WARNING: not for the faint-hearted. New and blunt from Chris Hedges, talking with Mike Gravel. This column is to Obama’s military strategy as Taibbi’s Rolling Stone piece is to Obama’s financial strategy.
“The first time I met him I felt there was arrogance with a touch of cynicism,” Gravel said of the president. “Now the cynicism and the arrogance have overwhelmed his intelligence. Like Clinton, he is into power.”
“Obama has wasted an opportunity to be a great president,” Gravel lamented. “More than 50 percent of the American people do not buy into this war. He could have stood up and said ‘we are getting out.’ Forget the Congress. Forget the Republicans. Forget the hawks. Forget mainstream media, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, which are hawks. He would have weathered that storm because he would have had the American people on his side. And what did he do? He caved in to the leadership of [David] Petraeus and [Stanley A.] McChrystal and adopted a scenario that is a total loser.”
From the New York Times 7/14/2008
<
p>Ending the (Iraq) war is essential to meeting our broader strategic goals, starting in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the Taliban is resurgent and Al Qaeda has a safe haven. Iraq is not the central front in the war on terrorism, and it never has been. As Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently pointed out, we won’t have sufficient resources to finish the job in Afghanistan until we reduce our commitment to Iraq.
<
p>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.
<
p>From:
“My Plan for Iraq”
<
p> By BARACK OBAMA
<
p>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07…
<
p>
During the campaign, it sounded wise to me and many others to wind down the fraudulently launched Iraq war and go back and complete the job in Afghanistan that W had flubbed. That was then. I submit that nationally we’ve paid a ton more attention to what Afghanistan is all about since Obama was elected. We’ve become acquainted with the complexities – the tribal nature of the country, its backwardness, abject poverty, harsh topography and lack of a central government. And who the Taliban are composed of, the extent of Al Qaeda in country, the delicate situation in Pakistan and the relationship between what we do in Afghanistan and its impact in Pakistan – not to mention our very active, covert operations within Pakistan.
<
p>All this is to say that a re-energized Afghanistan strategy that sounded good on the surface during the campaign no longer stands up in the light of new understandings about the Af-Pak region. So,to those who correctly say, “well, this is what Obama was saying and this is what you voted for,” I say, “that was then and this is now.” After reading, listening and learning, I’ve changed my mind on Afghanistan. I believe there’s no “winning” it, that we should wind troop levels down, keep some forces (maybe 20,000) there to monitor and hunt Al Qaeda and engage more in infrastructure-building they desperately need (water, schools, electricity, roads) than in state-building.
Excellent post. The sad part is that, while the Afghans can’t win any military battles, the fact is they don’t have to. We are paying $1M/year for each soldier. Fuel for the military costs $400/gallon, and the military uses lots of fuel. The smarter players see the bottom line. Eventually, there will be no more tax dollars to support the engagement. Economic collapse?
<
p>The Wall Street boys are getting ready for the backlash… A hint that things are going to get very bad, very fast.
<
p>In the words of Mr. Obama, “You can take that to the bank.”
Even though they’ve been expert at putting the risk burden on others.
They rehired retired examiners before the 2008 crash.
<
p>Little wonder the police are being militarized, the military practicing roadblocks and urban warfare. Powerful people know that our course is unsustainable and plan to control the hungry, homeless people by terror. We have tough times coming.
In 2007, the US military consumed at 133 million barrels of oil. At $400 a gallon, that works out to $2T.
<
p>They actually spent $12B on fuel in 2007; what’d I miss?
Here.