A note to our readers: We're eager
to hear from you, and to provide a forum for your words to be read by
others. Here are some helpful hints: Short, several paragraph letters
have the best chance of being accepted for publication. Sign the letter
with your name; we don't want to be giving out your email
address
to strangers. Unless you instruct us otherwise, we'll assume it's OK
with you if we post your letter, or excerpts from it.
Send your letters to us at
crisispapers@hotmail.com.
This page has retained letters
for the past three uploads.
Thanks. -- The Editors
July 28, 2010
Responses to Bernard Weiner's
essay,
Potholes, Petroleum, Pashtuns: Afghanistan As a Local Issue.
Hi Bernie,
EXCELLENT!! EXCELLENT! EXCELLENT!!!
I am really glad you wrote this the way you did emphasizing the bad
trade-offs we have made and are still making between fighting unwinnable
wars and improving our own country, which is rapidly deteriorating from lack
of sufficient funding.
Part of this is created no doubt by the influence and size of our military
industrial complex in Congress and their efforts to hold onto their turf and
acquire more. Part of this was created by peddling fear to too many
Americans who always by into this con because they love waving their flags
no matter what the cause. However the more serious part of this was created
by a Congress and President who never consider cost-benefit analysis when
making these decisions.
It's always war at any cost if it can be sold that way and usually it's an
easy sell. Yet the only way one can assess whether any war is a worthwhile
endeavor is by applying a cost-benefit analysis to this decision. There
always has to be a monetary limit on what you can spend on a war but there
is none on the war on terror. I can guarantee you will never hear back if
you ask any Congress person to give you the total number of actual
terrorists killed or captured since 9/11 [versus those we have just killed
or locked up w/o any charges, etc] and how much each one has cost us. The
reason is that the ratio wouldn't make any sense to a rational person. The
same way paying $1,000.000 to buy a Ford Focus wouldn't make any sense to
most people.
I would, however, state that Obama has already been using soldiers as cannon
fodder in Afghanistan assuming he too understands that this conflict is
unwinnable using any common usage of that term. And worse, the Dems in
Congress have allowed him to get away with doing this because they are
afraid to say no to him because they are cowards and fear being labeled weak
in fighting terror.
If we are still stuck in Afghanistan in 2012 I won't be able to vote for
Obama again. It will be hard enough voting for him with what I have already
seen.
RJ Crane (7/28)
Editor, Topplebush.com
Bernie:
[You wrote:] "Meanwhile, as the infrastructure and social services
continue to collapse at home, and as the economic depression becomes the new
normal, more than one rillion dollars has been spent on two unwinnable wars
abroad...."<
Two unwinnable occupations -- not wars, Bernie. The more we use the
WAR word, the more we fan the wrong flames of "patriotism" versus rightful
indignation.
Allen Roland (7/28)
free-lance blogger, Salon.com
In order to cut our losses and get out of that rock strewn shithole we are
going to have to admit the mistake we made in the first place, a mistake
that cost thousands of lives and billions of dollars and which has ruined
our economy at home and thus our own country. None of our politicians are
going to have the courage to make this admission.
woodyyc (7/28)
from Alternet.org
June 24, 2010
Selected responses to Bernard
Weiner's essay:
"The Incendiary Danger of Unchecked Power: Bibi As Bullyboy."
Dr. Weiner:
Israel became a garrison state because its neighbors have over and over
tried to destroy it. Garrison states are not nice. They change its citizens.
In Israel, most people have -- thanks to threatening neighbors and their
rockets and suicide bombers -- turned sharply to the Right. While you may
not like what you see in Israel, you miss the full truth if you ignore the
causes.
Anonymous (6/24)
from Truthout.org
Bernard Weiner responds:
I see no contradiction between being a "garrison state" and behaving
according to a civilized code of international law. As I noted in my
essay, there is enough anti-Semitism and anti-Israel sentiment out there
to help explain why Israel is so bellicose. But, just for one example,
there is no reason why Israel couldn't have handled this Gaza Flotilla
the way it's dealt with previous ships heading toward Gaza: escort them
into port and, if it's called for, search for contraband. Using
automatic weapons first on the high seas was provocative in the extreme.
Punishing the civilian population in Gaza, because you don't like who
they voted for, is an international crime ("collective punishment" is
illegal). I want Israel to have a future, and I want the Palestinians to
have their own state and have a future.
Mr. Weiner: You wrote: "Neighboring Arab leaders and countries urged
Palestinians to leave "temporarily" until the Israelis could be defeated in
war."
This is an often heard claim but I have never found a primary source to back
it up. Can anyone cite a radio recording, newspaper article, etc, that
verifies this account?
