Pax Americana

The Problem of Peace - Nuclear Giants and Ethical Infants

This then is the present situation. How do we perceive the problem of peace now? - Albert Schweitzer, 1952

 

I left a comment in Troutfishing's diary, quoting Omar Bradley and suggesting that Sens. McCain and Clinton also read Albert Schweitzer's 1952 Nobel Prize lecture, "The Problem of Peace".  I think it's important and relevant enough to stand as a diary, as well.

[I don't know how to make an excerpt/read more break in Typepad, so if someone wants to edit this for a smaller post, feel free.]

You may have heard the phrase "Nuclear Giants and Ethical Infants" before. It's attributed to Gen. Omar Bradley.  Enjoy these quotes and reflect upon their message, if you will:

The world has achieved brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience.  Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. We know more about war that we know about peace, more about killing that we know about living.

The way to win an atomic war is to make certain it never starts.

Wars can be prevented just as surely as they can be provoked, and we who fail to prevent them, must share the guilt for the dead.

With the monstrous weapons man already has, humanity is in danger of being trapped in this world by its moral adolescents.

A longer and more detailed examination, by 1952 Nobel Peace Prize winner Albert Scwheitzer, is contained in his lecture, "The Problem of Peace."  I've excerpted some of the most relevant, imo, grafs here. I'll leave the interpretation and comparison to our times to you.

It would seem then that, in the past, war could operate just as well in favor of progress as against it. It is with much less conviction that we can claim modern war to be an agent of progress. The evil that it embodies weighs more heavily on us than ever before.

Because they anticipated the progressive humanization of the methods of war, people also believed that the evils resulting from future conflicts would be relatively slight. This supposition grew out of the obligations accepted by nations under the terms of the Geneva Convention of 1864, following the efforts of the Red Cross. Mutual guarantees were exchanged concerning care for the wounded, the humane treatment of prisoners of war, and the welfare of the civilian population. This convention did indeed achieve some significant results for which hundreds of thousands of combatants and civilians were to be thankful in the wars to come. But, compared to the miseries of war, which have grown beyond all proportion with the introduction of modern weapons of death and destruction, they are trivial indeed. Truly, it cannot be a question of humanizing war.

The concept of the brief war and that of the humanization of its methods, propounded as they were on the eve of war in 1914, led people to take the war less seriously than they should have. They regarded it as a storm which was to clear the political air and as an event which was to end the arms race that was ruining nations.

While some lightheartedly supported the war on account of the profits they expected to gain from it, others did so from a more noble motive: this war must be the war to end all wars. Many a brave man set out for battle in the belief that he was fighting for a day when war would no longer exist.

Since we now know what a terrible evil war is, we must spare no effort to prevent its recurrence. To this reason must also be added an ethical one: In the course of the last two wars, we have been guilty of acts of inhumanity which make one shudder, and in any future war we would certainly be guilty of even worse. This must not happen!

Let us dare to face the situation. Man has become superman. He is a superman because he not only has at his disposal innate physical forces, but also commands, thanks to scientific and technological advances, the latent forces of nature which he can now put to his own use. To kill at a distance, man used to rely solely on his own physical strength; he used it to bend the bow and to release the arrow. The superman has progressed to the stage where, thanks to a device designed for the purpose, he can use the energy released by the combustion of a given combination of chemical products. This enables him to employ a much more effective projectile and to propel it over far greater distances.

However, the superman suffers from a fatal flaw. He has failed to rise to the level of superhuman reason which should match that of his superhuman strength. He requires such reason to put this vast power to solely reasonable and useful ends and not to destructive and murderous ones. Because he lacks it, the conquests of science and technology become a mortal danger to him rather than a blessing.

But the essential fact which we should acknowledge in our conscience, and which we should have acknowledged a long time ago, is that we are becoming inhuman to the extent that we become supermen. We have learned to tolerate the facts of war: that men are killed en masse - some twenty million in the Second World War - that whole cities and their inhabitants are annihilated by the atomic bomb, that men are turned into living torches by incendiary bombs. We learn of these things from the radio or newspapers and we judge them according to whether they signify success for the group of peoples to which we belong, or for our enemies. When we do admit to ourselves that such acts are the results of inhuman conduct, our admission is accompanied by the thought that the very fact of war itself leaves us no option but to accept them. In resigning ourselves to our fate without a struggle, we are guilty of inhumanity.

What really matters is that we should all of us realize that we are guilty of inhumanity. The horror of this realization should shake us out of our lethargy so that we can direct our hopes and our intentions to the coming of an era in which war will have no place.

This hope and this will can have but one aim: to attain, through a change in spirit, that superior reason which will dissuade us from misusing the power at our disposal.

Is the spirit capable of achieving what we in our distress must expect of it?

Let us not underestimate its power, the evidence of which can be seen throughout the history of mankind. The spirit created this humanitarianism which is the origin of all progress toward some form of higher existence. Inspired by humanitarianism we are true to ourselves and capable of creating. Inspired by a contrary spirit we are unfaithful to ourselves and fall prey to all manner of error.

Whether peace comes or not depends on the direction in which the mentality of individuals develops and then, in turn, on that of their nations. This truth holds more meaning for us today than it did for the past. Erasmus, Sully, the Abbé Castel de Saint-Pierre, and the others who in their time were engrossed in the problem of peace dealt with princes and not with peoples. Their efforts tended to be concentrated on the establishment of a supranational authority vested with the power of arbitrating any difficulties which might arise between princes. Kant, in his essay on "Perpetual Peace", was the first to foresee an age when peoples would govern themselves and when they, no less than the sovereigns, would be concerned with the problem of peace. He thought of this evolution as progress. In his opinion, peoples would be more inclined than princes to maintain peace because it is they who bear the miseries of war.

The time has come, certainly, when governments must look on themselves as the executors of the will of the people. But Kant's reliance on the people's innate love for peace has not been justified. Because the will of the people, being the will of the crowd, has not avoided the danger of instability and the risk of emotional distraction from the path of true reason, it has failed to demonstrate a vital sense of responsibility. Nationalism of the worst sort was displayed in the last two wars, and it may be regarded today as the greatest obstacle to mutual understanding between peoples.

Such nationalism can be repulsed only through the rebirth of a humanitarian ideal among men which will make their allegiance to their country a natural one inspired by genuine ideals.

I am well aware that what I have had to say on the problem of peace is not essentially new. It is my profound conviction that the solution lies in our rejecting war for an ethical reason; namely, that war makes us guilty of the crime of inhumanity. Erasmus of Rotterdam and several others after him have already proclaimed this as the truth around which we should rally.

