Helen Thomas to Obama: When are we going to get out of Afghanistan Spare Us

[SLSmith]

Run time: 02:44 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnNdFv7LdZE   Posted on YouTube: May 27, 2010 By YouTube Member: VoiceofAmericans2008 Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: May 27, 2010 By DU Member: SLSmith Views on DU: 6849

 
May 27, 2010
GOTTA Love Helen Thomas
President Obama Press Conference on BP

[ShortnFiery]

1. May Our Higher Power Bless Helen Thomas: A woman unafraid to speak truth to power.

:patriot: :loveya:

[EFerrari]

2. Go, Helen!

[AndyA]

3. Wouldn't it be great if they were all like Helen?

She has more courage and integrity than everyone else in the room put together. The rest of them have all been bought by their corporate bosses.

Chuck Todd...what a piece of work that slimeball is! :puke:

[mikita]

4. does anyone believe this?

does anyone really believe HE believes it?

[earth mom]

6. No and No. nt

[Radical Activist]

15. What is it that you don't believe?

Do you believe Obama is lying about the goals he wants to reach before leaving? Is he lying about the strategy being pursued?

It might be a foolish strategy but I don't see any reason to think Obama is lying in this video.

[mikita]

19. read post 18...

says it all for me.

I can hardly believe your username is "radical activist" (so not), but I DO believe your hobby, "confusing others".

[Radical Activist]

61. You made a vague statement and I asked you to clarify.

Asking questions and using critical thinking skills doesn't make me less radical.

Believing that Obama just might be sincere about his statements, even if they are misguided, doesn't make me less radical either. It's important to learn from the past but it's also important to not let the past become emotional baggage that stops you from being effective.

[ProudDad]

66. "Sincerely deluded" is the term we're looking for ... (n/t)

[mikita]

68. everyone else in this thread seems to understand what I was saying

and I did refer you to post 18. I'll now refer you to post 64 by Truth2Power, also very well spoken.

I don't feel a need to expand any more since you are a critical thinker, and I'm sure you now get the drift.

[Radical Activist]

82. Yes, it looks like people are having an emotional response about the war.

Yes, the war is bullshit and the reasons Bush gave for why it started were bullshit. So there's a lot of general anger and cynicism on this thread about the war that's well justified. Yet, not you or anyone else has said what exactly Obama was lying about. Thinking this war is a lie and that Obama lied about something specific in his explanation of what he intends to do from here on out are two different things. Understand? My ability to comprehend that doesn't make me less radical, so I responded to your cute little line about me.

[defendandprotect]

90. The minute Obama tells you that we attacked Afghanistan -- all of that nation ---

because some terrorists centered there -- which we created, btw -- allegedly

did what the Russians were never able to do in the farce of 9/11 -- then we know

that he is not telling the truth in following the "Bushism" crap.

obama may not be actively lying in creating new farce -- but he's repeating the

Bush lies of the past.

[Radical Activist]

99. That's your opinion.

All wars are about land, money, and resources. But many wars are also about other things at the same time. So no, I don't think it's a lie for Obama to focus on one of the other things this war is about, and define some specific goals for what he wants to do before leaving the country. There are several things wrong with what he wants to do and it may be completely unrealistic. But that's different than cynically assuming he's lying about his goals.

[defendandprotect]

114. That is NOT my opinion . . . that is reality by Brzezinski who was there . . .

Carter Administration -- and Brzezinski has repeated what actually happened

many times -- including in his book -- and including on the O'Reilly Show!

Brzezinski has testified to what they did in Afghanistan over and again --

in many forms.

No truthful plan of action can be based on known lies of the past!

[defendandprotect]

74. This is another CIA war -- and obama certainly knows it . . . .

either Obama is intelligent or dumb -- you can't have it both ways.

[Radical Activist]

83. All wars happen for a variety of reasons.

So yes, I think that a reasonable person can choose to focus on one of the reasons this war was started and/or change the focus of what we're doing here no out.

Just because I want us to get out of this war faster doesn't mean I have to spit on Obama's mother's grave and believe everything he says is a lie.

[defendandprotect]

84. Let's be clear... YOU are suggesting the "spitting on Obama's mother's grave" ....

not me --

Nor am I saying that "everything Obama says is a lie" --

And your comments give evidence to the fact that you're getting testy re this challenge

to you on this issue -- and you've run out of debating skills.



All wars happen for a variety of reasons.

So yes, I think that a reasonable person can choose to focus on one of the reasons this war was started and/or change the focus of what we're doing here no out.

There is no war without CIA involvement and there is no capitalism/corporatism without CIA

involvement -- no torture without CIA involvement. On and on.

They should be shut down.

Yes -- wars happen for a variety of reasons -- usually the same reasons over and again which

can be wrapped in a bundle of IMPERIALISM and EXPLOITATION of nature -- and other people.

