Jim Bovard on the FISA Amendments

In this youtube of an interview at Antiwar.com, Jim Bovard, author of Attention Deficit Democracy, explains how the bipartisan FISA amendments pose new dangers to individual liberty and privacy.

The McCain/Obama Echo Chamber (Part 2)

Both Obama and McCain almost simultaneously endorsed an expanded military. Now, both candidates have echoed each other again (see here and here) in calling for a surge of U.S. troops into the worsening Afghan quagmire.

Obama's Janus-Faced Foreign Policy

Obama lays out his plans for Iraq and Afghanistan in an op-ed for The New York Times. It reveals on full display a proposed foreign policy of confusion and contradiction.

With the notable exception of calling for a "residual force" to fight Al Qaeda and train troops, Obama sensibly argues that the best policy is to wean the Iraqis from dependence on the United States and create "a successful transition to Iraqis’ taking responsibility for the security and stability of their country."

Not recognizing the contradiction, however, Obama proposes the exact opposite solution for Afghanistan. Instead of letting the Afghans take "responsiblity for the security of their country," he wants to make them even more dependent on American welfare:

As president, I would pursue a new strategy, and begin by providing at least two additional combat brigades to support our effort in Afghanistan. We need more troops, more helicopters, better intelligence-gathering and more nonmilitary assistance to accomplish the mission there.

Gordon Prather on Iran's Nuclear Program

Here is a youtube of Scott Horton's interview of Gordon Prather on Iran's nuclear program (or lack thereof):

Robert Higgs on the McCain/Obama Call for a Bigger Military

Economic historian Robert Higgs has this to say about proposals by both McCain and Obama to increase the size of the military:

We hear much talk of “the burden on our troops.”

First, what’s the meaning of “our” in this construction? They’re not my soldiers. Are they yours? It seems to me that these soldiers are the hired hands of George Bush, Dick Cheney, and the other leaders of the gang that styles itself the government of the United States of America. None of this has anything to do with me, except that I am compelled by threats of government violence to pay a portion of the expense of maintaining and deploying these troops.

Second, what’s the sense of the “burden” they are supposedly bearing? They hired themselves out to work as soldiers; they are now working as soldiers. What could be more natural? People who hire themselves out as prostitutes expect to provide sexual services, and they do. People who hire themselves out as bakers expect to make cakes, cookies, and bread, and they do. People who hire themselves out as soldiers expect to kill people and destroy property as instructed by their officers, and they do. None of these classes of workers is any more burdened than the others: each type of worker makes a voluntary contract to supply services, and each fulfills the contract. There’s nothing especially burdomsome about the fulfillment of a voluntary contract.

Of course, we are constantly told how beholden we all are to the soldiers’ selfless services. Nonsense. I am not beholden in the least. Indeed, I devoutly wish that they had confined themselves to earning a living honestly, peacefully, and productively, rather than in a fashion so manifestly fruitful of senseless mayhem, death, and destruction.

And now, to top the evils that already exist, both major presidential candidates propose to employ even more people in this evil fashion. According to St. Matthew (26:52), Jesus declared that “all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.” On the strength of this declaration, one would seem well advised to decline the sword or, if one has already taken up a sword, to put it down before somebody gets hurt.

The McCain/Obama Echo Chamber

In the last two days, both Obama (here) and McCain
(here) have called for a bigger military. Here is what Obama said:

But we need to ease the burden on our troops, while meeting the challenges of the 21st century. That’s why I will call on a new generation of Americans to join our military, and complete the effort to increase our ground forces by 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 Marines.

Does Obama Support the Bush/Pelosi Secret War in Iran?

The most important section of the Hersh article (cited below) is his finding that the Democratic leadership has approved a $400 million dollar plan to wage a secret war on the Iranian government. Where does Obama stand on this on extremely dangerous plan? Why doesn't someone ask him? It is hard to believe that he does not know about it. Hersh reports the following:

The Democratic leadership’s agreement to commit hundreds of millions of dollars for more secret operations in Iran was remarkable, given the general concerns of officials like Gates, Fallon, and many others. “The oversight process has not kept pace—it’s been coöpted” by the Administration, the person familiar with the contents of the Finding said. “The process is broken, and this is dangerous stuff we’re authorizing.”

The Coming War With Iran?

Seymour Hersh has the latest developments.

George Carlin on Americans as a Warlike People

Milton Friedman and the Iraq War

Unlike many conservatives, Milton Friedman not only opposed big government in domestic policy but also in foreign policy. This free-market economist, and Nobel prize winner, condemned the U.S. invasion of Iraq as an act of aggression.

Shortly before his death, he stated "What's really killed the Republican Party isn't spending, it's Iraq. As it happens, I was opposed to going into Iraq from the beginning. I think it was a mistake, for the simple reason that I do not believe the United States of America ought to be involved in aggression."

Obama's Hawkish Speech on Iran/Israel Before AIPAC

Obama's sabre-rattling claims in this clip are debunked by running commentary from George Galloway who, ironically, is an Obama supporter.