Only when an ideal of peace is born in the minds of the peoples will the institutions set up to maintain this peace effectively fulfill the function expected of them.

Even today, we live in an age characterized by the absence of peace; even today, nations can feel themselves threatened by other nations; even today, we must concede to each nation the right to stand ready to defend itself with the terrible weapons now at its disposal.

Such is the predicament in which we seek the first sign of the spirit in which we must place our trust. This sign can be none other than an effort on the part of peoples to atone as far as possible for the wrongs they inflicted upon each other during the last war. Hundreds of thousands of prisoners and deportees are waiting to return to their homes; others, unjustly condemned by a foreign power, await their acquittal; innumerable other injustices still await reparation.

In the name of all who toil in the cause of peace, I beg the peoples to take the first step along this new highway. Not one of them will lose a fraction of the power necessary for their own defense.

I believe that I have expressed the thoughts and hopes of millions of men who, in our part of the world, live in fear of war to come. May my words convey their intended meaning if they penetrate to the other part of the world - the other side of the trench - to those who live there in the same fear.

May the men who hold the destiny of peoples in their hands, studiously avoid anything that might cause the present situation to deteriorate and become even more dangerous. May they take to heart the words of the Apostle Paul: "If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men". These words are valid not only for individuals, but for nations as well. May these nations, in their efforts to maintain peace, do their utmost to give the spirit time to grow and to act.

One last thought:  It wouldn't hurt to send some of these key passages to the Powers That Be.  America's moral compass is seriously out of whack, right now, and we could use all the help we can get.

Rip -

Justice Dumpty

The keenest legal mind of our time:

"I don't like torture," Scalia says. "Although defining it is going to be a nice trick. But who's in favor of it? Nobody. And we have a law against torture. But if the - everything that is hateful and odious is not covered by some provision of the Constitution," he says.

"If someone's in custody, as in Abu Ghraib, and they are brutalized by a law enforcement person, if you listen to the expression 'cruel and unusual punishment,' doesn't that apply?" Stahl asks.

"No, No," Scalia replies.

"Cruel and unusual punishment?" Stahl asks.

"To the contrary," Scalia says. "Has anybody ever referred to torture as punishment? I don't think so."

"Well, I think if you are in custody, and you have a policeman who's taken you into custody…," Stahl says.

"And you say he's punishing you?" Scalia asks.

"Sure," Stahl replies.

"What's he punishing you for? You punish somebody…," Scalia says.

"Well because he assumes you, one, either committed a crime…or that you know something that he wants to know," Stahl says.

"It's the latter. And when he's hurting you in order to get information from you…you don’t say he's punishing you. What’s he punishing you for? He's trying to extract…," Scalia says.

"Because he thinks you are a terrorist and he's going to beat the you-know-what out of you…," Stahl replies.

"Anyway, that’s my view," Scalia says. "And it happens to be correct."

He went on to add:

"There's glory for you!"
"I don't know what you mean by 'glory,' " Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't—till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!' "
"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument,' " Alice objected.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
"The question is, " said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty. "which is to be master—that's all."

To which I add: vafanculo.

ntodd

Our Forgotten War

Remember when we won this?

U.S. Marines are crossing the sands of southern Afghanistan for the first time in years, providing a boost to a NATO coalition that is growing but still short on manpower.

They hope to retake the 10 percent of Afghanistan the Taliban holds.

Some of the Marines that make up the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit helped to tame a thriving insurgency in western Iraq. The newly arrived forces hope to move into regions of Afghanistan now controlled by the Taliban.

I guess this Mini Surge is happening because every year since 2004 "coalition" military fatalities have gone up along with opium production...

ntodd

Homage To Catalonia

Hmmm...

April 25th 2008, marks the Seventieth anniversary of the publishing of George Orwell's Homage to Catalonia, a biographical account of Orwell's serving in a "revolutionary" communist force, the POUM, in the Spain in the year 1936. The soldiers of the POUM, along with other communist, anarchist and miscellaneous forces, were tasked with helping to hold Franco's forces at bay until such a time as the International Brigades could train an army capable of permanently ending the Fascist war plans.
...

One of the most horrible features of war is that all the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.

[...] The people who wrote pamphlets against us and vilified us in the newspapers all remained safeat home, or at worst in the newspaper offices of Valencia, hundreds of miles from the bullets and the mud [...]

all the usual war-stuff, the tub-thumping, the heroics, the vilification of the enemy --all these were done, as usual, by people who were not fighting and who in many cases would have run a hundred miles sooner than fight.

Now, if that doesn't sound familiar to you, well, perhaps I woke up in the wrong blogósfera this morning.

The best part is that Homage to Catalonia is available online at George Orwell.Org.  It's only about 105 or so pages long, including appendices, just the right size for a rainy weekend.

Indeed.  And if I didn't have a bunch of grading to do, I'd curl up with my laptop and read Homage right now...

ntodd

Those are people who died

The epidemic of suicides among veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts appears to be reaching a crisis point, as testimony is set to begin in a class-action lawsuit against the Veterans Administration for failing to provide more and better psychiatric care. Internal VA e-mails obtained by the plaintiffs say an average of eighteen veterans kill themselves each day. A RAND Corporation study found that an additional one thousand veterans attempt suicide every month. Clearly, the system currently in place simply can't deal with the sheer numbers of veterans whose psyches have been torched and gutted during their service in our mismanaged war in Afghanistan and our completely elective mismanaged war in Iraq. Returning veterans must navigate an incredibly labyrinthine process in order to claim any benefits; I've been clinically depressed myself (obviously, not to the degree that these returning veterans are) and I can tell you that paperwork is the last thing you're capable of dealing with when you're in that state. That's something I plan on writing about in more detail later on.

Right now, I want to touch on something I've written about before: human beings are simply not designed for war. I'm way too much of a misanthrope to have any illusions about human nature; it's clear that the default setting for much of our race is 'douchebag.'  But 'douchebag' is a far cry from ruthless killing machine.'  We have to be goaded, perverted into a warlike state, with promises of wealth or increased social status or threats of being cast out from the herd. One of the stated goals of military training is to tear down the recruit, to short circuit his human nature so he becomes able and willing to commit violence against strangers on the order of another stranger. Of course, the enemy too is dehumanized to the soldier (and, via propaganda, to the citizen) in order to make his death more palatable and less troubling. Arguably, this is done to make the soldier better able to survive the nightmare that is the modern battlefield.