Ken Hall (6/24)
from Truthout.org
Bernard Weiner responds:
With regard to your plea for information about the Palestinian diaspora:
Unfortunately, trying to get objective answers to what really happened
in 1948 is virtually impossible; political objectives and nationalist
agendas get in the way, with a wide variety of competing narratives.
Just two serve as ##examples:
Benny Morris, a Jewish-Israeli
history professor at Ben-Gurion University, wrote: "A Jewish State could
not have come into being without the uprooting of 700,000 Palestinians.
Therefore, it was necessary to uproot them. There was no choice but to
expel that population."
Nuri Said, former Iraq prime minister (1930-58), is quoted in an
Egyptian book "The Secret Behind the Disaster" as encouraging Arabs in
1947 to flee to safety before an Arab attack against the Jews: "The
Arabs should conduct their wives and children to safe areas until the
fighting has died down."
Bernard Weiner:
An Israeli is more likely to emigrate successfully than any Palestinian. And
many do, if they can, to get away from the madness that is Israel.
I knew a young man from Israel, originally from Poland, who made a second
jump to the U.S. He thought many more would follow if they could.
But now, the American intelligentsia especially is looking for refuge. I
doubt that Israel will be on the list of possibles.
Demeter (6/24)
from DemocraticUnderground.com
Mr. Weiner:
[You reference Helen Thomas' remarks about the need for Jews in Israel to
"go home."] So much for professional journalism. As has been pointed about
by only a handful of honest journalists, and as clearly stated by Helen
Thomas herself, the reference was to those European Jews (which is to say,
most of them) in "Israel" that have no legitimacy to any land outside of the
Green Line, which is to say, all who reside outside of the original 1967
borders of Israel, not those inside of those borders, as has long been
conceded by all of the Arab States (though you wouldn't know it to read the
corporate press).
It is virtually impossible in our censored press for anyone to point out
what is glaringly obvious to all but the most obtuse: that instead of
punishing Europe for its crimes against the Jews, it is the Palestinians who
must pay for the crimes of the West. Must we be reminded that it was the
good Christian Germans who did the slaughtering, and the Christian West
generally that would not even consider having the Jews emigrate to their own
countries, but instead demanded that the Arabs shoulder the burden and
occupation?
Helen was absolutely correct in pointing out that the European Jews ought to
"go home" and "get the hell out" of Palestine. But then the Nazis, and their
modern-day equivalents in Israel and in the U.S. never did pay much
attention to the law when it got in the way of imperial hegemony. The
hypocrisy of the West, the unmitigated rush to the defense of the
indefensible (as long as it serves the powerful) never ceases to amaze.
FR Tothus (6/24)
from Truthout.org
What FR Tothus and many other writers forget is that approximately 50% of
Israeli Jews originated in Arab countries, where they experienced
discrimination similar to that experienced by Israeli Arabs today. Also,
large numbers of them were expelled from those Arab countries without being
allowed to take their possessions. Should they go back to Iraq, Syria, and
North Africa?
Anonymous (6/24)
from Truthout.org
The more I ponder Zionist leadership, the more I wonder if Hitler knew these
guys more than we do.... Europe dumped its problems on Arabs, now we have to
pay for it with our honor, dignity and money. We must become honest brokers:
either arm Palestinians to level the battlefield, or cut our unconditional
support to the cowardly bullies so they learn to deal humanely with people
whose land was given to them so Europe and the US will not have to put up
with gypsies any more.
Anonymous (6/24)
from Truthout
The modern state of Israel was established in 1947 as the primary U.S.
military base in the Middle East. Sometimes the tale tries to wag the dog.
But ultimately, the dog is financing the tale. And until that changes,
nothing changes.
Dave (6/24)
from Truthout.org
I was a child in Palestine, in Haifa, in fact and we didn't even have a
radio; the first radio i ever saw was in the home of a Britisher whom we
visited. I find it hard to believe we Palestinians heard radio broadcasts
telling us to leave. What radios?
Sitti (6/24)
from Truthout.org
I can no longer respect the Israelis. They are bullies plain and simple. I
was once so pro-Israel it was annoying to my friends. Little by little the
zionists changed my point of view. Rabid dogs that they are, the right wing
in Israel will be their own un-doing. Enough is enough.
Anonymou (6/24)
from Truthout.org
Policy changes the same day that Palestinians accept the legitimacy of the
state of Israel and not a moment sooner.
Don't delude yourselves. Everything else will simply be smoke and mirrors to
mitigate foreign involvement and compete for foreign support and aid. The
alternative of course is War. Israel planned for that option perhaps all too
well. Its not like someone is offering you different options and flavors to
choose from here, and unless you live in the middle east or Israel your
opinion does not really count beyond whatever aid your government offers to
either side, and clearly the divisions exist throughout the western world.