We're still in the same gene pool which gave us genocide vs the native American --

and enslavement of African here.

And 100 more years of Segregation, Inc. --

And US is still using patriarchal religion as a tool of war --

See my post - link below -- for details on that re our creating Taliban/Al Qaeda and

our creating a violent element of Islamic religion --


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=469110&mesg_id=469508

[Radical Activist]

86. None of what you wrote addresses my question.

What specifically in that statement by Obama was a lie? No one answers. My debating skills aren't the problem. I responded in post 85 as well.

[defendandprotect]

88. What I wrote is relevant to war and how US/CIA goes about creating them . . .

It also makes clear that EVERYONE who bothers to know anything understands that

Taliban/Al Qaeda were a CIA creation -- did you happen to read the testimony of

Brzezinski? And not only did he make our creation of Taliban/Al Qaeda clear in that

statement, but on the O'Reilly Show! And in his book.

Certainly Obama knows all about all of this -- if not he's in great danger from what

he doesn't know.

My reply to what Obama was doing in this video was exactly what Helen was objecting to ...

i.e., old "Bushism" story --

and as I stated above in my original comments, he was repeating it "story like."

Most of us are reacting to the disappointment of Obama's comments . . . same ole/same ole.

No one is looking for a president to attack -- we are greatly saddened that we have a

president still supporting this war/wars.

Your main thrust is trying to PR for Obama --

Meanwhile, watch again the video of Pelosi day after '06 elections . . .

"WE WERE ELECTED TO END THE WAR" -- !!

And Dem Establishment/DLC has done nothing since then but refinance these wars which are

illegal, immoral and bankrupting our Treasury and the nation!!

[Radical Activist]

97. You're having your own conversation with someone else.

"Your main thrust is trying to PR for Obama --"

No, I'm not. Nothing you've written contradicts me or the question I asked. You're just repeating canned arguments. I'm already against this war and you're being an ass.

[defendandprotect]

115. Unfortunately, you are showing over and again that it is true . . .

because you are failing to in any way respond to what others are saying to you

about the realities of the past --

THE question of the OP has been ansswered quite clearly by most of us --

Your question is an effort to deny those responses.

No one who is against the war supports our being there ...



AND, I note from your profile that your "Hobby" is "confusing others" . . .

Really . . . ????

[WileEcoyote]

37. Simple reason for the Prez to lie

1. Military industrial complex wants that war.

2. Through MIC's influence they will have that war or Obama gets pilloried in the media.

3. Obama is walking a tightrope with a Sword of Damocles hanging over him.


So Obama will tell any plausible sounding lie that takes him off the hook. Doesn't want to have his brains shot out the back in Dallas. That's what happened the last time a sitting President went head to head with CIA/MIC...

[mikita]

38. how right you are...

just finished reading "JFK: The Unspeakable", and "Brothers" to remind myself.

[defendandprotect]

75. +1000% ---

[Obamaknowzz]

100. What this implies is that the Prez is little more than a puppet...

Which I agree with. He needs to cut those puppet strings and go after the bastards or we are fucking doomed.

[Cha]

109. That just shows the ignorance of those who

have nothing but cheap shots to throw around the internet.

[WileEcoyote]

124. He knows this and is slowly snipping away at the strings

but he also knows that if he cuts too many strings too quickly?

They'll shoot him dead in the streets of Dallas. Or poison his family.

Think "Wellstone, Carnahan" here. These assholes gladly KILL people. If their victims are lucky that is. What would stop them, a sense of decency?

They have none. See Limbaugh for reference...

[Cha]

108. That's your take ..the President doesn't have to lie.

[fascisthunter]

56. conformists with radical names and avatars

yup, you'll blend in...

[Radical Activist]

60. Asking questions and using critical thinking skills

doesn't make me less radical. It does make me more effective.

[Obamaknowzz]

101. LOL

:rofl:

[defendandprotect]

73. Obama is intleligent . . . why would he be following a "foolish strategy" ....

without reason? I have to go with lying --

[Radical Activist]

85. What would you do if you were President?

The most obvious answer is to get out right away. On the other hand, how do we not repeat the mistake of the 80's where we walked away from the country, left it in pieces, and created the kind of conditions that usually lead to oppressive governments? Aren't we in some way responsible for aiding a country we destroyed? Obama laid out three goals before we leave:
1) Take out terrorist strong holds. (Not ALL the terrorist as another posters spun)
2) Help rebuild the country.
3) Train the Afghan army and turn operations over to them.

Those sound like goals a reasonable, intelligent person would have. I think we're making a mistake by keeping our troops there, but it's perfectly reasonable to think that Obama is probably telling the truth about what he wants to do. So I asked what Obama was lying about, and instead of giving an answer, everyone goes off on rants about why the war is a lie. The war is based on a lie, but that wasn't the question. All wars start for a variety of motivations that come together.