The only problem is that it doesn't seem to work. Thich Nhat Hanh, no stranger to the reality of war, writes that military training designed to strip both the soldier and the enemy of their humanity will necessarily result in atrocities like Abu Ghraib, because "Preparing for war and fighting a war means allowing our human nature to die." But our human nature can't die as long as we remain alive, and it seems to come squirreling out of us from the weirdest places and in the weirdest ways and the next thing you know you've woken up in a cold sweat holding the gun you keep under the pillow and holy shit when did you start keeping a gun under your pillow?

Eighteen people a day lose the struggle to reconcile what they've become with what they once were. Another twelve thousand people each year succumb as well, but for the grace of whatever they believe or maybe only because of dumb luck they survive to struggle on. There are no half-time show salutes to honor those who survive their PTSD and the ones who die are not counted among the honored dead and their names will never be carved on a monument. Remember this the next time anyone tells you to be "realistic" and accept that war is "inevitable" and it's all just "human nature."

(x-posted at A Blog Named Sue)

The importance of being civilly disobedient

I am now a criminal.

Not in the felony sense, but not in the speeding ticket sense either.  Today I took NTodd's advice and I made the conscious decision to participate in the War Tax Boycott.

Because, as many of my blog-friends know, 2007 was an extraordinary year for me income-wise (thanks to a certain game show), I just couldn't afford to forgo all of my tax liability this year, and so I did have to write a large check to the U.S. Treasury.  But, after some calculating, soul-searching, and thinking about symbolic value, I deducted 15% from the amount I owed, and I wrote the following letter* to accompany my tax return:

---

April 15, 2008 

Department of the Treasury 
Internal Revenue Service Center 
Atlanta, GA 39901-0102 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

After careful consideration of the consequences and balancing them with my strong feelings against contributing fully to the illegal, unethical, and unnecessary war presently being waged by the United States in Iraq and Afghanistan, I hereby declare myself a War Tax Objector and am withholding 15% of my total tax liability for the 2007 tax year. The 15% amount is intended to represent a compromise or median point between the percentage of U.S. income tax revenue currently spent on the military occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan (7%) and the percentage of revenue targeted to military expenses in toto (31%). I simply cannot justify making a full contribution to the deaths of thousands of U.S. and coalition soldiers and exponentially more Iraqi and Afghan citizens, nor to the destruction of the rule of law in America by the regime presently in power.

I understand that this is an illegal act under current federal law, but based on my own values and morals, I believe that the war and occupation themselves are illegal and that my decision to conscientiously object to funding these military actions is a necessary act of civil disobedience in order to express my outrage at the federal government’s continued adherence to a dangerous and destructive military strategy. There was, as we now know with certainty, absolutely no defensible reason to invade and occupy Iraq, and while the military operation in Afghanistan arguably was justified by the search for Osama bin Laden, the apparent abandonment of that mission has made our efforts there futile and has created an increasingly unstable environment for their citizens and our soldiers alike. 

Of course, I know that the withholding of a mere $[amount deleted] will have little if any direct effect on U.S. policy in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, I am heartened by the hope that a similarly concerted effort by many American taxpayers, coordinated by the organizers of the 2008 War Tax Boycott (http://wartaxboycott.org), might deliver the message that the country is tired of the warmongering elitists who presently control our government and, indeed, dominate our discourse through the mainstream media. Just as importantly, though, it will allow me to live my life having reduced the stain of blood on my own hands that results from funding a war and occupation that never should have happened and that ought to end immediately. 

Thank you for your attention. 

Sincerely, 

[Sinfonian]

---

Maybe this is a futile gesture, and I'm just setting myself up for an audit, or worse.  Or maybe this is just another step in standing up as a citizen and saying that I'm sick and tired of watching the Bush crime syndicate run roughshod over the Constitution.  Either way, I'm okay with it.  In fact, I feel good about it.

Taking action is empowering.  Everyone ought to try it sometime.

(cross-posted in substantially the same form at Blast Off!)

---

* Looking back at the letter now, I should have added a sentence about how I planned to use the withheld money in ways that will help change the current state of things, such as donations to progressive candidates and causes.  But, frankly, I forgot, and I've already mailed it with my return.  Oh well.

What Is It Good For?

James Madison, Political Observations:

Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds are added to those of subduing the force of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes and the opportunities of fraud growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could reserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

Those truths are well established. They are read in every page which records the progression from a less arbitrary to a more arbitrary government, or the transition from a popular government to an aristocracy or a monarchy.

But what did he know?

ntodd

Be friends, you English fools, be friends! We have French quarrels enow, if you could tell how to reckon.

I have a picture on my hard drive. I don't look at it much, but I keep it around.

It's a picture of a four-year-old girl.

She's Iraqi.

It's dark in the picture, but the girl is standing in a pool of light created by a Maglite attached to the barrel of a U.S. Marine's assault rifle. She's covered in blood. It's not hers. It's her parents' blood. They died when the Marines shot up their car for whatever reason things like that happen in Iraq.  No weapons or explosives were found in the car. The girl in the picture is screaming, screaming while covered in her parents' blood.

Like I said, I don't look at that picture much. But I looked at it today in order to remind myself what five years in Iraq really means. I saved the picture because at the time it was taken my older daughter was four years old, and all I could think about after I saw it was my daughter, screaming while covered in her parents' blood.

My older daughter is seven now. We've been in Iraq for most of the time she's been alive. The war in Iraq encompasses the entirety of my younger daughter's time on this Earth. I'm having trouble remembering a time when we weren't in Iraq.

This isn't about the Marines. Maybe they were justified - shit, for all I know maybe the guy driving the car was Osama's BFF. Maybe it was what they call a "clean" kill, which means maybe the guys who did it will only wake up screaming from nightmares about it for the next five years or so rather than until the day they die. I don't know and I don't care. All I know is that no four year old girl deserves to find herself covered in her parents' blood.

This is about the reality of this war and all wars: a four year old girl screaming while covered in her parents' blood. War is not politics by other means, no god calls you to smite the infidel and save your soul, war is not what makes generations great. War is a dark lonely street and a bloody child. That's it.

Today I went and signed this petition, a Quixotic effort to get Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to stop tearing into each other with such gusto as to leave either too weak fight McCain in the general election. A month ago if you had asked me to sign such a petition I wouldn't have, as I thought that this vigorous primary contest was a good thing, whetting our eventual nominee for the fight to come and giving his or her ideas a highly visible platform. In other words, a month ago I was an idiot. I haven't heard an idea yet in this contest - have you?

