"The Left" not challanging Obama on The Afghanistan war

[Star Wars Fan]

doesn't surprise me. My local peace group has lost a lot of its' focus and only meets 2x a month

http://www.guerrillanews.com/articles/3982/Obama_s_War

[JoePedo]

Well, to keep it fair, the left didn't challenge BUSH on afghanistan either. It was pretty much just Iraq that everyone had a problem with...

Personally, I'm hoping someone will step up to him regarding his war on the Zapatistas...

[razlyubleno]

Kill Obama. Kill the Afghani insurgents. Let God sort them out.

razly

[Actor]

Because thats where "the terrorists" are.

[Captain Politik]

Originally Posted by razlyubleno

Kill Obama. Kill the Afghani insurgents. Let God sort them out.

razly

Kill them all and god will choose his own

[Space Monkey]

Pull out and let them recreate the medieval society they seem to like so much.

You want to target terrorism, then you'll have to do something about Saudi Arabia.

[Dichromate]

Originally Posted by Space Monkey

Pull out and let them recreate the medieval society they seem to like so much.

It's incredible really you know.
Going back to the 80s, what actually sparked the soviet intention in afghanistan was this:
After a bit of political intrigue, there ended up being a socialist government in Kabul. This didn't cause anything much to happen.
When they tried to roll back fucked medieval traditions, improve the status of women, you know what the place was/is like.... well it was when they started doing THAT that they encountered problems.

These guys will fight and die for the right to beat their wives, seriously, fuck that place. Eventually it got so out of hand the government asked the Soviets for help, which of course meant that the good old US of A came in to help the other side in classic cold war fashion. (lulz, but the soviets kinda killed the prez anyway)

I find it ever so amusing though that a 'liberal democracy' would pull shit like that.
Its be the moral equivalent of, in 1939, Churchill offering Hitler peace and free munitions if they would but carry on straight past Warsaw and into the USSR.

[THIS IS IMPORTANT GODDAMNIT]

I swear my thing said fishmonger for a second...

[Space Monkey]

Originally Posted by Dichromate

It's incredible really you know.

Exactly, I think Karzai just passed a law legalizing marital rape, I quite liked how the war in Afghanistan was originally sold to the Western public not only in the context of counter-terrorism but also on the basis of improving human rights and liberating women.

That sure worked out well.

[Hobo]

It is really truly disappointing how many self-proclaimed political activists, human rights activists and "leftists" magically became Obama supporters once he stepped on the stage as a candidate. It is amazing how many people believe that one more president, one more rich politician, one more person in favor of capitalist greed is supposed to make any "change" that we have been told to believe in.

[Star Wars Fan]

Originally Posted by Mcrjtn

Nothing says political reform like broken glass and burnt out cars, if you really give a shit, get to it. If all revolutionaries were like you pathetic faggots we'd still be stabbing each other with spears and praying five times a day.

Shut the Fuck Up, the local group can't be arsed to do anything more than 'oppose the war'. No 9/11 truth, relatively-few things. They had peace vigils in unitarian churches for fuck's sake.

Originally Posted by ImJoeThePedo

Well, to keep it fair, the left didn't challenge BUSH on afghanistan either. It was pretty much just Iraq that everyone had a problem with...

forgot that. There were some people who pointed out the bullshit regarding Afghanistan/the oil stuff. Remember some anarchist in a high school getting into shit over that years ago. Katie something. It was funny as I also rememeber seeing something on Youtube on a guy who was against the US entering Afghanistan before it began being slandered and Hannity bullshitting. Similar with other people.

Personally, I'm hoping someone will step up to him regarding his war on the Zapatistas...

haven't gotten a response for that 'contact us' thing.

Originally Posted by Hobo

It is really truly disappointing how many self-proclaimed political activists, human rights activists and "leftists" magically became Obama supporters once he stepped on the stage as a candidate.

Ditto. And looking at his bail-out bullshit and no nationalization and letting them survive, FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF.

Either let the banks die, or nationalize them for a better 'fixing'. Also fuck the Federal Reserve.

[postdiluvium]

Actually there is a movement for complete withdrawal from both Iraq and Afghanistan. Democrats from Northern California's districts in Congress are advocating withdrawal from both and Robert Greenwald has just released a documentary why Afghanistan will be worse than Iraq.

Added: http://rethinkafghanistan.com/

[Star Wars Fan]

Originally Posted by postdiluvium

Actually there is a movement for complete withdrawal from both Iraq and Afghanistan. Democrats from Northern California's districts in Congress are advocating withdrawal from both and Robert Greenwald has just released a documentary why Afghanistan will be worse than Iraq.