Often however people who know less about the situation are more apt to side
with the Palestinians as they have no memory of the past horrors and
freakish acts of terrorism committed by those people. They don't like Jews,
and anyone else who doesn't must surely be on their side too.
DigiTurd (6/24)
from Reddit.com
I was taking an International Studies class at the time of the first Israeli
invasion of Lebanon, when the saying was current that Israel had “lost the
moral high ground”. I asked my Professor Migdal if the PLO had acquired it
and he said “Well, they may have the moral high ground, but tactically
they're nowhere.”
It was years before I got what he was saying: Israel alone among countries
has to think tactically, think of its survival even in the short term. It's
the real world for Israel, objective reality, imposed on it by tha fantasy
of Power, and now on the Palestinians in turn. Like a spell, a nightmare, it
can end if we simply turn from it and look instead to what is green in us.
Anonymous (6/24)
from AlterNet.org
Thank you, Bernard.
inna (6/24)
from DemocraticUnderground.com
Dear Bernie:
[You wrote:] The only hope for a real shift in policy would
involve the U.S. government threatening to cut off economic and military aid
if that change is not forthcoming, and/or if the internal politics inside
Israel alter enough to lead to a withdrawal of public and parliamentary
support for Netanyahu.
You hit the nail on the head about what this country should have done TO
Israel a long time ago but there is absolutely no political will to do
anything TO Israel. It’s always and only one side of the coin: What we can
do FOR Israel. And it’s not just the far right or Zionists holding these
views. Almost all politicians, with some exceptions like Dennis Kucinich,
continue to give blind open-ended no strings attached support TO Israel.
And those raising issues of what should be done TO Israel like you have done
in this piece that I support, if we were part of the MSM, we would be
attacked and our careers would be ruined. We wouldn’t even have to say
anything quite as crazy as Helen Thomas to get the same result.
When Walt and Mersheimer’s book came out attacking US foreign policy as it
relates to Israel, the Zionists and their ilk tried to ruin their careers at
the universities where they were employed. It didn’t work – at least not
yet. Why do you think Jimmy Carter wasn’t allowed to speak on the podium
during Obama’s nomination? They’re all a pack of cowards who stand for
nothing except their next election.
P.S.: Brad Sherman [D-CA] is proposing a bill to charge any Americans on
that flotilla or future ones with a crime of aiding terrorists. And dear
pathetic Chuck Schumer -- 3rd highest-ranking Dem in the Senate -- agrees
with Israel’s policy of trying to starve the Gazans into submission.
RJ Crane, Editor (6/29)
Topplebush.com
Bernard Weiner responds:
I'm afraid you're correct: Nothing
will be done. The tragedy wheel keeps turning.
Crane replies:
Maybe what we need to do is condition our
support upon a candidate's willingness to hold Israel accountable. Just
about every other issue gets that attention but this one.
Weiner responds:
I hate making my vote conditional
upon a single-issue -- so many other issues are important as well -- but
I'm sympathetic to the cause. Might be a viable lever, who knows?
Crane replies:
I agree. Israel shouldn’t be the only
issue and certainly wouldn’t be the only issue for various constituents
either, but it’s one that should be brought up enough by more progressives
as if these politicians would be held accountable. My point was they never
have to answer to these kinds of concerns from John Q. Public.
Mr. Weiner:
Gross ignorance on your part. Egypt refused to take Gaza when the Sinai was
returned.
Jordan has no desire to take over the West Bank or its population.
The world wants Palestinian immigrants as much as it likes Jews.
When Arafat backed Saddam Hussein during the 1991 Desert Storm debacle,
Palestinians lost their middle management infrastructure jobs all over the
Arabian peninsula and became much poorer.
Bibi knows that no one wants the Palestinians and neither does he. What he
seems to be looking for is an emasculated Palestinian populace, which will
not happen
Kal Palnicki (6/29)
Mr. Weiner:
Just wanted to say how enjoyable and disturbing your article was. A
no-nonsense, well-balanced work. I'm reminded of Gen. Washington's
admonition in his Farewell Address. Beware the favored nation, they will
steal your foreign policy.
The Congress thinks they are helping Israel, and those opposed have no
balls. If the dollar doesn't take the US down first, then we and Israel will
be destroyed from within. Again, your clarity is astounding. Thank you.
Jim Roby (6/29)
June 12, 2010
About Ernest Partridge's Essay,
If It's Good for General Motors, Is It Good for the Rest of
Us?
Life is too short to spend much time on
the Democratic Underground, but this article by Ernest Partridge popped up
in one of my Google watch lists. I highlight only because it contains this
straw man:
The dogmatism of free market absolutism resides in the belief that the
unregulated market never fails to be beneficial to all; the belief, in other
words, that there are no malevolent effects of unconstrained market
activity, no “back of the invisible hand.” From this belief follows the
insistence that the free market is self-correcting, and that there is thus
no need for regulation ? that, in Ronald Reagan?s enduring words,
“government is not the solution to our problems, government is the problem.”
