Obama Is A Hawk

[Sonexdd]

Obama Is A Hawk

By John Pilger

15 June,2008
The New Statesman


In 1941, the editor Edward Dowling wrote: "The two greatest obstacles to democracy in the United States are, first, the widespread delusion among the poor that we have a democracy, and second, the chronic terror among the rich, lest we get it." What has changed? The terror of the rich is greater than ever, and the poor have passed on their delusion to those who believe that when George W Bush finally steps down next January, his numerous threats to the rest of humanity will diminish.

The foregone nomination of Barack Obama, which, according to one breathless commentator, "marks a truly exciting and historic moment in US history", is a product of the new delusion. Actually, it just seems new. Truly exciting and historic moments have been fabricated around US presidential campaigns for as long as I can recall, generating what can only be described as bullshit on a grand scale. Race, gender, appearance, body language, rictal spouses and offspring, even bursts of tragic grandeur, are all subsumed by marketing and "image-making", now magnified by "virtual" technology. Thanks to an undemocratic electoral college system (or, in Bush's case, tampered voting machines) only those who both control and obey the system can win. This has been the case since the truly historic and exciting victory of Harry Truman, the liberal Democrat said to be a humble man of the people, who went on to show how tough he was by obliterating two cities with the atomic bomb.

Understanding Obama as a likely president of the United States is not possible without understanding the demands of an essentially unchanged system of power: in effect a great media game. For example, since I compared Obama with Robert Kennedy in these pages, he has made two important statements, the implications of which have not been allowed to intrude on the celebrations. The first was at the conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac), the Zionist lobby, which, as Ian Williams has pointed out, "will get you accused of anti-Semitism if you quote its own website about its power". Obama had already offered his genuflection, but on 4 June went further. He promised to support an "undivided Jerusalem" as Israel's capital. Not a single government on earth supports the Israeli annexation of all of Jerusalem, including the Bush regime, which recognises the UN resolution designating Jerusalem an international city.

His second statement, largely ignored, was made in Miami on 23 May. Speaking to the expatriate Cuban community – which over the years has faithfully produced terrorists, assassins and drug runners for US administrations – Obama promised to continue a 47-year crippling embargo on Cuba that has been declared illegal by the UN year after year.

Again, Obama went further than Bush. He said the United States had "lost Latin America". He described the democratically elected governments in Venezuela, Bolivia and Nicaragua as a "vacuum" to be filled. He raised the nonsense of Iranian influence in Latin America, and he endorsed Colombia's "right to strike terrorists who seek safe-havens across its borders". Translated, this means the "right" of a regime, whose president and leading politicians are linked to death squads, to invade its neighbours on behalf of Washington. He also endorsed the so-called Merida Initiative, which Amnesty International and others have condemned as the US bringing the "Colombian solution" to Mexico. He did not stop there. "We must press further south as well," he said. Not even Bush has said that.

It is time the wishful-thinkers grew up politically and debated the world of great power as it is, not as they hope it will be. Like all serious presidential candidates, past and present, Obama is a hawk and an expansionist. He comes from an unbroken Democratic tradition, as the war-making of presidents Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter and Clinton demonstrates. Obama's difference may be that he feels an even greater need to show how tough he is. However much the colour of his skin draws out both racists and supporters, it is otherwise irrelevant to the great power game. The "truly exciting and historic moment in US history" will only occur when the game itself is challenged.

www.johnpilger.com

[mrreowwr_kittty]

1. So you'd prefer McCain? nt

[mrbluto]

13. Thank you.

Thank you for that thought terminating trope.

Because questions about a candidate are always attacks.

It's not like there's a chance here to examine an issue and put a candidate on notice that some of their positions are not supported, nor give them a chance to change or rethink them.

Perish the thought.

[slipslidingaway]

17. We should be questioning, although it may not be a popular

opinion.

[Cronopio]

19. Only unmutual infidels question.

Good people adapt, react, and obey. Or didn't your Daddy tell you this?

[slipslidingaway]

23. My Dad...Always question !!! So I was taught the opposite :) n/t

[Cleita]

2. Thanks for the concern but

we aren't buying it.

[mrbluto]

12. Yep. Anyone with reservations or scepticism...

...must be dismissed out of hand.

Obama will be our Democratic candidate and therefore not subject to any scrutiny on our part.

After all, that's what makes for a healthy democracy - right?

[JeffR]

3. Uh huh.

Sure thing.

[thewiseguy]

4. Bullshit

[Skittles]

5. so you'll be voting for him, right? n/t

[2Design]

6. bombs, bullets, murder, torture are better - not in my value book n/t

[On the Road]

7. I Didn't Realize Obama Supported an Undivided Jerusalem

That is disappointing. What on earth has to be done to bring some common sense to foreign policy?

[thewiseguy]

9. Thats not true

Obama's speech to AIPAC mentioned that he supports Jerusalem to be the capital of Israel. He never said that Jerusalem should not be divided though.

[On the Road]

11. Thank You for the Correction

I read part of that speech and didn't remember hearing that phrase. I do get the idea Obama has been driven toward establishment positions, possibly in an effort to be taken more seriously, but it's difficult to tell how far it's gone.

