Obama is full of it

Bulls-eye Oni! When I was in Beijing earlier this year, I too noted the many new buildings that were built especially for their olympics. They now stand EMPTY. Those shiny new buildings cost many residents to lose their homes where they lived for generationS. National Geographic MagazineAlso, my loathing for the corporate media reach high peaks during the Beijing Olympics. As the Chinese government repressed, tortured and murdered its own citizens, the western corporate media dutifully turned a blind eye to hawk their corporate sponsors wares. Whores!And just so I am not completely off topic . . .Obama campaigned that he would end the Afghan war.In a time of economic recession and health care crisis, this war is costing $2 billion EACH MONTH. Obama is not ending the Afghan war, he is ESCALATING it. Obama went ahead and boosted U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan by 17,000 this past Spring. An additional 40,000 troops will now be added. With undoubtedly more in the future when this surge also doesn't change things (Vietnam anyone?). Both Dem and Repub Administrations know that the art of "escalation of war mongering" needs to be done quietly and incrementally or an apathetic public just may react.I said before, Obama is gonna keep to a muddled strategy with continuing civilian deaths that will only create more terrorists against Amerika. Who STILL disagrees with this?Lastly, Oni, NYC is a bit far from Buffalo. Ever do shows in Toronto? I love Toronto. Certainly the best thing about living in Buffalo is that TO is just an hour or two drive away.

Oh, c'mon Jazzns.He never said his plan was to escalate the war in an effort to specifically kill civilians. His plan was supposedly different than Bush Jr's because "His" plan would be "effective" in eventually ending the Afghan war.It's not.Civilian deaths are uniting all factions against the US and will lead to more terrorist attacks against the US. I still am dumbfounded to why this so confuses people.

Sigh.Ok, I'll try once more . . .While campaigning, Obama said his escalating Afghan strategy, as opposed to Bush's, would be successful.It wasn't.The huge surprise is that many, many voters fell for it.Hence the topic of the thread.. . . we seem to agree here, yes? So what's with the hostility?Now, regarding your snarki last line:I would never vote for a candidate that believes killing civilians is an effective way to end a war. Yes, you're quite correct, I would rather waste my vote than vote for that type of candidate.

Hey Jazzns,Thanks for the more civilized discourse. And again, I think we generally are in agreement. 8 years? Oh boy. Invasions of Afghanistan - WikipediaFrom Onifre: I agree with Oni (big surprise there, eh?). This is what so pissed me off about Bush Jr.'s invasion into Iraq. His administration didn't know the history of Iraq's internal conflicts. They also didn't want to know. There WERE strategists who tried to warn the Bush Jr. Admin about Sunnis and Shiite and Kurds history, but the Bush Admin didn't care. That is why the Iraq fiasco HAD to turn out the way it did.And now it is Obama's turn. Did he ever offer a word of empathy to what the Afghans specifically want? Did he ever make a comment to Afghanistan's long history of invasion? Saying that the problem only goes back "8 years" is not helpful to realize a successful mission. This Afghan fiasco will end just like Iraq. Same mentality.

Thanks jacortina, you beat me to it.Here's a few of my links too:US drones killed at least 15 people inside Pakistan today, the first such strikes since Barack Obama became president and a clear sign that the controversial military policy begun by George W Bush has not changedThe Times & The Sunday Times. . . the aggressive policies of the alliance between President Pervez Musharraf and the Bush administration in the tribal areas.U.S. air strike in tribal area of Pakistan kills 9 - The New York TimesObama Continues Bush Policy of Deadly Air Strikes in PakistanObama Continues Bush Policy of Deadly Air Strikes in Pakistan | Democracy Now!

That may because you are directing us AWAY from your entire point when you write: (Captialization emphasis added by me.)