I want you to go and sign that petition, too - even though I don't think either the Obama or Clinton camp will pay any attention to it. They've got too much invested in the fight at this point, and neither is going to give any quarter. I want you to sign it anyway,  for a totally different reason: if you do something to remind yourself what's at stake in this election, maybe you won't be a complete fucking asshole to someone who supports the other candidate. Right now, we're in danger of leaving ourselves too exhausted for the general election too, and there's too much at stake this time to let that happen.

See, I don't care which one of our candidates gets the nomination. I really don't. Hillary's got corporate ties? I don't care. Obama's inexperienced? I don't care. Hillary's too polarizing? I don't care. Obama's pastor fucked a goat on the high altar on Christmas Eve? I don't care. I care about John McCain not becoming president. Period. John McCain thinks this gory clusterfuck in Iraq is a good thing, and what's more, he says he wants to start a few more wars, well, just because.

I'm not naive. I don't think Hillary or Obama is going to get us the hell out of Iraq right away and I'm not sure doing so is all that high on either one of their agendas. But at least with one of them we'll have a chance. At the very least, President Hillary Clinton or President Barack Obama will take the oath of office knowing that a large percentage of their base want this war over; they want no more screaming children. President John McCain will take the oath of office knowing that his base thinks singing "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" at a campaign event is funny as shit.

Like I said, with Hillary or Obama we have a chance. When I look at that picture on my hard drive, I know that I'll take whatever chance, however slim, that I can get.

(x-posted at A Blog Named Sue)

Star Chamber

Nay, that I mean to do. Is not this a lamentable thing, that of the skin of an innocent lamb should be made parchment? that parchment, being scribbled o'er, should undo a man? Some say the bee stings: but I say, 'tis the bee's wax; for I did but seal once to a thing, and I was never mine own man since. 

- CADE, King Henry VI Part 2, Act 4, Scene II

Guardian:

Military prosecutors today issued the first charges relating to the September 11 attacks, saying they would seek the death penalty against six detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, including the alleged mastermind of the plot, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

The Department of Defence, which is leading the prosecution through a controversial and much-criticised process of military commissions, issued 169 charges against the men that include conspiracy, murder in violation of the law or war, attacking civilians, destruction of property and terrorism.

Appended to the full list of the charges published on the Pentagon's website today were the names of all 2,973 victims of the outrage.

Prosecutors accused the men of collectively organising a "long-term, highly sophisticated plan to attack the United States".

The highest profile of the six, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, is alleged to have been the mastermind of 9/11 who, by his own words, was responsible "from A to Z".

The announcement of 9/11 charges brings to a head the simmering conflict over the legal treatment of the 275 detainees remaining in Guantanamo, and particularly the 15 so-called "high-value" suspected terrorists held there since September 2006.

Lawyers working on behalf of detainees have long criticised the commissions process — in which even the judges are military personnel — as unfair, unduly secret and against the US constitutional right to habeus corpus.

How sad that silly scribblings on paper are used to prevent justice...

ntodd

Chicken ala Democrat

Rolling Stone:

Quietly, while Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been inspiring Democrats everywhere with their rolling bitchfest, congressional superduo Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have completed one of the most awesome political collapses since Neville Chamberlain. At long last, the Democratic leaders of Congress have publicly surrendered on the Iraq War, just one year after being swept into power with a firm mandate to end it.

Solidifying his reputation as one of the biggest pussies in U.S. political history, Reid explained his decision to refocus his party's energies on topics other than ending the war by saying he just couldn't fit Iraq into his busy schedule. "We have the presidential election," Reid said recently. "Our time is really squeezed."

There was much public shedding of tears among the Democratic leadership, as Reid, Pelosi and other congressional heavyweights expressed deep sadness that their valiant charge up the hill of change had been thwarted by circumstances beyond their control — that, as much as they would love to continue trying to end the catastrophic Iraq deal, they would now have to wait until, oh, 2009 to try again. "We'll have a new president," said Pelosi. "And I do think at that time we'll take a fresh look at it."

Excuses are like assholes: everbody got one.  Speaking of which, Taibbi clearly stole the term chicken dove from me...

ntodd

John Denver-- "The Strangest Dream"...

If he was a Scientologist, at least he was one of the good ones.

Watch It Here.

Dr King

AP:

Nearly 40 years after the assassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., some say his legacy is being frozen in a moment in time that ignores the full complexity of the man and his message.

"Everyone knows — even the smallest kid knows about Martin Luther King — can say his most famous moment was that 'I have a dream' speech," said Henry Louis Taylor Jr., professor of urban and regional planning at the University of Buffalo. "No one can go further than one sentence. All we know is that this guy had a dream. We don't know what that dream was."

King was working on anti-poverty and anti-war issues at the time of his death. He had spoken out against the Vietnam War and was in Memphis when he was killed in April 1968 in support of striking sanitation workers.

King had come a long way from the crowds who cheered him at the 1963 March on Washington, when he was introduced as "the moral leader of our nation" — and when he pronounced "I have a dream" on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.

By taking on issues outside segregation, he had lost the support of many newspapers and magazines, and his relationship with the White House had suffered, said Harvard Sitkoff, a professor of history at the University of New Hampshire who has written a recently published book on King.

"He was considered by many to be a pariah," Sitkoff said.

But he took on issues of poverty and militarism because he considered them vital "to make equality something real and not just racial brotherhood but equality in fact," Sitkoff said.

Just a few excerpts for now:

• Beyond Vietnam, April 1967 - "A time comes when silence is betrayal." That time has come for us in relation to Vietnam.
     
  The truth of these words is beyond doubt but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government's policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover when the issues at hand seem as perplexed as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move on.
     
  Some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for surely this is the first time in our nation's history that a significant number of its religious leaders have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Perhaps a new spirit is rising among us. If it is, let us trace its movement well and pray that our own inner being may be sensitive to its guidance, for we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us.
   

• Domestic Impact of the War, November 1967 - Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. And then there are those who said 'You're hurting the civil right movement.' One spoke to me one day and said, 'Now Dr. King, don't you think you're going to have to agree more with the Administration's policy. I understand that your position on Vietnam has hurt the budget of your organization. And many people who respected you in civil rights have lost that respect and don't you think that you're going to have to agree more with the Administration's policy to regain this.' And I had to answer by looking that person into the eye, and say 'I'm sorry sir but you don't know me. I'm not a consensus leader.' I do not determine what is right and wrong by looking at the budget of my organization or by taking a Gallup poll of the majority opinion. Ultimately a genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus.
     
  On some positions a coward has asked the question is it safe? Expediency asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? But conscience asks the question is it right? And there come a time when one must take a position that is neither safe nor politic nor popular but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right.
   