There were plenty of warning signs with Clinton. While he wasn't nearly as bad as most other recent presidents, he could have done so much more in the international arena.

[slipslidingaway]

16. Transcript and video...Jerusalem must remain undivided

"...Let me be clear. Israel's security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable. The Palestinians need a state that is contiguous and cohesive, and that allows them to prosper – but any agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel's identity as a Jewish state, with secure, recognized and defensible borders. Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided..."


Video, the above paragraph is at the 18:25 minute mark

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cOJNC2EuJw


The Obama campaign tried to clarify his statement.

Obama clarifies united J'lem comment

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1212659672984&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull


Obama's AIPAC speech shocks Arabs
http://www.metimes.com/International/2008/06/05/obamas_aipac_speech_shocks_arabs/9021/

[Cronopio]

20. Another virtue of questioning ...

... is that they prompt clarifications and verifications.

Thank you, slipslidingaway, for rising to the challenge, raising the quality of information here, and not denigrating questions about Obama's future policies in a kneejerk fashion.

[slipslidingaway]

24. Thank you! Have we learned nothing from the past 7+ years

when any criticism or challenging of policies was seen as an attack against Bush.

[27inCali]

8. sounds a little like a 9/11 truther

you know, we're all grownups here, we know Obama can't change everything over night.

The radicals always think they should be able to sweep in dramatically and utterly erase every social edifice that does not fit into their limited conception of what societal justice looks like.

They accuse practically every public figure of geneflucting to whatever power structure they choose to blame for every ill, never understanding that they are really just raging against those who do not genefluct themselves to their own narrow perspective.

Yeah, there are powerful forces working to undermine democracy, but man, to believe that we and Obama wont do a lot of meaningful things to push against that, to assume that the movement in that direction has not already begun in many ways is just absolutely defeatist and not helpful.

[mrbluto]

14. So we shouldn't discuss this?

...to believe that we and Obama won't do a lot of meaningful things to push against that, to assume that the movement in that direction has not already begun in many ways is just absolutely defeatist and not helpful.

So what are you suggesting the OP do? Shut up? Phrase his issue more politely? What?

Where can I find a list of acceptable topics and the tone to take when discussing them?

Is it on the Obama website? Or the DNC's?

Oh wait - you said the guy sounds like a "9/11 truther" - I guess, if I take your word for it, I don't have to think any further, do I?

Let me ask you a question - do you ever look at your own posts and realize to what extent you are using all the canned technique, sloppy logic, and received talking points that pollute the current political dialog?

let's just tick-off the loaded phrases in your post:

• Guy is a "Truther"
• Grow-up
• can't change everything over night
• radical
• dramatic, utterly
• limited concept
• accuse
• raging
• genuflecting
• blame
• every ill
• narrow
• defeatist

Sounds like you just splatted out a road pizza composed of Frank Luntz's word list and last quarter's trolling tactics.

Just look at the term "Truther". It's emblematic of the little twist that Republicans love, like when they insist that their opposition is the "Democrat" rather than "Democratic" party. Seems like a Luntz move to me.

Then there's the ramping up of the contrast - when exactly did the OP suggest we "change everything over night"? Oh. He didn't. That was just you fabricating phrases and then stuffing them into the mouth of your opponent.

Well, if that's the road to truth, who am I to question it?

Who really needs to worry about trolls when there's the thinking in posts like yours clouding things up?

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

10. Man, the astroturfers have been all over the net tonight.

Here, HuffPo...lots of others.

Do astroturfers get paid by the word or the post?

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

15. Meh, this guy apparently didn't think much of Bobby Kennedy either......

.....so am I supposed to take him seriously, still?

[Doctor_J]

18. Obama is taking a great deal of fire from the left

Presumably people like Pilger and Naomi Klein will get satisfaction watching President McSame's SOTU addresses if they get enough Naderites to stay home November 2.

[vinylsolution]

21. Rather Obama than McSame....

.... But the rise of Barack Obama reminds me far too much of Tony Blair.

Remember, Obama is yet another of those Bilderberg selectees - hand picked by mass murderer Henry Kissinger.

The bright young thing bursting onto a stale political scene, selling vague notions of 'hope' and 'change'. As an expat Brit, I've seen this whole charade before, and I saw the direction it quickly took.

Look beyond the carefully marketed image and see the sucking up to AIPAC, and the ongoing threats to a practically defenseless Cuba. How on earth does that equal any notion of 'change'?

Another great essay, John. If only more people could be bothered to read you.

[MasonJar]

22. Obama and everyone should read The Faith Club, a book which

investigates the similarities and differences between Jews, Muslims and Christians, by three ladies who meet and become friends, while researching with each other a book to enlighten their own children. I intend to write to Obama about his stand on South America's democratic governments, his stand on Jerusalem, and Iran and etcs. I suggest that you all do the same. Obama supporters need to not be constantly trying to deflect any criticism of him; he needs to revamp several of his policies...especially the foreign policy ones.

[mdmc]

25. I'll take hawk Obama over hawk McCain

but that is just me...