I can’t think of any thoughtful defender of capitalism and free markets that
ever would have said that the market “never fails” or that it is “beneficial
to all” or that there are never bad outcomes or that the market is perfectly
self-correcting.
Bad, stupid shit happens all the time in free markets. For example, BP
idiotically dumps a few zillion barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. In a
free society, BP will be out billions of dollars in cleanup costs and damage
settlements — it might even bankrupt itself if governments allow that to
happen, and thus will never again be able to do something so careless.
Markets can’t prevent a first dumb action, like huge leveraged bets on
ever-increasing housing prices, but markets can make sure the folks involved
don’t have the resources to do it again — that is, except if governments
bail them out from their mistakes.
The point is not that markets are perfect — the point is that they are
superior in both function and the retention of personal liberty to the
alternative of giving governments coercive power to use force against
individuals to change market outcomes. The point is not that individuals
don’t do destructive things within the context of free markets. The point is
that they have a lot less power to do harmful things over long periods of
time than if one gave that person coercive power in a government job backed
by police forces and armies. There is only a limited amount of damage anyone
can do when they depend on the uncoerced cooperation and agreement of their
counter-party. A tobacco company CEO doesn’t have a hundredth the power to
ruin peoples lives as does one member of Congress. Fifty years of slimy
cigarette advertising doesn’t have the power of one Congressional mandate.
Go to Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore — which has been worse for these cities —
the private campaign to sell cigarettes or the government led war on drugs?
(Follow this link to the remainder of the article).
Ernest Partridge Replies:
"I can’t think of any
thoughtful defender of capitalism and free markets that ever would
have said that the market “never fails” or that it is “beneficial to
all” or that there are never bad outcomes or that the market is
perfectly self-correcting."
For a starter, look again at the
quote from the Milton and Rose Friedman: ""A free market [co-ordinates]
the activity of millions of people, each seeking his own interest, in
such a way as to make EVERYONE better off.." (Free to Choose, pp 13-4).
And Milton Friedman again: ""There is NOTHING wrong with the United
States that a dose of smaller and less intrusive government would not
cure."
Here's another from Jacob Halbrooks: "“In the free market, the
individual would have to produce a good that the other person desired in
order to receive a good in return. Adam Smith's "invisible hand" of the
market guides ALL participants in society to promote the best wishes of
EVERYONE ELSE by pursuing his own wants and desires.” (The once valid
link to the source in geocities.com has since been withdrawn).
And finally, regarding environmental policy from Robert J. Smith: "The
problems of environmental degradation, pollution, overexploitation of
natural resources, and depletion of wildlife ALL derive from their being
treated as common property resources. WHENEVER we find an approach to
the extension of private property rights in these areas, we find
superior results." ("Privatizing the Environment," Policy Review,
Spring, 1982, p. 11.)
Enough absolutes for you? (Note CAPS).
A lightly regulated free market, like Libertarians and Republicans, want
eventually destroys itself. The big corporations use their financial means
and market power to monopolize and oligopolize their markets effectively
block out any competition. There is no longer any reality of free entry into
the market. Anyone who tries ends up driven out of business or acquired by
the oligopolists.
This is happening today after 30 years of no anti-trust enforcement.
Practically every market is
controlled by a small number of large corporations.
Jom Comment
Atlantic Free Press
Thanks, from now on I will replace the term "capitalism" with "free market
absolutism". If free marketers are going to use religious language, so am I.
Safe in Ohio
Democratic Underground
Both capitalists and religious nuts use "invisible" entities to justify
their nonsense Religions used "invisible being(s)" up in the sky and faith,
for thousands of years (and they still do) to not only justify their
nonsense, but the power they hold over people's lives.
Capitalism uses "invisible hands" and markets to justify a rather arbitrary
socioeconomic system, whose principal aim was to replace the old feudal
pyramid of power, with another pyramid of their own.
Thus it is no coincidence both systems resort to abstract and invisible
concepts in order to rule reality. Scamming is as old of a profession as
prostitution. And at the end of the day, capitalism is a scam: those who
control capital, which you can't eat/refine/or make anything out of really,
managed to convince those with actual assets and labor (i.e. real things
that you can eat/refine/or use to make stuff) that capital was not only
worth more than their stuff (via credit/interest) but that it was
fundamental for the proper operation of society.
liberation
Democratic Underground
To an extent you are correct in
questioning the ability of totally free markets, but you are also leaving
out half of the necessary equation for the free market defense... that the
rule of law must be followed... without financial and criminal punishment
for acts such as the BP gulf spill for example, the totally free markets CAN
NOT work, but if the rule of law is maintained, it is always in the best
interests of the corporation to maintain safety and environmental interests.
but yes, if the corporations are allowed to get away with those things that
they have been getting away with, it is easy to make fun of the "free
market" solution.