• I've Been to the Mountaintop, April 1968 - Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it doesn't matter with me now. Because I've been to the mountaintop. And I don't mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land. And I'm happy, tonight. I'm not worried about anything. I'm not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.

More later...

ntodd

(x-posted at Dohiyi Mir)

No Mention Of Brady's TD Record?

It's all just a football game, of course:

The second half of 2007 saw violence drop dramatically in Iraq, but the progress came at a high price: The year was the deadliest for the U.S. military since the 2003 invasion, with 899 troops killed.

American commanders and diplomats, however, say the battlefield gains against insurgents such as al-Qaida in Iraq offer only a partial picture of where the country stands as the war moves toward its five-year mark in March.

Two critical shifts that boosted U.S.-led forces in 2007 — a self-imposed cease-fire by a main Shiite militia and a grassroots Sunni revolt against extremists — could still unravel unless serious unity efforts are made by the Iraqi government.
...
Along with the increase in American troops, Iraq's lessening violence has been attributed to a self-imposed freeze on activities by the Mahdi Army — the militia of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

Giving credit where credit's due: this is the first article I've seen since August that mentioned the Mahdi ceasefire as being a component in the decline in the apparent reduction in violence.  About time somebody did the math on that.  Still, too many people have died for no tangible reason at the cost of a couple trillion dollars and no end in sight.

Oh, and let's not forget our forgotten war.  2007 was a record year for deaths in Afghanistan, too, and many came while the surge was "working" in Iraq.  So what's the score, sports fans?

ntodd

and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Surah 5, Verse 32.

Here's an inspirational tale of the multiplier effect of one individual's actions. I first read about it in  "The Ornament of the World" by Maria Rosa Menocal, but an article in the December 3rd issue of  The New Yorker tells the full story, with many new details. If you don't subscribe to the New Yorker, I recommend getting hold of this issue, tout suite. It’s about the world’s oldest Sephardic Haggadah, the Sarajevo Haggadah; so called because it resided in the National Museum of Sarajevo, but the book was originally created in medieval Spain. It’s an illuminated manuscript, on parchment with gold and silver leaf, and it was the treasure of the museum. How it made its way to Yugoslavia, after all Jews and Muslims were exiled from the Iberian peninsula in 1492, no one knows for sure. In 1942, when the Nazis were occupying Yugoslavia, they went to the museum to confiscate the book, as they had confiscated and destroyed Jewish texts all over Europe. But the chief librarian, an Islamic scholar named Dervis Korkut, who took his responsibility as custodian of the books very seriously, hid the book from the German officers. He then snuck it out of the building under his coat, and took it to a remote mountain village, where he placed it in the care of the imam of a local mosque. The imam put it among the Korans and other Muslim holy books, and when the war was over, he returned it to Korkut, who then put it back in the library.

This would be a touching and inspirational enough story, but there’s a lot more. About how Korkut and his wife also rescued a young Jewish woman, Mira Papo, who was a member of the partisans, by hiding her in their home for months, and how eventually the tables were turned, and Dervis Korkut’s youngest daughter, a refugee from ethnic cleansing in Kosovo in 1999, was rescued through the actions of Mira Papo-even though Mira had died the previous year.

I do believe that when human beings are at their best, they can make miracles happen.

A Gathering Of Doves

Thanks to an e-mail I just received, I have something to do on the weekend soon!

New England Regional Gathering of War Tax Resisters and Supporters
"Taking Control of Change: Embracing Simplicity"
Friday-Sunday, December 7-9, 2007
at Woolman Hill Conference Center, Deerfield, Massachusetts

INTRODUCTION

The New England Regional Gathering of War Tax Resisters provides a time for renewal, support, and an opportunity to be with people who are searching for ways to withdraw their support from military violence. The gatherng is for both new and experienced war tax resisters, as well as for those just testing the waters. The water-testers are most welcome to come and hear the experiences of others. Together we can share, reflect, and reaffirm our commnity of resistance.

THEME OF THE GATHERING

Most war tax resisters try to live simplified lives by consuming and owning less and living well on a reduced income. This generally makes our war tax resistance easier and more sustainable for the long haul. By extension, these ethics will take on increased importance as we experience the change in our lives brought on by global warming, population growth, and scarcity of natural resources.

At this year's Gathering, we will explore the theme, "Taking Control of Change: Embracing Simplicity." Are we victims of change, or do we respond positively to it? Do we see ourselves as "consumers," or do we want to reduce our ecological footprint as much as possible? During our Friday evening panel discussion (free and open to the public), we will hear stories of people who are striving to live the theme. On Saturday, there will be small group discussions on simplicity in many areas, such as transportation, food, housing, etc. Participants can choose their topics of interest.

SCHEDULE

Friday Evening (panel at the meetinghouse adjoining the Woolman Hill Center)

5-7 PM: Registration and Dinner
7-7:30 PM: Welcome and logistics
7:30-9:30 PM: Panel discussion with those who are living their lives based upon simplicity. Free and open to the public.

Saturday
8-9 AM: Breakfast
9:30-10:30 AM: Meet as a large group
10:30-11:30: Small group discussions: Simplicity in transportation, economics, communications, etc.
noon-1 PM: Lunch
1:30-2:20 PM: Small group discussions: Simplicity in food, recreation, community, etc.
2:30-3-20 PM: Small group discussions: Simplicity in housing, health care, etc.
3:30-4:30 PM: Introduction to war tax resistance (for those new to WTR), planning for next year's gathering, feedback from small groups, announcements
4:30-6 PM: Free time
6-7 PM: Dinner
7:30 PM: Talent Show: Bring your instruments and voices--songs, poetry, comedy, etc.

Sunday

8-9 AM: Breakfast
9-11:30 AM: "Songs of the Spirit:" (acapella singing), regional reports of WTR, other peace and justice activities
noon-1 PM: Lunch and cleanup

LOCATION/FACILITIES

Woolman Hill is an idea place for a WTR gathering. It's a Quaker conference center named for John Woolman, a tax reuser during the French and Indian War. Located conveniently one mile north of Old Deerfield, the 110 acres of farmland and woods offer several well-marked trails.

Contact info available at the Western Mass AFSC for any New England readers who are interested.  And if you want more info on WTR, start here...

ntodd

While We All Fiddle

Ironically, via the Speaker's blog, comes this sobering snapshot of Iraq costs since John Murtha first said we need to redeploy our troops:

Be nice if Pelosi could show some real leadership and deliver on her promises.  Every day she allows debates about MoveOn's exercise of their First Amendment rights, every day she complains about CodePink, every day she makes excuses about votes...every day costs billions of dollars and hundreds of lives.

ntodd

Tertium Non Datur

You're either with us or against us.  You either are for the war or hate the troops.  You either support the President or are anti-American.