[sabrina 1]

89. I would have started by getting rid of Gates.

This is the man who undermined Carter to help Reagan and his cabal commit treason to make Carter look bad so that he would lose the election. They succeeded. He has been a part of this government, hopping from one administration to another since he betrayed Carter, the president for whom he was working at the time.

Why did Obama not do that? Why would he keep a man with such a clouded history, who escaped jail only because of the collusion of the Bush family, and later the Clinton administration who let the war criminals and usurpers off the hook when they were dangling nicely and ready to be indicted?

Either Obama is naive, which I doubt. Too smart for that. Or, he thought he could do SOME good if he went along with them on issues like these wars. Or, like Clinton, he actually supports what they represent.

Whatever the reason, not much has changed regarding these wars, not even those who are running them.

What did he lie about? He stated that the U.S. mission is to eradicate 'terrorists' in Pakistan and Afghanistan. He deliberately ignored the fact that the whole world knows that killing civilians as his administration is now responsible for, will accomplish the exact opposite.

Iow, he tried to convince the public that killing even more civilians, which most of the dead are, will make us safe.

When Bush told us fairy tales like that, at least we on the left didn't believe them. So now we have a better salesperson, at least that's what they thought, who can maybe convince the other half of the country, (Bush did the job on the right), iow, the left, that we must continue to support these wars because they are being fought for our national security. THAT IS A LIE!

[Radical Activist]

103. You didn't answer the question.

How do we get out without recreating the conditions that existed after we abandoned the country in the 80's? Or, should we not care and just get out? What would you do as President? Firing one person in the administration doesn't get us out.

It's a very difficult question. I'm not convinced Obama has the answer, but I'm not so cynical to believe that he's keeping the war going just because he enjoys it or something.

[sabrina 1]

105. To begin with, we could start listening to the people of

Afghanistan themselves. There are democratic voices in Afghanistan which this government ignores, while we make deals with war lords AND the Taliban in order to accomplish the real goals of this war.

A few investigative journalists, like Robert Fisk and Robert Greenwald (not Glenn) have gone there and filmed and talked to the ordinary people. Over and over they have said that our presence there has made things far worse for them.

They were caught between the war lords and the Taliban, now the U.S. is only strengthening the powers of these groups, by paying them, giving them weapons, facilitating the drug trade etc. not to mention killing many innocent civilians while doing nothing to build on the democratic base that already existed there but needed help. They have been ignored, in fact most Americans are not even aware that they exist.

As many of them told reporters, either the U.S. should leave, or start helping the people but what they are doing now is doomed to failure, and will doom the people there who have suffered so much already, to even more suffering, starvation (children are dying of starvation there while we spend a trillion $$ on weapons of war).

If you haven't seen any of Robert Greenwald's work on Afghanistan (among others) here is a link to some of his film work. If you want answers, listen to these people, especially to the women in Part V, although it is worth watching all of them.

http://rethinkafghanistan.com/videos.php

This reporter released his work free before Obama was inaugurated, hoping to get his attention on how it is necessary to change completely what the U.S. had been doing there.

[Radical Activist]

119. I'm aware of Greenwald's work.

And as you pointed out, it was all done before Obama was inaugurated. Obviously, this is a difficult question because even people opposed to the war don't have a clear idea about what we should do in the country before we leave, or if we should do anything at all.

[sabrina 1]

120. Start with: Stop killing civilians with Drones and pretending

your clearing out terrorists. I thought Bush's use of cowardly WMD like that would be over when Obama became president. So did many people around the world. Now, he has lost the confidence of the people in Afghanistan and the hope the world had of stopping these disasters in foreign countries, is pretty much gone.

There are many things that could be done to ease the way for us to go. But we'll have to go eventually without 'killing every terrorist'. The more people we kill, the more terrorists we are creating.

Nearly ten years and the combined forces of NATO backed by the U.S. have achieved nothing there. Nor will they as they fighting an old, outdated, medieval war that was tried so often in that part of the world, and failed. I suppose they think that with bigger more powerful weapons, things would be different this time. Just as Obama believed that 'new technology makes offshore drilling safe today'.

They always forget the human element. If you keep killing people's loved ones, you will create enemies. Obama could have been the one to put a stop to that, as the people of Afghanistan have demanded including Karzai.

So, that is the place to start. We don't get to use the people of foreign nations as a laboratory to test out our cool new WMD without consequences.

After the people see an end to the killing, then we could start funding the democratic movement there instead of the war lords and the Taliban and spend the billions we are spending on killing on repairing some of the damage we have done.

But Obama lost the moment, I think it's too late now to gain their confidence back so, like all the other empires before us, we will eventually leave, leaving behind more heartbreak and an even more destroyed country which those unfortunate people will be left to try to put back together. Maybe this time we can at least back the democratic people financially. It's the least we could do.