Sorry, Jazzns, I have a difficult time letting your question go in light of Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize. In a just world, a "Peace Prize" wouldn't be given to Arafat, Kissinger, or Obama.The US CONTINUES to use or sell illegal weapons (such as depleted uranium weapons, cluster bombs, napalm, and PARTICULARLY, phosphorus weapons to Israel) that ARE used against civilians. And the US still has not signed the land mine treaty (The Ottawa Treaty). As a result, innocent civilians continue to die.BEFORE responding, take a look at the following sites regarding phosphorus weapon use in Israel, in particular the picture page below with the DEAD CHILDREN. Is it possible to understand why I am not impressed with Obama? In a time of recession and health care crisis in the US, why has the US military budget (equal to ALL COMBINED military spending of the rest of the world) NOT been reduced? I often wonder why so few people are saddened/upset by all this:Human Rights Watch: Israel Used White Phosphorus Against People of Gaza.
The U.S government is complicit in any war crimes committed by Israel in its use of white phosphorus.
http://www.worldcantwait.net/...horus-against-people-of-gazaIsrael Used White Phosphorus —Made in USA—on Gazans
Israel Used White Phosphorus –Made in USA–on Gazans | Allison Kilkenny: UnreportedIn the view of Human Rights Watch the use of white phosphorus in densely populated areas in Gaza contravenes international humanitarian law.
http://www.aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=1&id=15350Israel: White Phosphorus Use Evidence of War Crimes
The United States government, which supplied Israel with its white phosphorus munitions, should also conduct an investigation to determine whether Israel used it in violation of the laws of war, Human Rights Watch said.
http://www.internationalnetworkforpeace.org/spip.php?arti...white phosphorus israel photos (WARNING, very graphic)
white phosphorus israel - Google SearchBoth the United States and Israel routinely use illegal weapons against civilian populations in the Middle East, including firing depleted uranium shells into city structures (roads, buildings, bridges, etc.), thereby contaminating the region with latent radiation for the next few thousand years.
Alex Jones' EndgameDetailed evidence has emerged of Israel's extensive use of US-made weaponry during its war in Gaza last month, including white phosphorus artillery shells, 500lb bombs and Hellfire missiles.
Amnesty International detailed the weapons used and called for an immediate arms embargo on Israel and all Palestinian armed groups. It called on the Obama administration to suspend military aid to Israel.
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/02/23Israel faces heat over white phosphorus
MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos

Hey Jazzns,Thanks for the reply. Again, there is no need to "misrepresent you", as we are generally in agreement, and it seems we are repeating ourselves . . . "Past CENTURY"? Oh dear. You don't seem to be reading my links I am providing. As my previous Iraq example has shown, if history is fully disregarded, then a successful strategy is doomed. I am NOT surprised or shocked by this fact. Obama and his supporters seem to be. Yes, yes, and yes. Again, I agree with you that Obama had campaign pledged that. Yes, he did follow through with his campaign promise by escalating the war in Afghanistan. I and his supporters are NOT surprised about THAT part. I AM surprised so many people fell for his supposed "different", "much better" and "analytically superier" strategy would be successful. In reality, it is no different than Bush Jr's. So many civilians are being killed by US attacks, the population has decided to accept the LESSER EVIL . . . the Taliban. Obama has effectively given the enemy victory by a continued muddled escalation strategy. I am NOT shocked or surprised about this part either. Perhaps you are not as surprised either because in your OPINION, you ALSO have wrote that it would be better for US to withdraw. The US military budget is equal to the rest of the world combined. When DEMS/REPUBS are conditioned to see a MILITARY solution to EVERY problem, there should be no surprise to the fiasco conclusions in Iraq and Afghanistan.Somewhat off-topic: Anyone see the movie "Osama"? Story of an Afghan girl who pretends to be a boy to fool the Taliban from destroying her family. Sad, horrible story. Based on true stories. Just how bad does the US have to suck for the Afghan people to choose the Taliban over the US troops?