The media and many (generally GOP) politicians love the Law of The Excluded Middle.  It's a smidge better than the "have you stopped beating your wife" questions and allows them to frame issues to the advantage of whatever narrative they're peddling.  Witness this exchange during last night's Democratic "debate" on CNN (applause deleted for space):

BLITZER: Well, let me bring in Governor Richardson.  Governor Richardson...you've suggested cutting off military aid to Pakistan so long as the Pakistani leader doesn't take these steps to restore the constitution, take off his military uniform, end the national state of emergency and have free and fair elections.

But some are worried, including the opposition leader, Benazir Bhutto -- I spoke with her earlier this week -- that cutting off military aid to the Pakistan military could undermine U.S. national security.  This is a country that has nuclear weapons. It has a strong Taliban presence, an Al Qaida presence. Are you worried at all that as bad as President Musharraf might be, it could get a whole lot worse over there.

RICHARDSON: Well, of course I'm worried, but what happened with our Pakistan policy, we got our principles wrong. We forgot our principles, our principles that we said to Musharraf: You know, Musharraf, security is more important than human rights.

If I'm president, it's the other way around -- democracy and human rights. What I would do is, yes, I would condition the assistance to Musharraf. We give him $10 billion. Sixty percent of that is to his military.

I would say, President Musharraf, unless you restore the constitution; unless you have elections in January; unless you end the state of emergency; unless you allow Benazir Bhutto to run as a candidate; unless you put the supreme court back -- and something else we forgot.

RICHARDSON: He is supposed to go after terrorists on his border. And he has done a very weak job of doing that.  And you know, I would condition the assistance...

BLITZER: All right.

RICHARDSON: ... but here's another point -- no, but here's another point. Pakistan and the politics of Pakistan, Islamic parties get maybe 15 percent of the vote. I mean, so this threat that, oh, revolutionary elements are going to overtake him, if he has a fair election, and you take his party and Benazir Bhutto's party, and you get the military...

BLITZER: But...

RICHARDSON: ... I believe that moderate forces can win. So, if we're on the side of democracy and human rights, and we're on the side of Musharraf having elections, then U.S. interests are preserved, and the Pakistani people have a democracy.

BLITZER: Let me just be precise because I want to make sure we all -- I heard you correctly.  What you're saying, Governor, is that human rights, at times, are more important than American national security?

RICHARDSON: Yes...because I believe we need to find ways to say to the world that, you know, it's not just about what Halliburton wants in Iraq. It's also about...our values of freedom, equality. Our strength is not just military and economic.

BLITZER: All right.

RICHARDSON: Our strength as a nation is our values: equality...

BLITZER: All right.

RICHARDSON: ... freedom, democracy...

BLITZER: All right.

RICHARDSON: ... human rights.

BLITZER: Senator Edwards, I want you to weigh in.

RICHARDSON: That's why we are strong.

It's a fundamental mistake to think respecting human rights and protecting American security interests are mutually exclusive.  They are really two sides of the same coin, for what has ostensibly given the United States a great deal of power in the world has been its moral authority, now pretty much pissed away in long, bloody wars in which we explicitly state our objective is to have other nations and people bear the brunt of "collateral damage" so we don't have to suffer any more trauma at home.

As William Fullbright observed:

The attitude above all others which I feel sure is no longer valid is the arrogance of power, the tendency of great nations to equate power with virtue and major responsibilities with a universal mission. The dilemmas involved are preeminently American dilemmas, not because America has weaknesses that others do not have but because America is powerful as no nation has ever been before and the discrepancy between its power and the power of others appears to be increasing.
...
I do not question the power of our weapons and the efficiency of our logistics...Our handicap is well expressed in the pungent Chinese proverb: "In shallow waters dragons become the sport of shrimps."
...
If America has a service to perform in the world - and I believe it has - it is in large part the service of its own example. In our excessive involvement in the affairs of other countries, we are not only living off our assets and denying our own people the proper enjoyment of their resources; we are also denying the world the example of a free society enjoying its freedom to the fullest. This is regrettable indeed for a nation that aspires to teach democracy to other nations, because, as Burke said: "Example is the school of mankind, and they will learn at no other."
...
[W]e have the opportunity to serve as an example of democracy to the world by the way in which we run our own society; America, in the words of John Quincy Adams, should be "the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all" but "the champion and vindicator only of her own."

If we can bring ourselves so to act, we will have overcome the dangers of the arrogance of power. It will involve, no doubt, the loss of certain glories, but that seems a price worth paying for the probable rewards, which are the happiness of America and the peace of the world.

AS many people know, Kucinich is my man, er...hobbit during the primaries, but Richardson did a decent job with this question.  He at least recognized that human rights don't take a back seat to national security, though he still fell for the "one must be more important" false dichotomy.  It seem he implicitly understands the dangers posed by American arrogance of power.

ntodd

A Remembrance

Today is the Veteran's Day holiday, originally known as Armistice Day, although Sunday was the actual anniversary of the end of World War I. It's a shame that it has become stripped of it's meaning and just another occasion for a sale at the mall. 

Some words from a great man. 

The Meeting

I ended up not going to the meeting with Rep Peter Welch (shocking, I know).  As is often the case when I get home from a road trip, I find my life timeshifted and I suffer from insomnia, so I stayed up until 430am doing today's Paxcast and then didn't wake up until 1240pm.  That made the 90 minute trip to Barre a physical impossibility with current hybrid technology and Vermont laws.

Michael said he'd pass along audio if there was any recorded, and he'll be a guest on The Mark Johnson Show on WDEV at 930am tomorrow talking about what happened.

ntodd

Offerings

AP:

They are lined up like footnotes to the names etched on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial's polished black granite, leaning against its base, some a collective tribute to the fallen, others bearing a message for just one of the dead.

An American Legion uniform cap from Kansas, a police patch from a town in Georgia, a note to "GRAMDADAD" that appears to have been written by the unpracticed hand of a young child. A homemade plaque with plastic red poppies pasted to it, dedicated to a "Band of Brothers." Poems from middle school students.
...
Since the memorial was completed in 1982, it has become a de facto shrine with more than 100,000 offerings for the dead and messages from survivors left by the millions who visit it each year.
...
The nature of the mementos has changed. In the beginning, it was mostly veterans who dropped off unit patches, Purple Hearts, photos of lost soldiers or old pairs of Army boots. But with many veterans now in their 60s, members of a younger generation — including grandchildren of veterans and the fallen — are making contributions.