[mikita]

121. what you say is heartbreakingly clear...

I don't buy the argument that we don't know what to do... We (and our *leaders*) know EXACTLY what needs to be done, but it won't happen because there's too much profit in the status quo, that is, War ad Infinitum. The model is so tried and so tired. It's been the same forever: WAR IS A RACKET.

[sabrina 1]

122. Yes, that really is the truth.

They want war. They cannot be so stupid as to think that killing people's innocent loved ones will bring peace and good will. So, the only logical conclusion, assuming they are not that stupid, is that they want war.

The Arms business, the Drug Trade, the Oil business, not to mention the Torture Business, they are all extremely profitable businesses that are 'too big to fail'. The people in these countries are merely part of the lab in which they test their latest WMDs. Drones must be in demand. I wonder if they are on the Stock Exchange. I haven't checked, it's all just too sickening.

But what is most disturbing is the sudden change of heart of former Anti-Bush progressives who are now attempting to rationalize these wars, and, either wittingly or unwittingly, using the same arguments Bush used and giving support to these crimes, which they were from the beginning, and that did not change when a Democrat was put in charge. Dying people probably didn't notice the change of CICs and we shouldn't either as long as these crimes against humanity continue.

[mikita]

123. something you just said....

Your last paragraph sums up so much of what makes my head hurt these days. There are so many apologists now who used to be apoplectic when the same crimes occurred during the Bush years.

I'm going to sear your last sentence into my brain ... it is SO Clear ......

"Dying people probably didn't notice the change of CICs and we shouldn't either as long as these crimes against humanity continue."

Thank you and namaste,

Mikita

[sabrina 1]

126. Thank you, sorry I missed your post yesterday ~ it is all so sad.

[defendandprotect]

92. Well . . . you're sure drinking the Bush Kool Aid . . .

No -- the people who were there -- Brzezinski -- Carter Administration --

tell you honestly that we created the Taliban/Al Qaeda -- and did it thru

ISI-Pakistan --

and we went into Afghanistan 6 months before the Russians came in ... "in hope of baiting

the Russians into Afghanistan and giving them a Vietnam-type experience."

Carter's farce of removing us from the Olympics in Russia aside!!


The way to "aid" Afghanistan right now is for us to leave --

US is the force which has killed more than 1 million Muslims based on a lie of 9/11 -

US is the "terrorist nation" -- and US is the "destroyer" -- as we've seen throughout history.



1) Take out terrorist strong holds. (Not ALL the terrorist as another posters spun)
2) Help rebuild the country.
3) Train the Afghan army and turn operations over to them.

Looks more like protecting the heroin crop and our interests in it --

Did you happen to see the video posted here a few months ago where a British officer is

looking out at the supply of heroin being produced again and noting that "The US certainly

loves to sell drugs!" ??? Since our takeover, they have reached new peaks of production.

Taliban was anti-drug production, reducing it. And, anti-the pipline.

#2 also sounds like another corporate opportunity and more exploitation of Afghanistan

#3 also sounds like more time necessary for "School of America" type training to brutalize

citizens there.


What would I do -- I would tell the American public the true costs of these wars -- and

that they have been and are bankrupting the nation/the Treasury in order to keep a corporate

MIC going with perpetual wars!!

About time Americans got something else for their tax dollars than MIC and war!!

[Radical Activist]

95. You lack reading skills.

I wrote twice in that comment that I oppose the current strategy. You're making idiotic assumptions about where I stand. You're repeating talking points from a conversation you had with someone else. Try again when you gain reading comprehension.

You didn't answer my question either. Telling people that the war sucks is not a plan of action and you don't seem to care if we repeat the mistakes of Carter and Reagan in the 80's. You have nothing but history and slogans.

[Cha]

110. But it can throw that "drinking the bush koolaid" insult out

there to show it has absolutely no clue.

[defendandprotect]

111. This is the Kool Aid I'm talking about . . .

On the other hand, how do we not repeat the mistake of the 80's where we walked away from the country, left it in pieces, and created the kind of conditions that usually lead to oppressive governments?

What we were doing in Afghanistan was creating Taliban/Al Qaeda and using them to

"bait the Russians into Afghanistan in hopes of giving them a Vietnam-type experience."

Again -- we are not the helpers, we are the destroyers --



And your responses and blatant ignoring of information being given to you is making clear

that you can't handle the information.


And, again, we have all replied to the question of what Obama was doing in his reply --

repeating a fable or lying -- not much difference.

But whatever YOU think his plan is, it is based on the original fable.



And, here's another of my responses here you seem to be failing to acknowledge or absorb . . .