Wasn't aware. My local US rep (Daniel Lipinski) voted for pro-war bills and IIRC was in the military when younger. he's a democrat.

[Mr. Dazed and Confused]

Originally Posted by Dichromate

It's incredible really you know.
Going back to the 80s, what actually sparked the soviet intention in afghanistan was this:
After a bit of political intrigue, there ended up being a socialist government in Kabul. This didn't cause anything much to happen.
When they tried to roll back fucked medieval traditions, improve the status of women, you know what the place was/is like.... well it was when they started doing THAT that they encountered problems.

These guys will fight and die for the right to beat their wives, seriously, fuck that place. Eventually it got so out of hand the government asked the Soviets for help, which of course meant that the good old US of A came in to help the other side in classic cold war fashion. (lulz, but the soviets kinda killed the prez anyway)

I find it ever so amusing though that a 'liberal democracy' would pull shit like that.
Its be the moral equivalent of, in 1939, Churchill offering Hitler peace and free munitions if they would but carry on straight past Warsaw and into the USSR.

I think the Iranian Islamic revolution had an immense impact on the situation in Afghanistan as well. I don't have a problem with Obama's plan in Afghanistan, except for the fact that it may be too little, too late. We may have succeeded in Iraq, maybe, but it wasn't worth the money and it wasn't worth dropping the ball in Afghanistan. Iraq wasn't a failed state like Afghanistan and Iraq was not nearly as dangerous to our national security as Afghanistan. I may be preaching to the choir, but I think the failure in Afghanistan over the past eight years has been one of the most overlooked events this decade.

We had a great opportunity to create a stable environment in a region that is very dangerous. Now, Afghanistan is still a failed state and unless we do something drastic it will always be a failed state. The fact that Bush thought Iraq was more dangerous than a failed state that was a safe haven for terrorism and located right next to Pakistan sickens me. I support Obama's plan for Afghanistan, but it seems to me that we still won't have enough boots on the ground and money invested to make a dent. We might a well pull out because a few ten thousand more troops isn't going to make a difference.

[skyclaw441]

That's because we want to kill Osama Bin Laden and eliminate Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. We're finally going to kick some ass that worth kicking, rather than invading Iraq for oil.

[Star Wars Fan]

Originally Posted by Mr. Dazed and Confused

We had a great opportunity to create a stable environment in a region that is very dangerous.

Iran is pretty stable. The Central Asian nations are stable, though NOT very democratic (the US has outsourced detainees to one central asian nation to be tortures).

Besides, it's all for oil anyway.

Originally Posted by Mcrjtn

Yes, because killing hundreds of people both in Afghanistan and northern Pakistan for a decade or so until they get really pissed off then just leaving is a genius move.

more like thousands. argugbly hundreds of thousands.

[Dichromate]

Originally Posted by Star Wars Fan

Iran is pretty stable. The Central Asian nations are stable, though NOT very democratic (the US has outsourced detainees to one central asian nation to be tortures).

Central Asia isn't as stable as you might think.
Tajikistan in particular is going to be utterly fucked. Something like a third of their national income comes from migrant workers working in Russia, particularly in construction.

The global financial crisis is going to mean hoards of unemployed young men with nothing to do and no prospects for the future coming home.

[Star Wars Fan]

Originally Posted by Dichromate

Central Asia isn't as stable as you might think.
Tajikistan in particular is going to be utterly fucked. Something like a third of their national income comes from migrant workers working in Russia, particularly in construction.

The global financial crisis is going to mean hoards of unemployed young men with nothing to do and no prospects for the future coming home.

lol. Russia gets fucked. The migrants are angry, the rising tide of russian nationalism and racist stuff, lol nigga moment..what's russian for 'nigga moment' or tajik for 'nigga moment'

EDIT: also wasn't that country having issues with "Islamic Fundmentalists"?

[Cory]

I think all of the Islamic Jihiad "problem" in the region is due to one overbearing factor: The complete short sightedness of American policy in the region during the Cold War.

Some examples:

Iran: The country was becoming more and more liberal and progressive in the early 50's under Prime Minister Mossadegh. Mossadegh wanted to nationialize the nations oil industry in order to share the wealth amongst the people of Iran. This would come at a huge profit loss for BP. So in response the CIA staged a coup that overthrew the progressive democracy and installed the repressive Shah as the nations dictator. Eventually the people of Iran turned to radical religious extremists to through off the opressive Shah, thus leading to the creation of the Islamic Republic and a constant thorn in America's side ever seince.