On a recent day, a baseball card from a boy named Nicholas was propped against the wall, with a note that read "For my grandfather."

The practice wasn't foreseen by the memorial's planners, but the first offering came even before the monument was completed, a Purple Heart laid in the foundation by the brother of a dead soldier.

At the beginning, a memorial staffer collected the items on the belief that people would want them back.

When they continued to pile up, with little sign of abating, the Park Service decided in 1986 to treat the items as museum pieces.
...
Park Service workers collect the mementoes every few days and ship them to a temperature-controlled warehouse in an office park in suburban Landover, Md., about 20 miles away.

Each piece is catalogued. Some are kept in locked cabinets, others alongside long shelves of antique furniture from other historic sites. The warehouse holds more than 45 different collections, and the Park Service says there is no easy way to say how much it costs to store the mementoes from the wall.

Even seemingly mundane items are kept, like a Washington Metro subway ticket with 15 cents on it, to avoid discarding something that might have a hidden meaning. Some show significant forethought, like a carefully made homemade replica carousel; others seem to be tokens left by people unexpectedly moved by the monument. Flowers and other perishables are not kept.
...
Much of the trend likely stemmed from the diverse backgrounds of U.S. troops, some of whom came from cultures where such items were a part of burial traditions, said Kristin Hass, a University of Michigan professor who wrote a 1998 book on the practice of leaving messages and mementos at the wall.

"They are speaking to the dead and to the place of the dead in culture," she said.
...
John Rowan, president of the Vietnam Veterans of America, says seeing the names is what motivates people to leave things behind, a way to commune with the dead. Rowan left the only poem he wrote at the memorial in the 1980s.

"It's a personal connection. It's a way to attempt to reach through the wall to a person's whose name is there," he said.

I've been to the Wall a few times, including twice this year.  The last was especially moving because a dear friend was finally able to visit a friend of his, 40 years dead.  Simply touching the names, whether you know the lives behind them or not, and seeing other people do the same is always a powerful experience.

Would that we never needed to build another war memorial...

ntodd

A Little Face Time

Following up on last month's action at Rep. Peter Welch's office:

When Democrats won control of Congress last November, Robin Lloyd thought she was about to see the beginning of the end of the war in Iraq. Now she despairs over whether she will ever see that.

"I'm very discouraged with the Democrats in Congress and with the candidates for president," said Lloyd, a longtime peace activist from Burlington.

She's not alone. A recent Pew Research Center poll indicated that a growing number of Americans -- 47 percent in October compared to 40 percent in March -- are dissatisfied with Democratic leaders in Congress over the war.

Some Vermont war protesters have focused their fury on Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., the state's lone representative in the U.S. House. Two weeks ago, they showed up at the congressman's Burlington office seeking a phone interview with him in Washington. They walked away instead with trespassing charges for refusing to leave the office at closing time.

Those protesters have since won a measure of victory -- a meeting with Welch. Sunday, they will sit face-to-face with him at the Barre public library, where they will likely tell him he hasn't gone far enough to stop the war and he will likely tell them he's on their side doing every bit he can.

"That's what he ran on. That's largely why he beat Martha Rainville," said Michael Colby of Worcester, one of those arrested at Welch's office last month who is looking forward to Sundays' meeting. "We want him to be a leader."

"Every chance I've had to take tough action on Iraq, I've done it," Welch said.

Colby and others point to a funding bill Welch voted for Sept. 26 that, among many other items, contained at least $9 billion that can be used in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill passed easily in both chambers. Colby wanted Welch to join the 14 Democratic House members who voted against it.

Welch said that bill has been mischaracterized. "I disagree with the characterization of that bill as a war bill," he said. "That's a keep-the-lights-on bill."

Without that bill, he said, federal government would have had to shut down -- no hot lunches for low-income children, no veterans' health care, no Social Security checks. Meanwhile, he said, the Defense Department had plenty of money to continue the war regardless of the bill. Welch said he wasn't willing to punish people who rely on federal programs to send a message about the war.

The rest of Vermont's congressional delegation voted for the bill too, but the more entrenched Sens. Patrick Leahy and Bernie Sanders -- the former a long-time incumbent; the latter at the start of a six-year term -- are not feeling the pressure from anti-war activists that first-termer Welch is. Colby said protesters have been to the senators' offices and likely will visit them again, but Welch was the one who made the war the focus of his campaign last year. "Let's see the action behind the rhetoric," Colby said.

Welch said he understands the frustration. "They want the war ended. I hear that from Vermonters from one end of the state to the other, from Republicans, Democrats and independents," he said. He blames Bush, who has vetoed efforts to set a timeline for troop withdrawal. "The president has not budged an inch," he said.

Apparently Welch only provided 3-day notice on this, presumably because he would like to limit how many people hear about and attend the public meeting.  Since I missed the protest (and arrest) in October, I'm going to see if I can't clear the decks and make the haul down to Barre.  He really needs to have a fire lit under his ass (which I really couldn't do when I saw him on the plane Monday!).

Anyway, I'm disappointed that Welch and the Democrats are still hiding behind "we don't have enough votes" and "golly, think of all the other things that won't get funded."  It's time to up the ante, well past time in fact.  Deny Bush the money and authority for his pet war.  Shut things down.  Actively oppose, don't make excuses.

ntodd

Details from Michael Colby:

The meeting will take place this Sunday (November 11th) at 1:30 at the Aldrich Public Library in Barre, Vermont (6 Washington Street). [Update: Please note the new meeting place.]

I hope you other Vermonters out there can attend...

(x-posted at Dohiyi Mir)

Pay No Attention To That Oppression Behind The Curtain

AP:

Police and soldiers emboldened by state of emergency powers swept up hundreds of activists and opposition members on Sunday, dragged away protesters shouting "Shame on you!", and turned government buildings into barbed-wire compounds.

Gen. Pervez Musharraf's government said parliamentary elections could be delayed up to a year as it tries to stamp out a growing Islamic militant threat — effectively linking two of the greatest concerns of Pakistan's biggest international donors: the United States and Britain.

Increasingly concerned about the unfolding crisis, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Washington was reviewing billions of dollars in aid to its close terrorism-fighting ally. Britain is also examining its assistance.

"Some of the aid that goes to Pakistan is directly related to the counterterrorism mission," Rice told reporters traveling with her. "We just have to review the situation."