The minute Obama tells you that we attacked Afghanistan -- all of that nation ---

because of some terrorists centered there -- which we created, btw -- allegedly

did what the Russians were never able to do in the farce of 9/11 -- then we know

that he is not telling the truth in following the "Bushism" crap.

obama may not be actively lying in creating new farce -- but he's repeating the

Bush lies of the past.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=469110&mesg_id=469572

[mikita]

93. as President,

I'd do as Bill Blum, author, historian, and activist suggested awhile back:

If I were the president, I could stop terrorist attacks against the United States in a few days. Permanently. I would first apologize to all the widows and orphans, the tortured and impoverished, and all the many millions of other victims of American imperialism. Then I would announce, in all sincerity, to every corner of the world, that America's global interventions have come to an end, and inform Israel that it is no longer the 51st state of the USA but now -- oddly enough -- a foreign country. I would then reduce the military budget by at least 90% and use the savings to pay reparations to the victims. There would be more than enough money. One year's military budget of 330 billion dollars is equal to more than $18,000 an hour for every hour since Jesus Christ was born. That's what I'd do on my first three days in the White House. On the fourth day, I'd be assassinated.

[Radical Activist]

96. That's a good start.

And then what would you do to stop Afghanistan today resembling Germany in the 20's? How do we avoid repeating the mistake Reagan made when we walked away and let the destroyed country descend further into a chaotic civil war that ushered in a repressive government? There's a good argument that we shouldn't do anything at all but get out, but a lot of fair minded people think we shouldn't walk away without doing something to help rebuild the country. And is it reasonable to think we can simply give reparations (which is what I'd most like us to do) if there's no stable government to aid when we leave. It could be like Somalia where foreign aid does no good because it all goes to warlords. That's a little more complicated than saying the war sucks.

I think Obama is making a mistake by not leaving sooner, but I also believe he might be sincere about doing something to make sure the country isn't a total chaotic shithole in the hands of an oppressive taliban government when we leave. That's why I asked what you thought Obama was lying about.

[defendandprotect]

112. Lovely response . . . and wish it could happen some day --

Especially re the warmongering Israel -- !!

You can't have democracy and have the MIC/CIA running the country and our "free press" -- !!

[sabrina 1]

125. I never saw that before. But I totally agree with everything

he says, including the last sentence!

[Obamaknowzz]

104. How in the hell could Obama NOT by lying? He is either under

their thumb or in with 'em. The fucking evidence is overwhelming regarding the true motives of the US all the way back to the PNAC imperitives, etc. The CIA is a gigantic Octopus that devours anyone in opposition to it and even their own from time to time. How could it not be? It has absolutely no power that can challenge it except a haphazard slap here and there from the Internet that quickly is fixed with damage control.

The shit that has been exposed is so far from the "official" story about what is going on that it isn't funny.

If I read your tactics you may try to now say: "Prove it!" Well Mr. Radical Activist it has already been proven a million times and you know it or you don't know anything. Just look at all the whistleblowers that have laid it out over the last decade and before. The pattern of many of these cases, often corroborated by multiple sources is similar: someone (an honest, but naive person) in the government finds out about CIA dirty ops, they try to stop it and end up getting on the shit list. For every 1 of them their are 10 and more who suffer for "knowing to much". They all just fade away, never to be heard from again. That is how it works! the CIA devours all who can expose stuff connected to a whistleblower. In one case SIX of the witnesses perished and anybody that tried to followup for years afterwards, in all about 10 people.

The CIA has or had a program, revealed by a highly respected CIA agent, to label people conspiracy nuts to destroy their credibility. Now look at how effective that was.

What is needed is for all of the people who know shit to have a safe-forum to tell their story and investigations of those stories. But it would have to be a really safe
haven and the process hammered out BEFORE the thing gets started.

Me talking here is not safe either, but what is to be done?

[defendandprotect]

113. +1000% -- and that would be "Operation Mockingbird" ... I believe ....

[Obamaknowzz]

127. The people who met untimely deaths were all involved in

the 1980 October Surprise (there was a 1968 version as well). The reporter (Danny Casolaro) who was very close to going public was "suicided" after a number of the people he interviewed died, some from violent deaths. His lawyer who tried to get the info to incoming AG Janet Reno died suddenly and one of the authors of "Octopus" that tried to keep the story alive died mysteriously. It is one long string of bodies.
I'm sure you know alot about this, and how easy it is to get "dungeoned" here for talking about it. But it has to be told. The people who control the Octopus are not being held acountable and until they are we will have no peace, security, etc. It looks like now we might not even be able to have a habitable planet.

:thumbsup:

[Obamaknowzz]

129. The stuff on conspiracy theorist program is in a book called..

"The Praetorian Guard". It may be a part of Mockingbird.

[leeroysphitz]

23. President Obama is definitely not putting his heart into selling this.

His bored, almost distracted delivery gives me the impression that he doesn't even care whether we believe it or not...