Debunking Truther Nonsense

People in the antiwar movement rightfully question the trustworthiness of the Bush administration.

Unfortunately, a few have carried this skepticism to the ridiculous extreme of accepting harebrained theories that 9/11 was an "inside job" and, even more unbelievably, that our bungling federal bureaucrats would be capable of pulling off this imagined vast conspiracy.

Few are better at refuting Truther hogwash than Scott Horton. Here, he systematically demolishes their claims.

Americans for Appeasement?

John McCain and George Bush have charged that Barack Obama, who states that he will talk with adversaries, such as Iran, is guilty of appeasement.

If their goal is to paint Obama at out-of-step with ordinary Americans, however, they are barking up the wrong tree. On this issue it is Bush and McCain, not Obama, who are on the political fringe. According to a Gallup Poll in May, a whopping 79 percent of Americans (including about half of all Republicans) think it is a “good idea” for the president to meet “with leaders of foreign countries considered enemies of the United States.”

Juan Cole's Advice for Obama on Iraq Trip

If Obama does visit Iraq, he should consider this advice from Juan Cole.

Gordon Prather and Victor Navasky on Antiwar Radio

Gordon Prather, physicist, and Victor S. Navasky of the Nation magazine will be the featured guests on the Scott Horton Show at Antiwar Radio, 12:15PM Eastern, Friday, May 30th.

Topics include the recent IAEA report on Iran’s nuclear program and the media's coverage in the lead-up to war. Scott Horton is one of the best interviewers in the business. The streaming link is here.

With God on Our Side (Bob Dylan's Famous Antiwar Song)

Audio of John Kusack Interview on "War, Inc."

Here is an audio of Scott Horton's interview of actor, producer, and writer, John Kusack about his new film satire, War Inc. The film opened on May 23 in New York and Los Angeles and in the interview, according to this description, Cusack expresses "his outrage at the criminality of modern American war profiteers, the need for a grassroots bumrush of the first showings to guarantee national distribution, some critics’ complaints that the movie 'hits too close to home,' the great journalists whose work has inspired him, the socialization of the costs of all these private armies onto the American tax payer, the outsourcing of interrogation, the betrayals of the Democrats, the banality of evil, the short-changing of the troops while private mercenaries cash in and militarism in the movies."

Here is a trailer for the film:

Rosyln Zinn dies at 85 after a life as artist, teacher and activist...

Read about her life and see a picture of her with her husband, progressive historian Howard Zinn, at commondreams.org or at boston.com.

Conservatives Demonized Reagan as "Chamberlainian appeaser"

The conservative attempt to compare Obama and Neville Chamberlain is not new. Glenn Greenwald finds that they made the same charge against none other than Ronald Reagan. For example,

Conservative Caucus Chair Howard Phillips, for instance, "scorned President Reagan as 'a useful idiot for Kremlin propaganda,'" and published ads which, according to a January 20, 1988 UPI article (via LEXIS): likens Reagan's signing of the INF Treaty to British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's signing of an accord with Nazi Germany's Adolf Hitler in 1938. The ad, with the headline, "Appeasement Is As Unwise In 1988 As In 1938," shows pictures of Chamberlain, Hitler, Reagan and Gorbachev overhung by an umbrella. Chamberlain carried an umbrella and it became a World War II symbol for appeasement.

Pelosi Leaves War With Iran "on the table."

Is this the choice the Democrats will offer us in November?

Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives said in Israel on Monday that they do not rule out military action against Iran to stop it from acquiring nuclear bombs. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said a "full array of tactics are on the table" in efforts to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

McCain Versus McCain

Peace History Society spring newsletter...

The spring newsletter of the Peace History Society is now available as a pdf file at http://peacehistorysociety.org/news/Newsletter_spring_08.pdf.

Even in Mississippi

Democrat Travis Childers won a stunning victory in a heavily Republican district in Mississippi, once represented by Trent Lott, by stressing such themes as support for a balanced budget amendment and opposition to gun control.

A less noticed, but equally important, factor in Childers' victory in this pro-military district was his call to bring the troops home “honorably, safely and soon.”

New Insider "Buzz" About War With Iran

Former CIA officer and Antiwar.com columnist Philip Giraldi has this ominous news:

There is considerable speculation and buzz in Washington today suggesting that the National Security Council has agreed in principle to proceed with plans to attack an Iranian al-Qods-run camp that is believed to be training Iraqi militants. The camp that will be targeted is one of several located near Tehran. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was the only senior official urging delay in taking any offensive action.

GOP Antiwar Member of Congress Wins Reelection

The best hope for the success of the antiwar movement is to have friends in both major parties.

One of these friends is Republican Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina, who turned against the war despite his famous proposal to change the name of French fries to "freedom fries" soon after 9-11.

Despite the best efforts by the GOP establishment to punish and remove him, Jones easily prevailed yesterday against a pro-war opponent.

The heroic Republican Ron Paul of Texas, who was number one on the GOP's enemies list, won 70 percent against his primary opponent earlier this year. Paul has been against the war from the beginning and has often spoken out against the prospect of war with Iran.