Sherry Mann
OpEdNews
I think most of the progress that you ascribe to market capitalism was
actually achieved by scientific and technological progress and the hard
efforts of working people. If a co-operative, collectivist, system had been
in place, with restrictions on wasteful financial speculation, that
restricted the larcenous depredations of market capitalist parasites, that
enforced a radical leveling of income and that, crucially, ensured that
ecological sustainability was the highest value, not the maximisation of
profit, I am certain that human progress would have been far greater, more
equitable, and sustainable, and we would not be facing civilizational
collapse and possibly species extinction as we do today. Market
fundamentalist capitalism is the acting out in everyday life of the
pathopsychology of evil individuals whose insatiable greed is a projection
of their inner emptiness, and who hate other human beings. Just look at the
viciousness of the policies of class hatred and revenge being inflicted on
Greece, Iceland and Ireland, so exactly alike to the policies inflicted for
decades on the poor world by the IMF and World Bank. The financial gangsters
and parasites who precipitated this crisis not only get off, scot-free, they
are given trillions of public money, which are to be paid back by the serfs,
as a century of social advance is destroyed in a trice. The policy
prescriptions of the Right are always the same-shovel money at the parasite
elect and screw the rest, and give ‘em the Bangkok treatment if they resist.
That’s really existing market capitalism.
Mulga Mumblebrain
dissidentvoice
Another COMPLETELY useless article - an insult to the mind....I spit on this
sophomoric garbage.
"...It is noteworthy that the
United States has the largest prisoner to population ratio in the
industrialized world...."
Really...? Is it also
"noteworthy" that the oceans are wet...?
Follow the Facts
Information Clearing House
By attacking and insulting those who believe in intelligent design rather
than randomness and chaos in the opening paragraph, and furthermore, using
the belief in same to ridicule a market theory, the author is committing
journalistic suicide. What Christian or Muslim reading the opening sentence
will want to click on the link? Well I did and am not the better for it.
Why promote the theory of evolution in the same article that claims to
address the issue of unregulated capitalism? Many of us deists (Christians
or Muslims) are not fundamentalists. Not all Christians believe the Bible is
a literal account of the origins of the universe. Plus anyone with the
honesty to reflect on the root cause of current problems has heard long ago
the capitalist mantra: "privatise the gains, socialize the costs". So that's
a lot of ink or rather, kilobytes wasted here.
Kamo
Information Clearing House
NO! But what's good for US is Good ENOUGH for GM!! Since We the People
Now OWN them (and Chrysler) where Are OUR 1995 taxpaid-for ELECTRIC CARS
(NOW!)? (It's not as if they don't still have the plans and have to
Re-invent The "WHEEL"). Right, I Forgot OBUMMER!
Vic Anderson
Truthout
Response to Ernest Partridge's essay,
"Nolo Contendere":
The Left loses because they allow people like myself to be destroyed by the
Right. I would have been one of those voices you wish existed in the
mainstream media: I've written for Time Magazine and the New York
Times.
You can still make this happen. If you're interested I can tell you how.
On another note, I have been pressing for the creation of "Media SWAT
Teams." Each team has a core group of a dozen people, and a larger group of
100 or so. If anyone feels he has to quit, he can do so only after getting 2
replacements. (Everyone makes this pledge before joining.)
The activities will be legal, but once they become effective, undoubtedly
moves will be made to make them illegal, so the dozen people in the central
group may have to change frequently.
Half-a-dozen of these will be Readers: they look for right-wing lies in the
media, even letters to the editor by right-wingers. The other half-dozen
will alert the 100 to take action, after digging up relevant contact
information to target the offender: contact information for the offender's
boss, his cousin's boss, his home telephone number, etc. They will also
possibly create websites attacking the offender, listing his home address
and pictures of his house.
Each person commits to sending one email a week, making one phone call every
two weeks, and writing one letter a month.
Jonathan Farley
Dear Dr. Partridge,
Thank you for writing your article and posting it – you echo thoughts
colleagues and I’ve expressed, and I’m sure many others have too – we
somehow need to amplify these proposals and – ask George Soros for a TV
station. . .ask the wealthy donors for the long term funding and guiding,
mentoring and job security, that the GOP gives its young potential leaders,
starting in high school – and ironically, the Left donors demand near term
financial results from their donees, whereas the right wingers do not. I’ve
passed your post to a friend at Netroots Nation, Raven Brooks. I think it
might be productive for you to confer with him.