Afganistan: In the early 1980's the nation's government had become dominated by the pro-soviet Socialists who began eliminating many of the archaic religious laws in the country. Fundementalists began to rise up against the government and the government called on the Soviets to support them(they really had no choice). In response, the USA began supplying the Islamic Fundementalists with arms and funds, including a certian Osama Bin Laden. The Fundementalists eventually drove the Soviets out and toppled the Government, thus promptly bringing Afganistan back into the dark ages.

Palestine: Throughout the Cold War(and indeed into the present day) the United States and the West in general have been overwhemingly biased in favor of the Israelis, at the cost of alinenating almost the entire Arab population. In retrospect, this seems to be an extremly disastorus decision. The USA/West missed a golden chance to win the Arab population by overtly siding with them and pushing for a gradual liberalization of the region. This would've given the West much greater acces to the Middle-Eastern oil at a cheaper price and the chance to establish an anti-soviet bloc in the region at the expense of losing what(without the West's support) would've been a puny small state relying on the USSR for any support. But instead, the West backed Israel, and simply gave themselfs a world of heartache as the Arab populations turned to Islamic Extremeism to "rid themselfs of Zionist Western opression". Oops.

tl/dr: The USA had a "enemy of my enemy is my friend" police in regards to the Middle-East during the Cold War. Of course it horribly backfired.

[Dichromate]

Originally Posted by Cory

I think all of the Islamic Jihiad "problem" in the region is due to one overbearing factor: The complete short sightedness of American policy in the region during the Cold War.

Some examples:

Iran: The country was becoming more and more liberal and progressive in the early 50's under Prime Minister Mossadegh. Mossadegh wanted to nationialize the nations oil industry in order to share the wealth amongst the people of Iran. This would come at a huge profit loss for BP. So in response the CIA staged a coup that overthrew the progressive democracy and installed the repressive Shah as the nations dictator. Eventually the people of Iran turned to radical religious extremists to through off the opressive Shah, thus leading to the creation of the Islamic Republic and a constant thorn in America's side ever seince.

Afganistan: In the early 1980's the nation's government had become dominated by the pro-soviet Socialists who began eliminating many of the archaic religious laws in the country. Fundementalists began to rise up against the government and the government called on the Soviets to support them(they really had no choice). In response, the USA began supplying the Islamic Fundementalists with arms and funds, including a certian Osama Bin Laden. The Fundementalists eventually drove the Soviets out and toppled the Government, thus promptly bringing Afganistan back into the dark ages.

Palestine: Throughout the Cold War(and indeed into the present day) the United States and the West in general have been overwhemingly biased in favor of the Israelis, at the cost of alinenating almost the entire Arab population. In retrospect, this seems to be an extremly disastorus decision. The USA/West missed a golden chance to win the Arab population by overtly siding with them and pushing for a gradual liberalization of the region. This would've given the West much greater acces to the Middle-Eastern oil at a cheaper price and the chance to establish an anti-soviet bloc in the region at the expense of losing what(without the West's support) would've been a puny small state relying on the USSR for any support. But instead, the West backed Israel, and simply gave themselfs a world of heartache as the Arab populations turned to Islamic Extremeism to "rid themselfs of Zionist Western opression". Oops.

tl/dr: The USA had a "enemy of my enemy is my friend" police in regards to the Middle-East during the Cold War. Of course it horribly backfired.

I would generally agree on Iran and Afghanistan, but you're out of your mind on Israel/Palestine.
There was never a united 'western' position and by the time the US got involved the mess was already made.
You’ve completely forgotten about the suez crisis and the fact that by the time the US started seriously helping the Israelis there was already a SOVIET supported bloc in the middle east. Remember that earlier on the French were far more supportive of the Israelis then they are now, the US-Israeli shindig didn’t come about until later.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Dichromate

You’ve completely forgotten about the suez crisis and the fact that by the time the US started seriously helping the Israelis there was already a SOVIET supported bloc in the middle east. Remember that earlier on the French were far more supportive of the Israelis then they are now, the US-Israeli shindig didn’t come about until later.

That's my point, we should've never even helped the Israelis in the first place. As soon as the conflict began between them we should have instantly supported the Arabs and provided them with weapons/funds in exchange for at least anti-sovietism.

[JustAnotherAsshole]

I've never been against any conflict or war. I was against the Iraq war because we were told that Saddam and his friends had something, if not everything to do with it.