War as the Health of the Civilian State

Ninety years ago, Randolph Bourne aptly characterized war as “the health of the state.” Economic historian Robert Higgs not only agrees but also challenges those on the right as well as the left who assume an automatic trade-off between guns and butter.

In a online roundtable for Reason Magazine on the coming recession, Higgs writes:
:
Hardly anyone was surprised that real military spending (measured in accordance with the government’s own narrow definition) increased by almost 60 percent between 2000 and 2007, compared to real GDP growth of 18 percent during that time. Note, however, that the government’s real nondefense outlays increased concurrently by more than 24 percent—an increase one-third greater than that of GDP. When people let down their guard in “supporting the troops,” they permit the government to make greater headway in its ceaseless quest to enlarge spending in a wide range of areas, many of them strictly civilian in nature.

London Replaces Labour Antiwar Mayor with Tory Antiwar Mayor

Over at Antiwar.com, Eric Garris has the full story.

Herbert Spencer on Patriotism and Empire

Few individuals in history have received more negative treatment than Herbert Spencer. Some U.S. survey texts give the impression that this alleged “Social Darwinist” (a term Spencer never used) was an apologist for imperialism and violence by the strong against the weak.

Spencer’s own writings tell a different story of a flawed but sincere classical liberal advocate of peace, free exchange, and social cooperation. Spencer was second to none in his critique of imperialism and militarism. In his essay on patriotism, Spencer had this to say about the Afghan War of his time:

Some years ago I gave my expression to my own feeling – anti-patriotic feeling, it will doubtless be called – in a somewhat startling way. It was at the time of the second Afghan war, when, in pursuance of what were thought to be “our interests,” we were invading Afghanistan. News had come that some of our troops were in danger. At the Athenæum Club a well-known military man – then a captain but now a general – drew my attention to a telegram containing this news, and read it to me in a manner implying the belief that I should share his anxiety. I astounded him by replying – “When men hire themselves out to shoot other men to order, asking nothing about the justice of their cause, I don’t care if they are shot themselves.”

Who Is Really Winning "The War on Terror?"

Ian S. Lustick has the answer:

”al Qaeda’s most important accomplishment was not to hijack our planes, but to hijack our political system. For a multitude of politicians, interest groups, professional associations, corporations, media organizations, universities, local and state governments and federal agency officials, the War on Terror is now a major profit center, a funding bonanza, and a set of slogans and sound bites to be inserted into budget, project, grant and contract proposals. For the country as a whole, however, it has become a maelstrom of waste and worry that distracts us from more serious problems.”

Hat tip Keith Halderman.

McCain as "neoconservatism squared"

Over at Antiwar.com, Doug Bandow has a perceptive piece on John McCain's long-time affinity for war as a first resort:

Anyone willing to go to war with Iraq, Iran, North Korea, and Serbia is prepared to fight anyone. Most people lean toward peace and believe that only dangerous necessity can justify loosing the dogs of war. Not McCain, who appears to be in permanent "yes" mode. If that famous 3 a.m. phone call came into the McCain White House, he likely would yell "bomb them" into the receiver, then wait until the morning to ask who we had attacked.

HAW member article on John Yoo and torture...

Jennifer Van Bergen, a member of the HAW Steering Committee, has published an article on John Yoo and the issue of torture at http://thepeoplesvoice.org. It contains links to other literature and documents related to the issue:

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2008/04/24/john_yoo_the_president_s_executioner

War and Its Discontents: Khoury Understands Iraq

War And Its Discontents: Understanding Iraq And The U.S. Empire

At the second plenary session of the conference, Dina Rizk Khoury delivered a passionate and inspiring presentation on Iraq. She detailed her extensive research and oral histories collected in refugee communities among the two million women, men and children who are living in exile. Khoury framed her remarks in the context of thirty years of war. She used Iraqi voices to tell the story of how tribalism and sectarianism were fabricated over the last two decades. Her interviews revealed that lost memories surfaced and were invented as the disintegration of the Baathist movement and the Iraqi State after the Gulf War, associated with bombing and destruction in the 1990’s sewed the seeds of social and economic fragmentation. Following the invasion and occupation, traditional pre-modern social networks used by Saddam to hold onto power emerged. They were enabled and aided by Paul Bremer’s imposition of neo-liberalism associated with massive unemployment. Most importantly, Khoury concluded that on-going occupation was likely to intensify efforts by local warlords and paramilitary forces to secure and expand power. Her conclusion was that the pathway to end the war was in the hands of Iraqis and that immediate removal of foreign military forces was necessary but not sufficient. Khoury stressed the need for consideration of international action and reparations by those who bombed Iraq throughout the 1990’s, invaded, occupied and destroyed after 2003. She called for monitoring of sanctions and economic warfare against Syria and Iran, which threaten to expand the conflict and will be especially burdensome for Iraqi refugees, already living precarious and fragile lives.

David R. Applebaum
HAW Conference Committee