j_b Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Shame: The 'Anti-War' Democrats Who Sold Out In a historic vote, only 30 of 256 Democrats stood against $100 billion for more war. by Jeremy Scahill In a vote that should go down in recent histories as a day of shame for the Democrats, on Tuesday the House voted to approve another $106 billion dollars for the bloody wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (and increasingly Pakistan). To put a fine point on the interconnection of the iron fist of U.S. militarism and the hidden hand of free market neoliberal economics, the bill included a massive initiative to give the International Monetary Fund billions more in U.S. taxpayer funds. What once Democrats could argue was "Bush's war," they now officially own. Shame: The 'Anti-War' Democrats Who Sold Out Quote
j_b Posted June 17, 2009 Author Posted June 17, 2009 Bill Moyers: The Rise of Private Armies -- Mercenaries, Murder and Corruption in Iraq and Afghanistan By Bill Moyers [..] Bill Moyers: How do explain this spike in private contractors in both Iraq and Afghanistan? Scahill: Well, I think what we're seeing, under President Barack Obama, is sort of old wine in a new bottle. Obama is sending one message to the world, but the reality on the ground, particularly when it comes to private military contractors, is that the status quo remains from the Bush era. Right now there are 250 thousand contractors fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's about 50 percent of the total US fighting force. Which is very similar to what it was under Bush. In Iraq, President Obama has 130 thousand contractors. And we just saw a 23 percent increase in the number of armed contractors in Iraq. In Afghanistan there's been a 29 percent increase in armed contractors. So the radical privatization of war continues unabated under Barack Obama. [...] Moyers: But many people will say of course, the truth, which is he inherited a quagmire from the Bush administration. What's he to do? Scahill: Well, there's no question that Obama inherited an absolute mess from President Bush. But the reality is that Obama is escalating the war in Afghanistan right now. And is maintaining the occupation of Iraq. If Obama was serious about fully ending the occupation of Iraq, he wouldn't allow the U.S. to have a colonial fortress that they're passing off as an embassy in Baghdad. Bill, this place is the size of 80 football fields. Who do you think is going to run the security operation for this 80 football field sized embassy? Well, it's mercenary contractors. Moyers: So we're supposed to be withdrawing from Iraq. But you're suggesting, in all that you've written, that I've read lately, that we will be leaving a large mercenary force there. Scahill: Absolutely. In fact, you're going to have a sizable presence, not only of U.S. forces, certainly in the region, but also in Iraq. These residual forces… I mean, Bill, you remember, during Vietnam, the people who were classified as military advisors. Or analysts. And, in reality, the U.S. was fighting an undeclared war. So, in Iraq, I think that we've seen reports from Jim Miklaszewski, NBC News' Pentagon correspondent. He's quoting military sources saying that they expect to be in Iraq 15 to 20 years in sizable numbers. Afghanistan, though, really is going to become Obama's war. And, unfortunately, many Democrats are portraying it as the good war [...] Mercenaries, Murder and Corruption in Iraq and Afghanistan Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 It was all just a slogan to get morons like you to vote for them. Quote
Doug Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Shame: The 'Anti-War' Democrats Who Sold Out In a historic vote, only 30 of 256 Democrats stood against $100 billion for more war. by Jeremy Scahill In a vote that should go down in recent histories as a day of shame for the Democrats, on Tuesday the House voted to approve another $106 billion dollars for the bloody wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (and increasingly Pakistan). To put a fine point on the interconnection of the iron fist of U.S. militarism and the hidden hand of free market neoliberal economics, the bill included a massive initiative to give the International Monetary Fund billions more in U.S. taxpayer funds. What once Democrats could argue was "Bush's war," they now officially own. Shame: The 'Anti-War' Democrats Who Sold Out I own things that I didn't buy, but have to pay the upkeep on. I would much rather see funding for continued operations than to just pull the rug out from under their feet. Yawn. Quote
j_b Posted June 17, 2009 Author Posted June 17, 2009 It was all just a slogan to get morons like you to vote for them. It is obviously great comfort to warmongering dead-enders like you to see the people being taken by demagogues once more. And no, i didn't vote for them. In fact, I always said this would happen in this forum. Quote
j_b Posted June 17, 2009 Author Posted June 17, 2009 Shame: The 'Anti-War' Democrats Who Sold Out In a historic vote, only 30 of 256 Democrats stood against $100 billion for more war. by Jeremy Scahill In a vote that should go down in recent histories as a day of shame for the Democrats, on Tuesday the House voted to approve another $106 billion dollars for the bloody wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (and increasingly Pakistan). To put a fine point on the interconnection of the iron fist of U.S. militarism and the hidden hand of free market neoliberal economics, the bill included a massive initiative to give the International Monetary Fund billions more in U.S. taxpayer funds. What once Democrats could argue was "Bush's war," they now officially own. Shame: The 'Anti-War' Democrats Who Sold Out I own things that I didn't buy, but have to pay the upkeep on. I would much rather see funding for continued operations than to just pull the rug out from under their feet. Yawn. So, instead of ending the war, you'd rather see "continued operations"? how does pulling forces out of Iraq jive with increasing the number of mercenaries by 25%? Quote