[icee]

32. Absolutley not. McCrystal and our bloodthirsty generals have

sold him a bill of goods. And now we may go into NK and then Iran? I presume everyone knows what's going to happen if we do that? NK may bomb us and/or Iran may close the Gulf. Even if they don't, how can we keep spending this money? Where is it coming from?

[defendandprotect]

77. As long as there is capitalism/corporatism, there's no end to the source of right wing $$$ ---

[Enthusiast]

45. We don't believe it and

he doesn't believe it. No improvement will come from the Afghanistan War. And that is such a shame.

[Grinchie]

50. OMFG!

Nwever mind the 10 Billons spwnt of Pakistan....

With 10 Billion, I could dismantle a lot of shit..

[defendandprotect]

72. No . . . seems like he's following a story-line . . . trying to remember it--!!

[earth mom]

5. Is it me, or did the answer sound like "NEVER"?!

Because there is NO DAMN WAY you can catch all the terra-ists on this planet!

Obama's answer sounded like an articulate version of what * would say. :argh:

[pezDispenser]

7. thats exactly what it sounded like to me

We are never going to leave that area.

[karmkay]

10. blah, blah, blah never ever ever

I guess it's going to be our graveyard too.

[sasquuatch55]

14. Empire building for control of the entire area and its resources as we

stand behind puppet governments. It's the imperial design. Attack, and occupy weak nations under the lies that it is for their own good, they pose an imminent threat, and spreading democracy, when indeed it is a conspiracy between US, UK, and Israel. Their is no doubt Iran will be next!

[defendandprotect]

78. At least 20 new bases in Iraq -- a Taj Mahal of a US Embassy -- !!!

Not aware of what we've done in Afghanistan re bases --

but we certainly have increased the heroin crop and have control of it!!

[Radical Activist]

12. That's not what he said.

He spoke about breaking up strong-holds and training the Afghanistan army to take over more anti-terrorism work while US troops are gradually withdrawn. There's a very good chance that strategy won't work, but he never said anything about catching all the terrorists before we leave.

[pundaint]

31. OK we know what he didn't say. Did you get an answer, or is it just a faith thing

you have faith in Obama and we have faith in repeated experience. No answer as to when we will leave is never. Now that World War II is over, we'll be leaving Germany soon.

[Radical Activist]

87. I'm simply correcting a false statement made in the comment above.

Obama just indicated a willingness to leave BEFORE all the terrorists are gone. Which is good, since there's no such thing as killing all terrorists without creating new ones. I'd rather see that as an encouraging sign and try to hold Obama to that promise. It gives him wiggle room to get out sooner rather than later. There is some space in between having blind faith in the President and being consumed by cynical hopelessness. It's the space in which most effective activists operate.

[ProudDad]

67. You're right

"Catching terrorists (tm)" is NOT his job. If it were, he could find thousands of them in Florida, Utah, Arizona and Idaho (for a start)...

His job is making sure that the Perpetual War Economy hums along...or else!

Whatever pisses away treasure on military adventures, whatever pumps the GDP is the ONLY job he has to concentrate on...

His corporate capitalist masters would blow him away if he didn't follow the prime directive of the USAmerikan Empire...

[sabrina 1]

91. Why do we need to train one of the most successful

army of fighters in history? Do you really buy that excuse? Have you been following what is going on in Afghanistan regarding this 'training'? Think for a minute. Your country is invaded by, say, the Chinese (think Red Dawn). They sweep through your country, overwhelm your forces, slaughter thousands of your fellow citizens, torture them and then occupy your country. You KNOW why they are there. You have something they want. What YOU don't have are powerful weapons.
our
Back home they are getting funding for the invasion by lying to their own people, telling them they have to stay, for this reason or that, longer. They have to 'train your people to fight for themselves' (that hurts, considering your long history of victories over other Empires).

So, here you are, you can't win against their weapons, but guess what, they want you to sign up to 'learn how to fight' THEIR way! What would YOU do in such a situation?

[Radical Activist]

102. Let's say you remember the civil wars.

Maybe you're not a fan of how the country was run under the Taliban. Maybe you don't want a return to instability, violence, and oppressive governments. It was not a united country. So as much as people hate the US being there, I'm sure there are many who like the idea of having a stable government that can fight a weak Taliban before the US leaves. Maybe your side couldn't defeat the taliban side during the civil wars but you can with the help of US troops. I'm sure there are many motivations for people too cooperate.

The real question now is how do we get out without leaving the same conditions that existed after Reagan abandoned the country in the 80's. I'm not convinced Obama's strategy is going to work, but I haven't seen any other ideas on this thread.

[sabrina 1]

106. I see the point you are making, and no we cannot do what Reagan

did.

However, you are missing the point that the Taliban and the War Lords are in a struggle for power and have been since Reagan left them to fight it out. So, members of either of those two groups are likely to take advantage of 'training' and have. We are using both of them, sometimes even paying the Taliban for 'protection' next day, the war lords. This ensures they remain powerful.

