Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


History > History General > I agree: Say NO...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 1 of 2 Topic 2872 of 3183
Post > Topic >>

I agree: Say NO NO NO to a bigger colonial war on Afghanistan, it is

by "B.T.World" <btrworld@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Aug 5, 2008 at 05:07 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20080801/cm_huffpost/116207;_ylt=AlCAlMIpybpsNlmDbdUKRKH9wxIF
 Stopping Military Build-up In Afghanistan Key to Real "Change" and
"Hope"

Roberto Lovato Thu Jul 31, 9:08 PM ET

Recent debates around a possible and likely military build-up in
Afghanistan have created some divisions and tensions within the
movement to stop the war in Iraq. Though it is urgent and necessary to
debate the pros and cons of exposing the Afghan people to more U.S.
militarism, we should, with increasing urgency, worry about exposing
ourselves to the effects of continued and increased militarism:
budgets broken by war, spikes in global hatred of the U.S. and the
possibility of raising children in a future dominated by the anti-
democratic dual dictates of perpetual war and "national security."
ADVERTISEMENT

A recent re****t on how to best combat "terrorism", "How Terrorist
Groups End - Lessons for Countering al Qaida," by the hardly-peace-
loving Rand Cor****ation concluded that, "In most cases, military force
isn't the best instrument." This re****t and the common sense
conclusion that the current approach -- sending hundreds of thousands
of troops, deploying massive numbers of ****ps and conducting thousands
of air strikes -- make obvious that big money military-industrial
interests have failed to deal with what some national security
specialists call "asymmetric threats" (groups organized to conduct
decentralized, networked and unconventional military operations). And
this failure raises a critical question: why another clunky build-up
in Afghanistan to fight another nimble threat?

In addition to the axiomatic great game answer that says having a
military presence in a region makes it better for securing oil and
other "national interests", another answer seems equally legitimate:
that continued big-money militarism in Afghanistan continues to
guarantee the that global cor****ations will rule the economic,
political and personal lives of people across the world-including the
people in the United States.

By reaching what appears to be another Wa****ngton Consensus around a
buildup in Afghanistan, candidates Obama and McCain appear to be
sending signals not to the voters, but to the Pentagon and Haliburton,
Boeing, Blackwater and other military-industrial companies whose stock
values depend on the extension and expansion of what Nobel prize-
winning economist Joseph Stiglitz calls a "3 Trillion Dollar War."
Viewed from this perspective, changing military focus from Iraq to
Afghanistan is a form of coded communication between those who would
govern us politically and the de facto interests that govern us from
behind the Oval Office -- global cor****ations and military industrial
interests that "protect" their investments in the name of "the
national interest."

Without stopping those who profit handsomely by killing both people
and peace in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, we will not have the
economic resources required to build a more just society; we will not
have a political system in which the sovereignty of real citizens
overrules the sovereignty of the inhuman and non-human cor****ate
citizens that now define the meaning of "democracy"; We will not rid
ourselves and the world of the interests behind the US's 737 military
bases located in 130 countries and inhabiting all the continents where
Gallup and other polls tell us we are hated at unprecedented levels.
We will not achieve the peace and stability needed to save the planet
itself. Any talk of "change" or "hope" must place priority on fighting
and defeating the militarism that sucks our economy, polity and
culture dry.

For these and many other reasons, we must strike out in powerful
opposition to the next excuse for continued militarism, Afghanistan.
Whether the face of the next president is black or white matters less
than ending the sovereignty of the militarism that paints the world in
the black and white, us-versus-them logic that's starving people and
democracy.

For more on the discussion about Afghanistan and militarism, check out
tomorrow's Meet the Bloggers show at 1 pm EST!
 




 2 Posts in Topic:
I agree: Say NO NO NO to a bigger colonial war on Afghanistan, i
"B.T.World" <  2008-08-05 17:07:37 
Re: I agree: Say NO NO NO to a bigger colonial war on Afghanista
Bill <palmer.william@[  2008-08-19 23:03:30 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Wed Dec 3 16:38:31 CST 2008.