But, she said, she did not expect the U.S. "to ignore or set aside our concerns about terrorism."

Indeed, TBWOT* must trump all...

ntodd

* The Bogus War On Terror

For Those Of You Keeping Score At Home

Wow, it seems just like yesterday that we'd broken 2006's KIA mark in Afghanistan.  Now coalition deaths are at 199, including 98 US troops (tied with last year).  Good thing we decisively defeated the Taliban...

ntodd

Grinding Our Seed Corn?

Not even extra blood money is working for the military industrial complex.  Joe Galloway:

The Army reportedly has a shortage of 3,000 captains and majors this year, and recently began offering them bonuses of up to $35,000 if they'd agree to remain on duty for another three years. The shortage was forecast to rise to 6,000 by 2010 as the Army tries to grow by 65,000.

Even with the offer of the cash bonus or free graduate school or their choice of assignments, the exodus of young officers continues to grow at a pace that worries commanders. The U.S. Military Academy at West Point was founded to educate career officers for the Army, and upon graduation each officer owes Uncle Sam five years on active duty. The hope is that most will remain for a full career, and historically just 28.8 percent have opted out after five years.

A total of 35 percent of the West Point Class of 2000 left the Army in 2005; 46 percent of the Class of 2001 left in 2006, and a staggering 58 percent of the Class of 2002 left active duty when their obligation expired this year.

Those figures are mirrored among officers who are commissioned through university ROTC programs, with attrition rates now at a 30-year high. The Army Reserve reports that the situation is even worse for critical ranks and specialties: The Reserve has only 58 percent of the sergeants first class it needs, 53 percent of the needed captains and 74 percent of needed majors.

Even if you think war is a responsible way to protect our national interest, it seems that we're really screwing the pooch in terms of long-term strategic preparedness as we continue to spill blood into the sand...

ntodd

Pretty Soon You're Talking About Real Money

I've been following the Bush adminstration's fuzzy math and true costs of the war since the beginning, so of course this caught my eye:

The cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could total $2.4 trillion through the next decade, or nearly $8,000 per man, woman and child in the country, according to a Congressional Budget Office estimate scheduled for release Wednesday.

A previous CBO estimate put the wars' costs at more than $1.6 trillion. This one adds $705 billion in interest, taking into account that the conflicts are being funded with borrowed money.

Pete Stark did an admirable job linking these astronomical costs of death and destruction to our alleged inability to preserve life and care for children with SCHIP.  When you consider the Right's canard that people making $83K should be able to make choices and afford healthcare for their kids, they are correct.  "Should" being the operative word.

When you're stealing $8000 from each person in this country, those families lose a significant chunk of all that "discretionary" income they're supposed to be investing in their kids' insurance.

ntodd

For Those Of You Keeping Score

Non-US troop fatalities hit the century mark in Afghanistan, bringing the total coalition death toll to a record 192 for 2007.

ntodd

For Those Of You Keeping Score At Home

The "coalition" deathtoll in Our Forgotten War just hit last year's high of 191.

I know Afghanistan is--or at least was at the outset--a very "popular" war because it was a direct response to 9/11 and all that.  It's just a low-grade fever compared the the spontaneous combustion in Mesopotamia, but it also needs to be stopped just as our other quagmire.  It's still killing with no end in sight and no achievable objectives.

Of course, if Congress has been unable and unwilling to end the debacle in Iraq, best of luck trying to get the Democrats to do anything about Afghanistan.

ntodd

It's No Amritsa, But...

This scene following the Amritsa Massacre in Gandhi came to mind this morning:

ADVOCATE: General Dyer, is it correct that you ordered your troops to fire at the thickest part of the crowd?
DYER (righteously): That is so.
ADVOCATE: One thousand five hundred and sixteen casualties with one thousand six hundred and fifty bullets.
DYER: My intention was to inflict a lesson that would have an impact throughout all India.
INDIAN BARRISTER: General, had you been able to take in the armored car, would you have opened fire with the machine gun?
DYER: I think, probably – yes.
HUNTER: General, did you realize there were children – and women – in the crowd?
DYER (a beat): I did.
ADVOCATE: But that was irrelevant to the point you were making?
DYER: That is correct.
ADVOCATE: Could I ask you what provision you made for the wounded?
DYER (a moment, then firmly): I was ready to help any who applied.
ADVOCATE: General . . . how does a child shot with a 3-0-3 Enfield "apply" for help?

No, it is no Amritsa--not this single incident, anyway:

A joint U.S.-Iraqi commission reviewing American security operations after a deadly shooting of Iraqi civilians allegedly at the hands of Blackwater USA guards met for the first time on Sunday, the U.S. embassy said.
...
The joint commission, chaired by Iraq's defense minister and the American embassy's No. 2 diplomat, expressed "mutual commitment of the Iraqi government and the U.S. government to work together to evaluate issues of safety and security related to personal security detail operations in Iraq," the brief embassy statement said.

The commission is expected to issue recommendations to both Baghdad and Washington on improving Iraqi and U.S. security procedures, with the "goal of ensuring that personal security detail operations do not endanger public safety" and prevent similar incidents in the future.

It is one of at least three investigations into the Sept. 16 shooting in which Blackwater guards are accused of opening fire on Iraqi civilians in a main square in Baghdad. The Moyock, N.C.-based security company contends its employees came under fire first, but the Iraqi government and witnesses dispute that.

Our policies are killing Iraqis.  There is a quantitative difference, of course, but I see no qualitative difference between what we're doing and what the British did in India, or any other atrocities the world has seen.  A strong nation on the right side of morality and history would see this clearly and hold no debate about ending our involvement in evil.

ntodd

PS--A bit about General Dyer, and Winston Churchill's speech defending Cabinet's decision on how to reprimand him.

The Forgotten War

Let's not forget Afghanistan is part of that 190 billion more dollars being requested by the Department of Murder:

President Hamid Karzai on Saturday offered to meet with the Taliban leader and give militants a government position only hours after a suicide bomber in army disguise attacked a military bus, killing 30 people — nearly all of them Afghan soldiers.

I admit that I have focused on Iraq in my efforts mostly out of expediency.  I was and am against the war in Afghanistan as well, but it's a more "popular" war since it was originally tied with some justification to our 9/11 response, and it's such a low-grade affair that it can't generate the same outrage Iraq does.

Anyway, I hadn't been checking in on the casualties since the beginning of summer and was shocked just now to see the current chart:

	Period		US	Other	Total
+	2007		88	96	184
+	2006		98	93	191
+	2005		99	31	130
+	2004		52