The third group, the ordinary people, who hate both those groups, now being empowered by NATO, are who we should be dealing with. But the U.S. is still in Cold War mode, where anything that is truly democratic means 'communist' to them. They are still fighting according to the Cold War playbook, propping up corrupt governments, ignoring the people's needs and frightened to death of anything that might make a country that is strategic in oil wars, completely independent, as has been happening now in South America finally.

And keeping Gates and all the other Bush left-overs on board ensures that nothing will change.

[Phlem]

16. That's the issue!

We're fighting terrorism. That's like fighting the night from coming. It's gonna happen everywhere in some form or another as long as we have the filthy rich and the filthy poor. If there weren't such a grave contrast between the two there might be less terrorism.

But fighting terrorism means an endless war. There's no winning this war! There's no one you can soot dead to end the war. We're fighting an issue we're causing.

Man I get frustrated the general populace (not you, I'm just agreeing with you).

The first step is for the nation's citizen's to understand the bullshit that is "Fighting Terrorism". But as long as we're all afraid, plus the propaganda, I'm not seeing the light at the end of the tunnel.

Rant Done.

-p

[defendandprotect]

79. +1000% . . . and love Obama's repeating, they killed "3,000 Americans" . . .

No -- Cheney/Bush/PNAC killed 3,000 Americans -- MIHOP

[laconicsax]

33. Master chess player, 16 months, Palin as POTUS, something about a pony.

:grr:

[Grinchie]

51. * (3D Chess)

Such a mahvelous playa.

[scentopine]

35. It was a very flowery form of never that takes 5 minutes to say and induces a coma after that -nt

[defendandprotect]

116. "Catapulting the propaganda" as Bush would have put it --

[JaneFordA]

8. SHE should be the President!

Gooooooooo, Helen!

[Radical Activist]

9. That's why Bush stopped calling on her.

I don't believe you can defeat the Taliban as long as we're killing civilians, but it's good to see Obama give a serious answer to what he wants to accomplish before leaving. LBJ always spoke about Vietnam taking a greater share of the war effort, so we'll see if that strategy turns out any differently in Afghanistan.

[joshdawg]

11. Afghanistan

Back in the 60's, I remember hearing this same rhetoric about South Vietnam. "We will get the South Vietnamese strong enough to stand up for themselves." We all know how that turned out.
I say we get the hell out of Afghanistan and Iraq and leave those folks to fight the same fight they have been fighting for hundreds of years. Not our problem.

[MrMickeysMom]

13. The video left out this part...

"... But, Helen....... if trade imbalances in the financial market keep going the way they are ......

complete with super wild ass swings in an already Bear market ... and our credit market dries worse than Ann Coulter's pubis...... and our beloved United States of America deepens itself into a full blown depression then.... I would have to tell you ...........................................

....ALL bets are off.

Then, I swear on Shasha and Milia's future .... WE'LL GET THE FUCK OUT OF THERE, okay?

Thanks, Helen."

[valerief]

17. Helen is the bomb! nt

[sabrina 1]

18. An Oil War under the guise of catching 'terraists'. He is just

easier to listen to as he can actually pronounce 'terrorist'.

As the Women in Afghanistan said, most Afghans know exactly why we are there. If the Taliban had agreed to the oil pipeline right before 9/11, we would never have been there.

Obama must know this, which is why he doesn't sound sincere trying to sell the Bush lie that we are there because of 9/11.

And where is Osama Bin Laden? What a failure it is if the most powerful country in the world, with all its high tech networks and human intelligence, could catch a guy living in a cave (lol) dragging around a dialysis machine, over 6' foot tall, with a caravan of family members travelling around with him?

Is there ANYONE who believes the Fairy Tale of Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden anymore, least of all someone as smart as Obama?

[mikita]

20. thank you...

you answered post #15 so well.

:hi:

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

42. well said post 18, no I do not believe in the fairy tale behind the wars

call me a skeptic, but if you live long enough,the bullshit gets so obvious.

[Enthusiast]

46. Thanks, Sabrina.

In my wildest dream I can't see us accomplishing some great good by continuing the war in Afghanistan. As of now it is no better than extending the war in Vietnam was then.

[truth2power]

64. Sabrina, you have stated it as succinctly as anyone can...

Is Obana lying? Yes. I can't see how anyone is shocked by that.

The idea that we're there to "train" the Afghan army, the same people who've thrown out every invader since god was a pup, is ludicrous beyond belief. Nor are we there to assure that Afghan women can go to school. Not that that isn't something to be desired.

Helen's further comment to President Obama, while he was responding to her question, wasn't audible because she didn't have a mike, but I think it was something to do with the Taliban not being a threat to us.