Best wishes,
Martha E. Ture
May 19, 2010
About Bernard Weiner's Essay:
Mr. Obama: Tear Down This War!
Mr. Weiner:
You are so right; them's my beliefs. Obama needs to study history and get
some courage; get out of these far-off places. But I wonder if we are trying
to deny China and Russia the oil from the stans -- the bigger geopolitical
reason to kill and die.
Helen Thomas (5/18)
[White House Correspondent, Hearst Newspapers]
Washington, D.C.
Bernard Weiner responds:
Receiving praise from you, one of
my journalistic heroes, is a great honor. And your speculation about why
the U.S. is fighting in that area of the world -- to keep Russia and
China from totally dominating the stans -- makes a lot of sense.
Thanks so much for contacting me.
Dear Mr. Weiner,
Thank you so very much for your article, "Tear Down This War." Yes, "Those
were the days....," and we are again in them.
I deeply appreciate your mentioning the military/industrial complex, as so
few people ever do. President Eisenhower warned us but to no avail. I was
soooo hoping that President Obama would NOT walk lockstep with that crew,
but he is.
WHEN will we, as a nation, understand who is really running the show?
Again, thank you for your wisdom, knowledge, and willingness to share.
Phyllis T. Albritton (5/18)
Blacksburg VA 24060
Read Ismael Hossein-Zadeh's
"A Vicious Circle
of Debt and Depression." His analysis is not seriously disputable
by any rational, semiliterate person who has watched the horror unfold over
the last 2 years. Indeed, it is class warfare, initiated from the top down.
Trends forecaster Gerald Celente -- an actually rather conservative fellow
and certainly no socialist -- has a clever moniker for the inevitable
resistance which will sweep the globe in response over the next several
years: "Workers of The World Unite 2.0". Greece's problems, which are
only beginning, augur tremendous global instability for State
capitalism, convulsing Europe, the Americas, the Pacific Rim.
Perhaps this calculation has intuitively already been made by the global
corporate and banking elites: With no hope of growing the global economy
further (Peak Oil and other pressures), in the interim they are determined
to steal everything they can and test the resistance from the bottom. When
little appears at first, they are tempted to take even more. They are
confident the cost of resistance -- strikes, sometimes violent civil unrest
pushing countries to the brink of revolution, permanently depressed
economies etc. will not outweigh what they will be able to permanently
steal.
The smug punditocracy who ingratiated themselves to Triumphant Capitalism in
the 1990s, as if the Free Market were an inevitable and right force of
Nature led by the more Perfect Union, those Americans who thought they had
repealed history, have been the ones in denial the longest. But even
sycophantic whores like Tom Friedman have finally awoken from their
semi-comas. They realize what's at stake now. The fact that they align
themselves with plutocrats because it's in their self-interest to do so
should not obscure the basic point: People are increasingly forced to take
sides, sometimes in rather dramatic ways.
The outcome nation by nation, region by region, is uncertain. A great deal
will hinge on civil action, disobedience, other forms of creative protest,
dissent, economic reorganization such as local cooperatives, etc. If the
fiat $$ system collapses or shows signs of cracking, the latter will become
very important.
Some interesting counterexamples to state capitalism (less generously but
just as accurately termed Fascism) are already in place in Bolivia and
Venezuela and (Don't cry for her) Argentina. Indeed, learn from her instead.
She repudiated her debt and freed herself from the US Dollar.
Scott Schneider (5/18)
http://scottschneider.dbetv.com
Thank you, Bernie. Seems like it never ends. We just have to keep working
together as long as we can.
Peggy Blum (5/18)
Washington
Hey Bernie,
Great piece! I can really relate (I'll be 60 in November).
This sentence sure did remind me of what Nixon did with Viet Nam. <i>"In
Iraq, Obama has begun re-positioning U.S. forces away from the urban
battlegrounds in preparation for the promised pre-2012-election troop
withdrawals."</i>
I'm going to post the article on my Facebook page. Thanks for sending it.
I had no expectation that good things would come with Obama so nothing he
does surprises me.
Evelyn Pringle (5/18)
Bernie,
Good on you! It's all so maddening -- and numbing. Here we are, decades
later, and we're still angry and frustrated about the same things! What
changes? Really. What? "Rage, rage, against the..." And still the power
elite does what it does without common sense, driven by a moral mania that
belies objectivity.
Yet, ironically, as you point out, that moral mania actually damages our
moral sense of who we are and what we stand for. And our country stands
confused, like children waiting for guidance from their parents, never
learning that the parents are, sadly, wrong, and, yes, maybe even
incompetent, bad, criminal. And what do you do with that? What do we do when
the Good Object is actually bad? How do you embrace the duality of all that
without going mad?