Doug Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 For the record, I have never been against troops in Afghanistan. That country under the rule of the Taliban is/was a hiding place and breeding ground for the groups that are waging jihad. Those groups, or one in particular, executed an attack on the U.S.. Iraq, on the other had, no one has come up with any credible rationale for why we went in. We're in knee deep and to immediately pull out (or pull funding) would be ridiculous. Quote
j_b Posted June 17, 2009 Author Posted June 17, 2009 For the record, I have never been against troops in Afghanistan. That country under the rule of the Taliban is/was a hiding place and breeding ground for the groups that are waging jihad. Those groups, or one in particular, executed an attack on the U.S.. A police operation to deal with terrorists doesn't necessarily imply occupation and military solution to long term socio-ethnic conflicts. You still have time to reconsider your stance and not support decades of anti-guerilla warfare that will inevitably translate into the murder of countless innocents. Iraq, on the other had, no one has come up with any credible rationale for why we went in. We're in knee deep and to immediately pull out (or pull funding) would be ridiculous. err ... we said from day one that controlling the 2nd largest reserve of oil on the planet was a credible enough rationale. We aren't pulling out despite the campaign promises and the situation was no different before the elections. The people voted for a pull out. Quote
Doug Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Wow JB, thanks for your opinions. Have a nice day. Quote
j_b Posted June 17, 2009 Author Posted June 17, 2009 Yeah right, standing for democracy has become an "opinion" Quote
Fairweather Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 It was all just a slogan to get morons like you to vote for them. Well said. But...if all goes according to plan...slackers like j_b...are gonna get...FREE healthcare!!!!! Did you hear me? I said FREE!!!! Quote
Fairweather Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Yeah right, standing for democracy has become an "opinion" You certainly do not stand for democracy. Quote
kevbone Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Those groups, or one in particular, executed an attack on the U.S.. Really. Who told you that? Quote
j_b Posted June 17, 2009 Author Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) Yeah right, standing for democracy has become an "opinion" You certainly do not stand for democracy. Here comes the crypto-fascist wanting to give lessons in democracy. Edited June 17, 2009 by j_b Quote
billcoe Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Here comes the crypto-fascist wanting to give lessons in democracy. Do you think in anyway your petty, ignorant insults add anything of substance to the conversation? Or is it more likely showing you to be a small minded thinker and a petty tyrant type of Napoleon, who, too stupid and ignorant to address the arguments in any manner with logic resort to personal attacks? Just askin? No need to get all huffy again! Lifes too short. Quote
j_b Posted June 17, 2009 Author Posted June 17, 2009 what insults? I just pointed out the irony in having the most consistantly authoritarian poster on this board wanting to give lessons in democracy. Personal attacks? so when other posters call me a "moron", a "slacker", you don't say anything and then you partake by calling me "too stupid" and "ignorant" and you calim to want to add substance to the conversation? You are an hypocrite Bill, and your pretense at political moderation doesn't fool anybody here. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Yeah right, standing for democracy has become an "opinion" You certainly do not stand for democracy. he stands for some kind of democracy, say, a "people's democratic republic"... Quote
j_b Posted June 17, 2009 Author Posted June 17, 2009 Great. Now Attila the Hun is gearing up for a little McCarthyist red scare. Quote
j_b Posted June 17, 2009 Author Posted June 17, 2009 You're hurting America. And I thought that all the conservatives in congress (all except 5) who didn't vote for that war bill were the ones "hurting America" Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Great. Now Attila the Hun is gearing up for a little McCarthyist red scare. no need to be scared of a pinko punk like you Quote
j_b Posted June 17, 2009 Author Posted June 17, 2009 I am mesmerized by the depth of your arguments. As your pal Bill will no-doubt point out to you what a way to "contribute substance to a discussion". Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 I am mesmerized by the depth of your arguments. As your pal Bill will no-doubt point out to you what a way to "contribute substance to a discussion". a brain-damaged wacko like you contributes nothing to a "discussion" Quote
j_b Posted June 17, 2009 Author Posted June 17, 2009 Thank you for once more making my point clear. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.