and that includes Gen. McChrystal in recent weeks.

If you have even the slightest notion that, while waging a war in Afghanistan may be difficult and unpleasant, it could still be "winnable," or if you think, as Obama says, fighting a war in Pakistan and Afghanistan "could not be more just," then take five minutes and read this article in the Guardian newspaper. It is an account of villagers in Afghanistan's Kunduz province who had to collect the bodies (or body parts) of their family members (or anyone's family members) after a NATO airstrike killed scores, perhaps as many as 90, two weeks ago. If you still think a US-NATO war in Afghanistan is necessary or to the benefit of Afghans (or even us), read the above story and ask yourself what is the true cost of war and if you have any human compassion whatsoever.

Yet here we are, nine months into Obama's season of "HOPE" and "CHANGE" and what do we get? Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen coming before Congress with his hand out asking for more. More money, more soldiers, more weapons...more, more, more.


As if 68,000 American soldiers weren't enough, Americans are going to be asked to stomach a request for up to 45,000 more troops and god knows how many dollars.

This means, of course, we will be asked for more time, more commitment, more (human) sacrifice and more war.

Congress, deliberately playing its role as the limp-wristed enabler, is ready to bend over and suck Mullen's toes, dropping a spare $10 billion in change on the floor for the military to scoop up. Blood-spattered Sen. Lindsey Graham [R-SC], living up to his state's proud reputation for honorable politicians, and always ready to throw his money behind the losing dog, warned with faux severity, "this is your last chance."

Sure it is. Until Christmas.

Democrats are making a few mild grumblings -- Pelosi, Murtha, Levin and Feingold are thinking about November 2010 and what they will tell their voters when just plain folks and the seasonal "anti-war movement" gurgles a few irritated burps about too many troop deaths.

But fret not Freedom-Loving Americans! Congress will certainly fork over the money and troops even if it means accelerating the "withdrawal" from Iraq, luring more foreigners to sign up with the promise of citizenship, dropping enlistment standards further, carrying out more stop-loss orders, lengthening ordinary deployments, or hiring more private contracting firms like Blackwater (renamed Xe) or the security contractors who are being investigated for taking time out from guarding the U.S. Embassy in Kabul for some late night shenanigans.

So tell me, how stupid are we -- flat on our backs, eyes closed, iPod buds firmly stuffed in our ears, thumbs rapidly punching out tweets about what a dick Kanye West is or pondering who really killed Michael Jackson as our government waves a blank check for war without end in our faces and we barely blink.

Under-educated, under-informed, disinterested and just too damn busy, lazy or indifferent; we can barely muster a voice to oppose what is surely a bad, wrong and doomed effort to exert more military control over another far-flung land.

We've done this before in Vietnam, in Iraq, and for eight years already, in Afghanistan. Yet the military brass is telling us (again), "now we've got the right plan and the right man for the job, this time things will be different."

What could be more wrong, or more stupid?

Something still stinks...

Everyone seems to get it except for the people that can actually make the changes that need to be made.

Yesterday when the head of NATO and U.S. forces in Afghanistan Gen. Stanley McChrystal said, "The situation in Afghanistan is serious, but success is achievable and demands a revised implementation strategy, commitment and resolve, and increased unity of effort," it is hard not to blurt out, "You fucking liar!"

Of course, one could respond, "You delusional twit!" and perhaps that is more appropriate. Maybe McChrystal isn't really lying so much as he just doesn't have a clue. He's so deep in the game that he is completely polluted with military fantasies that he just can't think or see straight.

But what about Obama? What is his excuse? Isn't Barack Obama Mr. Brilliant - the Change we can believe in? Where is the change in sending 14,000 more "trigger-pullers" (read: blood-spillers, future PTSD sufferers) to bolster the already 65,000+ U.S. troops in Afghanistan?

Day by day, BHO's war policy is looking more and more like our old friend GWB's. And like Bush, Obama is proving to be a "uniter, not a divider."

Just look at the unity his misguided Afghanistan policy has engendered, bringing together such diverse voices as two polar opposites -- staid, conservative columnist George Will on one end, and on the other, independent Nir Rosen. Today they both came to a similar conclusion in their respective forums: the U.S.. should get out of Afghanistan.

As George Will wrote in a column in the Washington Post today, "Genius, said de Gaulle...sometimes consists of knowing when to stop. Genius is not required to recognize that in Afghanistan, when means now, before more American valor... is squandered."

Nir Rosen, coming from a very different background and political philosophy basically arrives at the same, or a similar conclusion : it is time to get out of Afghanistan, or rather, the time has long since passed and staying longer will only bring more needles bloodshed on all sides.

Today on Democracy Now! Rosen said, "In terms of the actual [U.S.] goal, they’ve said that it’s preventing al-Qaeda from using Afghanistan as a base. How do you get there? They haven’t yet managed to explain that. In fact, al-Qaeda in Afghanistan was destroyed following September 11, and they’re based on the internet, they’re based all over the world. They’re based—it’s an ideology."

The callous disregard for human life and utterly squandered resources is not only criminal, it is immoral and just plain stupid. Like watching a caged animal try to break through the same barrier again and again, seemingly never realizing that it is just repeatedly making the same mistake, we must endure the foolish, criminal behavior of the United States government and military as they try in vain to convince us or themselves or someone, that they really are doing the right thing.

In fact, the opposite is true. McChrystal, Sec. Gates, Obama and the rest are no better than the last bunch we just got rid of. After all, a shit sandwich in a pretty new wrapper with the words "100% Natural! Organic!" is really still just a shit sandwich.