Thanks for speaking out.
Simon Levy (5/18)
Los Angeles
Dr. Weiner:
You just made my day. Would that more articulate & to-the-point bottom line
articles like yours have been written 3 yrs ago.
I'm sending this to everyone I know -- whether they want to read it or not.
Do you think anyone will ever listen?
Amy (5/18)
In the short term, it seems tragic, as the fascist amerikan empire
slaughters and terrorises its way into oblivion- failed empire. Yet in the
long term, it's all neccesary because world peace cannot happen as long as
the imperialist bully, amerika, rules the playground !
Siempre por PAZ!
Tioche (5/18)
Mexico
The U.S. invaded Iraq and Afghanistan because of oil, to enrich defense
industries and secure Israel. Because Iraq and Afghanistan flank Iran, Le
Bete Noir Du Jour, and because U.S. administrators and Congress members
represent lobbies, not the American people, don't expect an exit.
Michael Barrett (5/18)
Minneapolis
Dear Dr. Weiner,
Thank you so much for the article appearing in Truthout: "Mr. Obama, Tear
Down this War!"
I deeply appreciate your words, although I must say, your analogies to Viet
Nam brought back a flood of incredibly strong emotion.
Although I never protested in the streets, my heart was with everyone who
did. I would definitely take to the streets today, if I thought it would
help.
The problem is I'm not sure what helps anymore.
I thought that getting Obama elected would pull us out of the quagmire. It
seems as though he is intent on keeping us there for reasons that have never
been made clear.
But every time I think of the insanity of endless war, I know I have to do
SOMETHING.
If I could save one Iraqi child, one Afghani woman, one young American from
dying needlessly, I would do whatever it took. We need to learn to take care
of one another and this is not the way.
...I hope and pray that your strong voice will reach the President and his
close advisors before we lose more good people to this ungodly, immoral and
unnecessary tragedy of two wars without reason.
Therese L. Hunkin (5/18)
Samoa News
American Samoa
You can be nostalgic all you like, Bernard, but everybody's older now and
more sluggish, they've got houses and families and kids and a stake in the
system, plus they don't care about this war because their rumps aren't on
the line anymore and if they're wealthy enough their kids will never have to
go. So why should they care? They don't.
This is like the Korean war must have been. Background noise, is all.The
only people who give a damn about it is the people who have family members
in the military there. And since that's none of the media,no attention is
given it.
None of this is morally right, but it's how it is.
MizzGrizz (5/18)
from SmirkingChimp.com
They should get out of Iraq and Afghanistan now.
Our nation is in the grip of ruthless corporations with no national
allegiance. It is all about their profits.
That's why we live in a state of endless war, open borders with America like
a sinking ship, labor outsourced and imported, no guaranteed medical care or
social security for American citizens. Not to mention college education.
All of which the rest of the westernized, civilized world possesses.
It's pointless to talk to the government as if they "made a mistake." They
didn't make a mistake. They're doing exactly what they were told to do.
It's not our government; it's theirs. Voting is a bad joke.
Anonymous (5/18)
from Truthout.org
The problem with liberals is that, in the face of all reason and evidence,
they continue to believe that Obama is a progressive and understands what is
right. Nope. He is a neo-con, just like Clinton.
What has changed since 2008? Lots of empty rhetoric and promises. Talk is
cheap. I don't see any change at all. Wall Street didn't fund his campaign
to see him act against their interests. America is a right-wing nation in a
death spiral with too many stupid people who can't think critically. Their
minds are rotted by television and the entertainment culture of this
country.
Obama is doing exactly what his masters want him to do and he is pulling the
wool over vast numbers of people's eyes because he is such an eloquent
speaker. He's nothing but a scam artist picking our pockets in the service
of his corporate masters.
Jeff (5/18)
from Truthout.org
The Left/Right paradigm is disintegrating before our eyes. The only way out
of this is to give it up and realize that we've been manipulated ...just as
long as it generates massive debt to service. We are being milked and more
recently, with the bank bailouts, GUTTED.
Ron Paul was in the small minority who opposed these wars from the
beginning, and who continues to oppose them, as well as having opposed the
bank bailouts. When will so called 'liberals' and 'conservatives' alike give
up and admit that the man has been right as rain for many years now, while
focusing on the whole Liberal/Conservative ping-pong match has produced not
one single win for anybody -- except Goldman Sachs, the Federal Reserve Bank
and the rest of the band of pirates who run the world at this point.
Bill O'Rights (5/18)
from Truthout.org
My comment to all future Presidential candidates, including Mr Obama: I will
vote for whomever will promise to remove our troops and civilian mercenaries
out of Iraq and Afghanistan within a year of taking office - no if, and's or
but's.