Ermmm, he has neither signed it or has said he intends to sign it. At the very least, he doesn't see it as an urgency. Supposedly . . .
"The United States refuses to sign the treaty because it does not offer a "Korean exception". But, nearly the entire rest of the world sees how landmines murder women and children, and they prefer to outlaw landmines.Ottawa Treaty - WikipediaI've been to Cambodia. US landmines continue to maim and kill civilians. In the countryside, amputee children are everywhere begging. Unlike virtually every civilized country in the world, the US takes no responsibility for its casualties caused by its landmines. It's deplorable. What other conclusion can there be? Jazzns, Did you read any of my links? ANY? (I'll include them again, below). During the Israel invasion into Gaza, January 2009, Israel troops used US-made phosphorus weapons on women and children CIVILIANS. Not only was that an illegal war act, but the entire assault was illegal: collective punishment IS a war crime. Yet there was no condemnation from Obama. SOS Clinton only shameful words were that the Israelites had a "right to defend themselves" (by murdering women and children). Obama/US continues to sell weapons to Israel. I ask again, what other conclusion besides "Obama, at least TACITLY, approves the murder of civilians" can there be?I think I am HARDLY using hyperbole. I understand you disagree.Human Rights Watch: Israel Used White Phosphorus Against People of Gaza.
The U.S government is complicit in any war crimes committed by Israel in its use of white phosphorus.
.../5473-human-rights-watch-israel-used-white-phosphorus-against-people-of-gazaIsrael Used White Phosphorus —Made in USA—on Gazans
http://allisonkilkenny.wordp.../israel-used-white-phosphorusIn the view of Human Rights Watch the use of white phosphorus in densely populated areas in Gaza contravenes international humanitarian law.
http://www.aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=1&id=15350Israel: White Phosphorus Use Evidence of War Crimes
The United States government, which supplied Israel with its white phosphorus munitions, should also conduct an investigation to determine whether Israel used it in violation of the laws of war, Human Rights Watch said.
http://www.internationalnetworkforpeace.org/spip.php?arti...white phosphorus israel photos (WARNING, very graphic)
white p - Google Search...Both the United States and Israel routinely use illegal weapons against civilian populations in the Middle East, including firing depleted uranium shells into city structures (roads, buildings, bridges, etc.), thereby contaminating the region with latent radiation for the next few thousand years.
.../doctor-decries-israels-use-of-illegal-weapons-in-assault-on-gaza.htmlDetailed evidence has emerged of Israel's extensive use of US-made weaponry during its war in Gaza last month, including white phosphorus artillery shells, 500lb bombs and Hellfire missiles.
Amnesty International detailed the weapons used and called for an immediate arms embargo on Israel and all Palestinian armed groups. It called on the Obama administration to suspend military aid to Israel.
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/02/23Israel faces heat over white phosphorus
MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos

Hmm.Jazzns, thanks for the on-going and interesting discussion. Yes, I also sense that we are in "argumentative agreement". Obama's campaign pledge was to end the Afghan war (through military escalation). Can we at least agree to this? IMO, by not considering ALL other problems (such as full history of Afghanistan), Obama will not solve ANY problem. The problems are very deep, and interwoven (see below). Without a very complex analysis of ALL the problemS, Obama's sole military solution will not work. I criticised his muddled military "solution" one second into his presidency, and I will criticise his muddled military "solution" eight years into the future. Yeah, that seems to be an American passion throughout the world (no matter how democratic the nation). However, particularly in Afghanistan, counter insurgency was always of LOW importance to the US. Why would the US continue to murder wedding parties in an attempt to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people? Doesn't make sense, this would always create more terrorists (I keep asking, who besides riVeRraT doesn't understand this?). America's MOST IMPORTANT interest in Afghanistan has always been about energy resources. Bush Jr. Administration invited Taliban into US to make energy deals. When the Taliban couldn't produce a stable enough environment for corporations/legal contracts to hold, the US knew it needed a convenient excuse to get inside Afghanistan. The Bush Jr, administration PRAYED for a "Pearl Harbor" event that would allow the public to accept military intervention into Iraq/Afghanistan/middle east. Viola, 9/11, prayer granted. I read an excellent article detailing this several months back, I'll try to find an equivilant article for you if interested. As in Iraq, oil/gas/energy resources are the BIGGEST reason for ANY US intervention in Afghanistan. There is no difference between Bush Jr. and Obama here. They are both fighting for the "nation's interest" (corporate elite's profits/military industrial complex). The US will never care about the plight/human right violations of Iraqis, Afghanis, Sudenese, Somalians, Rwandans, East Timorese, Armenians, etc. Again, we are in agreement. Obama did escalate military involvement into Afghanistan like he said he would. Still no argument here.Obama's campaign pledge was to end the Afghan war (through military escalation). However, bringing peace to Afghanistan requires efforts/solutions/understandings into:
1. Disburse/eliminate Taliban and Al Queda
2. Make poppy seed less financial rewarding (see below)
3. End extreme poverty which attracts terrorist mentality
4. Share profits of gas pipelines and energy resources to indigenous peoples, EQUALLY
5. Stop slaughtering innocent civilians
6. tribal loyalties/history
7. ?
8. ?
9. ?I haven't seen/heard of any earnest actions into these problems sponsored by Obama. This is probably a bad idea, as it is in South America when hyper-subsidizing legal crops in other areas, to the point of profitlessness for peasant farmers, then farmers are forced to grow illegal crops for subsistence. Or when the market "forces" corn growers to grow crops for fuel uses, while people starve. However, if it would reduce the US military from murdering wedding parties, I would at least consider it. Do you have a link that fully details this strategy?