Then we found out that that claim was bullshit, and that Bush had lied, and that Osama Bin Laden has never had anything to do with Saddam Hussein. Eight years, billions of dollars and thousands of lives later, we still don't have Osama Bin Laden, and we're still not any safer. Afghanistan is where Intelligence Agencies and the Military always thought he was hiding out, so why did we even bother with Iraq?

[Jeff Gatherer]

well, Obama's plan to send more troops into the region is flawed, and his support of unilateral bombings in Pakistan are flawed. Obama is still chasing the mirage that the United States can remain a force of dominance in the region, it simply cannot. No foreign military force has ever bested insurgents in Afghanistan

[the phantom stranger]

The left is continuing to challenge Obama on all these wars. Last month our local ISO branch held a forum on "The Myth of Humanitarian Aid" regarding so called "aid" given by imperialist capitalist governments. Next week we are having another forum about the occupations of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Palestine.

So we on the left are still fighting. But the left does need to do more and make itself seen and heard.

[supperrfreek]

Originally Posted by the phantom stranger

So we on the left are still fighting. But the left does need to do more and make itself seen and heard.

If one of your own (referring to any elected politician) does something on an issue which is against the ideology of the party, and/or against the will of his constituents, he needs to be called out on it.
The problem with a lot of the young voters who came out for Obama is this: they don't know what they're talking about, were going with the flow, and since the election, have lost interest in politics.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...502104_pf.html
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2007/09/20/18641/
This though:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1...556/144/665985
is wrong.
Their ideas on question answers are just plain stupid.
For Example #6

The problem here isn't in the correct answer, its what isn't correct. Specifically, did you know that the Bill of rights doesn't prohibit prayer in public schools or that it doesn't prohibit discrimination?

The constitution doesn't prohibit all discrimination in the bill of rights, it's in the body of the constitution itself, it's also in the 14th amendment.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

That's from Article IV Section II -> doesn't sound so discriminatory does it. Although the Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments doesn't prohibit it the Cosntitution does 2 times).
The test asks a question about FDR's pack the courts plan - they don't get it. They ask why Brown vs Board of Ed wasn't on the test-the answer- because if you don't know about Brown vs the Board of Ed you're an idiot and deserve an ass kicking.
They raise question to a question about abortion. Abortion is used as a litmus test for supreme court nominees. If people don't know about the ruling in Roe vs. Wade, they ought to just stay home on november 4th. they need to know that women currently "can choose" up until the end of the second trimester (if you haven't decided by then you've got a baby-besides, the morning after is the most acceptable time for an "abortion").
They are right about the establishment clause making a wall of separation, but the origin of the term is where they were wrong. It's important to know where these phrases came from (the federalist papers), because they're the only thing we have to look into the framers minds and they're frequently used in the supreme court.
They also don't seem to know what was happening worldwide in 1939 when we were selling guns, ammunition, airplanes and other pieces of war equipment to our soon to be allies. The effect of the new deal is debatable, but I will say it may be a 50-50. But anyhow the question was about deficit spending - lowering taxes while increasing spending - Keynesian economics.

Apparently Daily Kos knows as much about the Constitution, Civics and Basic American History as the average fourth grader, they also apparently have no idea of how to check facts, and how to look up how the constitution was passed. They might even find an ally in Alexander Hamilton, perhaps even Madison and Jay too (but now they can't because they don't even know THAT THEY WROTE THE FEDERALIST PAPERS AND ARGUED FOR A MORE POWERFUL GOVERNMENT). The "bi-partisanship" crap even dates back to the federalist papers (although I don't remember which one), it speaks of "mitigating the effects of factions" and how the constitution will do that. I don't see why they don't huddle around this amazing document as opposed to international law (which was drafted by Europe - they can never get things right in their own continent, now they want to make international law give me a break).

But aside from that long rant to preemptively strike an inaccurate source, I'd like to say that today's youth ought to be tested on civics in the SAT or something. And also that this lack of knowledge to begin with, fact forgetting and lack of interest mainly, is why they aren't with you in your protests for peace or with me in my pursuits.
thank you for your time (I'll try not to rant next time). I'm sorry for any trouble my overzealous behavior may have caused.

[Mr. Dazed and Confused]

Originally Posted by Star Wars Fan

Iran is pretty stable. The Central Asian nations are stable, though NOT very democratic (the US has outsourced detainees to one central asian nation to be tortures).