If that person does not do that, I will then spend my energies on what it
takes toward their removal from office. One 72 year old vet who is losing
patience.
Charles in Oregon(5/18)
from Truthout.org
Which wall do you want Obama to tear down? Don't hold your breath that the
world will change because our generation demanded it and wants it. As long
as Darth Vader has breath (and they live almost forever), they will rule
through the dark side. No Sky-walker around.
Anonymous (5/18)
from Truthout.org
Iraq, Afpak are NOT WARS -- they are fascist/ imperialist terrorist acts
against humanity! No war/ occupation is winnable because the more you cause
suffering, the more you WILL suffer! The fascist amerikan empire is in for a
lot of suffering! War criminals bush, cheney, rice, clinton ,obomber -- the
list is long and soooo far away from moral as they carry out atrocities for
what.?: power and oil...amerikan imperialism!
tioche in Mexico
from Truthout.org
"Mommy? Brother Adolph won't share!" ("Ask him again, sweetie.")
Starve the beast.You can't talk to it.
And you can only talk about it, so much. You lose your breath.
So you have to find ways to starve it, stop it. Kill it. Tell me there's
another way? Ha!
Ned Lud (5/18)
from OpEdNews.com
Mr. Obama regrets he's unable to listen today.
Thank you for emphasizing that, based on the actual war policies of the
Obama Administration, the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan now belong
to President Obama despite the fact that he cannot be blamed for our initial
involvement in these wars.
When I think about the criticism that was justifiably directed against the
war policies of the prior Administration, it increases my disgust toward the
partisan hacks in Congress who defend the same policies in the Obama
Administation. The United States has a shameful history of foolish military
adventures against impoverished peoples, and these futile counter-productive
wars are not ennobled by a Democratic President who knows how to formulate a
coherent sentence.
Blaine Kinsey (5/18)
from OpEdNews.com
The US has been at war against Iraq continuously since 1991. The bombing and
blockade never stopped, although they were much less severe in some years.
The US is not only at war in two countries. In addition to the peoples of
those two, the US is at war against the peoples of Pakistan, Somalia,
Palestine, probably Yemen, and of NE South America.
And, Obama did not run as a peace candidate. He ran as a war candidate who
wanted to change the primary emphasis from Iraq to Afghanistan.
[1] The primary characteristic of recent US wars are that they are not
primarily against governments, but portions of the civilian populations. Go,
brave troops!
[2] US participation in Israel's war against Palestine is sufficient to make
it a combatant, if not a trigger puller. The US is part of the weapons
logistics chain, not merely as a vendor, but as a financial supporter.
by Richard Pietrasz (5/18)
from OpEdNews.com
Mr. Weiner:
Who says it's unwinnable?
Some evidence would be nice for a change. And why do you gnore the big
difference between Vietnam and Afghanistan?: the insurgency in Vietnam was
popular; the insurgency in Afghanistan is unpopular.
Vattel (5/18)
from DemocraticUnderground.com
Why are we at war in Iraq and Afghanistan? You think it's WINNABLE...What do
we "Win"?
KoKo (5/18)
from DemocraticUnderground.com
I don't know if it's winnable. Afghanistan needs less political corruption,
reliable security forces, and more economic development. The story is that
we are providing security in the short term until Afghanistan's security
forces are up to speed. Economic development is crucial if the Taliban are
to be marginalized. That requires security and less political corruption. It
looks like a daunting task and [Weiner] may be right that it can't be done,
but unless he offers evidence, why should I accept his opinion?
Vattel (5/18)
from DemocraticUnderground.com
Well, it has been 9 years, and we've only gotten this far. We still have no
description of how we will know we have won. We have many proven instances
of commanders lying about operations. We have fought for the same territory
multiple times. We have pressing needs at home which go begging to pursue
this boondoggle.
You may continue to believe war mongers' lies on the hunch that after 100
consecutive lies, the 101st is bound to be true, but to some of us that just
seems to be recklessly stupid and immoral in our current fiscal state.
And there is that thing about killing civilians to save them that just seems
beneath a nation that would presume to be a world moral authority.
But that's not the point; this is: If you want to spend another $33 Billion,
I would think the onus of proof would be on you. You got any proof that
anybody has ever been successful in Afghanistan, or that you have the first
successful strategy there in recorded history? Didn't think so.
pundaint (5/18)
from DemocraticUnderground.com
A bill in the House of Representatives, H.R. 5015, would require the
administration provide a timetable for ending the disastrous, costly
Afghanistan war. Unfortunately, Members of Congress have told us they aren't
hearing from their constituents about Afghanistan.
You can change that.
Please send your congressperson a message that you want them to co-sponso
H.R. ##5015. ( http://rethinkafghanistan.com )
Jefferson23 (5/18)
from DemocraticUnderground.com