Fair enough. I'll temporarily retract my "Obama pro-landmine" assertion.But not my "Obama pro-Palestinean women and children slaughter" assertion. Please re-read over the phosphorus weapons links I provided.

Hey Jazzns,I read your posts #89, 90, and 91. I am generally nodding "yes" to many things you write, except . . .post #89: After eight horrid years of Bush Jr., it is sad I can only admit Obama is "micro-stepping" in the right direction. Obama is a corporate tool. Under an Obama administration, the industrial military complex shant be reduced, there will be more oppression, torture (no talk about closing Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan is there?), and death, while education and health care will go on wanting. No, I rather think too many apathetic/non-thinking/too-easily-complacent/non-voting voters are flawed. Democracy without participation is not democracy.post #90: Keep in mind, one child's death negates a million good things Obama has/will supposedly do. Perhaps that is why the Afghans are now choosing the Taliban. I have noted your postive outlook, unfortunately I am not as optimistic as you. Nonetheless, you don't seem to want to come to grips with this specific overwelming problem: ...the Afghans don't like foreigners inside their country. They understand foreigners murder helpless women and children. When the US murdered the first baby in a village somewhere in Afghanistan, the US presence had permanently lost all credibility. The US is now viewed along with Alexander the Great, the Mongols, the British as ENEMY invaders. Afghans don't like the US, they don't want to act in unison with the US. I don't blame them. Please consider this analogy: Germany invades Poland under false pretenses. Poland doesn't want the Germans inside Poland. While murdering women and children, the Germans continue to prod the Poles to act in unison with the Germans. How likely do you think a lasting peace will form between the Poles and occupying Germans? Just as Germany had illegitimate reasons for occupying Poland, so too has the US for occupying Afghanistan. The Afghans understand this, Americans still don't.post #91: If you are unable/unwilling to acknowledge the war crimes of "Collective Punishment" and the war crimes of using illegal weapons against women and children and the illegality of US giving weapons to a country in violation of human rights, THEN, I understand you won't be in agreement with me. No, not complicated at all. From Obama's point of view, it is ridiculously easy: Stop giving Israel military aid/ANY financial aid. We have seen quick success when this solution was applied to other nations receiving US aid (how quickly Indonesia's Suharto came into line with just the possibility of him not receiving any aid). That Obama will not consider something entirely quick and easy to end oppression, torture, and death of Palestinian woman and children is indicative of his indifference to human suffering.

My apologies Jazzns, please explain, I am pleading temporary ignorance.

Jazzns,RE: post # 97:Certainly one of the better responses I've ever read on the forum. Clear and illustrative. Reminds me of a typical post from Rravin. Good job Jazzns.I am mostly in agreement with your post, I think we are somewhat similar in POV. BUT, while you have a much more patient, willing-to-allow-gradual-change stance, I have a more victim-centric priority (I sometimes think I come across like the character from The Simpsons, Helen Lovejoy, when she bemoans "won't someone think of the children!?"). If my country is doing something illegal or immoral, I want it to stop IMMEDIATELY. Perhaps your stance is a more reasonable, pragmatic course, but in my mind that doesn't help the victims who are suffering right NOW or who will be suffering tomorrow morning.I don't have anything more to add. If you're done, thanks for the "debate". I look forward to our next one.

I understand what you are saying, and while I somewhat agree, I can't imagine things could be even worse for these Palestinian children:google images search>white phosphorus weapons children (WARNING, graphic images!)white phosphorus weapons children - Google Search(as I mentioned earlier, I can't stop thinking about the women and children victims FIRST)