Besides, it's all for oil anyway.



more like thousands. argugbly hundreds of thousands.

I was pretty much talking about Pakistan, which is clearly the elephant in the room. Central Asia is somewhat stable, but I think not very Democratic is a complete understatement. The most democratic nation in the region is Kyrgyzstan and that's not saying much. If you look at the election statistics for these countries, democracy is more of a facade. These states are single-party dominant or exclusive regimes that use the money from energy sales to keep power.

Iran is pretty stable internally, but they support or turn a blind eye to "Islamists" who want to destroy Israel. Let me be clear, I do not like what the state of Israel has done and I do not believe the United States should constantly give them a pass. I just think that if Israel is hit with any kind of WMD, they will respond and it would be one of the worst disasters the region, or even the world, has ever seen.

[Star Wars Fan]

Originally Posted by supperrfreek

I don't see why they don't huddle around this amazing document as opposed to international law (which was drafted by Europe - they can never get things right in their own continent, now they want to make international law give me a break).

International law doesn't exist technically (sovereignty and all), you're referring to treaties and shit.

Also the EU is amazingly stable. Ignoring some arguably shitty things they have done (IIRC, for example stabilizing agriculture policies in some bad ways; e.g. how finland does stuff won't be how Italy does stuff due to climate and whatnot. That and the anti-holocaust denial law attempts last year by Merkel and the anti-pedophile bullshit).

lol @ the constitution given the historical fact that i'd be whipped as a slave or driven off my land. that and the whole 'stipped identity' thing I'd experience back then

thank you for your time (I'll try not to rant next time). I'm sorry for any trouble my overzealous behavior may have caused.

it's okay

Originally Posted by Mr. Dazed and Confused

I was pretty much talking about Pakistan, which is clearly the elephant in the room.

ahh. I see now.

I just think that if Israel is hit with any kind of WMD, they will respond and it would be one of the worst disasters the region, or even the world, has ever seen.

hopefully in that situation Israel's samson plan nukes get wiped out before the Zionists can respond in kind.

Originally Posted by the phantom stranger

The left is continuing to challenge Obama on all these wars. Last month our local ISO branch held a forum on "The Myth of Humanitarian Aid" regarding so called "aid" given by imperialist capitalist governments. Next week we are having another forum about the occupations of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Palestine.

So we on the left are still fighting. But the left does need to do more and make itself seen and heard.

thanks. I recently saw this ad on the 95th and dan ryan el station on a local socialist group meeting up. As to be expected it's on the fucking north side of the city

it's all day I think this saturday so ill be able to go there and will try to then to see what's happening.

[Star Wars Fan]

Originally Posted by supperrfreek

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...502104_pf.html
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2007/09/20/18641/

lol. they suggest bringing newspapers? FUCK NEWSPAPERS AND FUCK OLD MEDIA. Sorry but I have a bias toward the internet, especially when old media can lie and manipulate and omit things. See the Somali pirates situation (ignoring the EU having dumping shit in their waters and overfishing)

also wut

"Not knowing is not the same as being ignorant," he said. "And if we can teach our students that there's a distinction between the two, then I think we have done a good job. I have a feeling that some people who ran that survey don't understand."

remember the second link i quoted is a study from a right-wing group.

because if you don't know about Brown vs the Board of Ed you're an idiot and deserve an ass kicking.

that's not nice man

[Irukanji]

Originally Posted by Mcrjtn

The real reason no one gives a shit is they've got you (being the anti-war protester) content to do nothing more than meet twice a month in a basement somewhere.

Nothing says political reform like broken glass and burnt out cars, if you really give a shit, get to it. If all revolutionaries were like you pathetic faggots we'd still be stabbing each other with spears and praying five times a day.

50% of the world still lives like that.

Muslims, hundus, etc all pray a billion and a half times a day each. Seems like a massive waste of time to me.

[Dumpster Slut]

Originally Posted by Space Monkey

Pull out and let them recreate the medieval society they seem to like so much.

You want to target terrorism, then you'll have to do something about Saudi Arabia.

The Sauidi's are the real enemy.

[Star Wars Fan]

...well I feel better.

I just came back from protesting Karl Rove with some 9/11 truthers (wearechange, the chicago organizer formed part of it from the collapsing lonelantern group) and a few socialist/communist groups as well (theworldcantwait, the revolutionary communist party, and some local peace groups/anti war groups. Oh and the anarchist (Jeremy Hammond) who was V& for hacking the right-wing site (Protest Warrior); the dude whoo founded hackthissite