Obama responded that they certainly are a threat. I say, BS. On stilts.

If we wanted to prevent so-called terrorist attacks we would do much better to stop killing their husbands, fathers, women and children. They don't hate us for our freedoms.

In regard to terrorist attacks let me expand on your OBL comment...The Taliban, so we are told, are so clever that they can hide OBL from our clutches for nine years and counting. Yet they send not one, but two hapless schlumps to try to set off bombs on or over the US. Sure! There are enough holes in those narratives to erect a couple of small shopping malls.

Your statement, "If the Taliban had agreed to the pipeline right before 9/11..." begs the question of who, then, is most likely to have been responsible for that attack. Hmm...let's see. I'll go with False Flag. Makes eminently more sense than the official conspiracy theory.

We want control of Central Asian gas and oil resources. Thus the pipeline issue. And we'll be in Afghanistan until those poor people in that god-forsaken country have no more resources that we can exploit. I'd say another 50-100 years.

[ProudDad]

69. I don't believe the fairy tale behind the Towers' collapse...

There's a butt-load of proof that they were intentionally demolished...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3677063232217711616#

Watch this before you try to attack me -- I've been a "9/11 truth" skeptic for years but now I'm convinced that something "funny" occurred...

If not the perpetrators, at the very least Cheney/Bush were accessories after the fact...

Insurance fraud to create the "war on terra(tm)"...

[defendandprotect]

80. +1000% -- plus a little matter of increasing heroin crop we control . .. MIHOP

[BetterThanNoSN]

21. Ugh...

Now thats disappointing, he even threw in the old tried(tired may be more apt) and true 'when they stand up, we'll stand down' bushism. When they stand up, we'll stand down = When we need nothing more from that country

[sabrina 1]

94. Yes, that rightwing talking which I spent several years

arguing with rightwingers over (before I realized that you cannot penetrate the minds of people who have so exposed to indoctrination without some kind of deprogramming). Then I noticed Democrats having the gall to blame those people for US invading them and refusing to admit that they WERE standing up, AGAINST us and quite effectively since the war that was supposed to take 'months at most' is still going on.

But, now that I am several years older and a lot wiser, I realize that this was what they wanted, a real war. And if it looked like we might finally win, then we had to have another excuse, like 'they need to stand up so that we can leave'.

The first Democrat I heard using that formerly rightwing talking point, was Hillary Clinton. Which is why I never supported her as she was clearly a war supporter for all the wrong reasons, starting with her vote for the war.

[subsuelo]

22. "don't give us this bushism"

Nice!

[leeroysphitz]

24. And sadly bushisms were all he had. He just dressed them up real nice.

[subsuelo]

26. It's amazing that this can continue for so long

Corporate wars for natural resources, and ongoing excuses by paid-off politicians.

When will people wake up.

[Grinchie]

52. When the food no longer tastes good.

And the water no longer run from the taps,

And nobody can flush the toilets

And the refrigerator is without power

and there is no gas.

And the Air is fouled with pollution

Thats when people will wake up

[defendandprotect]

81. Correct....they'll realize we blew 60 years where we could have done something

about Global Warming and alternative energy because oil companies killed a president

and took control over our "people's" government and its agencies.

Corporate/CIA/Pentagon journalists now also control our MSM once known as "free press" --

[Amonester]

117. A majority of people have woken up since before Nov. 2006.

It's just the bought-and-paid for politicians keep pretending they haven't (after having promised to END the wars quickly to get elected).

But I understand Obama has a really nice family he loves and he still wants to be with them when his term's over, so I don't blame him.

Next time, elect someone who's single (and Brave).

[big lu]

25. k&R ..

[tblue]

63. That's a keeper!

Love me some Helen! Thanks for the pic.

[Divine Discontent]

27. just more politispeak that B*sh would say, but Obama can say it calmly & pronounce the words

true liberals would not back warfare of this nature and surely jumped all over B*sh's politispeak.

Most of us still believe the MIC is throwing hundreds of billions of taxpayer money down into a drain (that leads to the warmonger's pockets), while our troops die needlessly. Special Ops forces were used before, and they should be used now - not a massive ground force that are left as sitting ducks when they go out of the base.

[donco6]

28. She is SO on the List now.

Move over Dylan Ratigan.

[Dinger]

29. Etc., etc., etc. . . . .

K & R

[Mister Griswold]

30. #18, sabrina 1, nails it.

Truth in a nutshell.

[pengillian101]

34. K&R n/t

[wildbilln864]

36. Thank you Helen!

That's what journalism looks & sounds like! :patriot:

[donheld]

39. Am I the only one who heard Helen say

"don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining?"

[civilisation]

40. 9/11 - really?

9/11 - really? It was stupid when the shrub said it,. even dumber now. The war on terrorism=the war on drugs, what a load sht! Any excuse to drop taxpayer money on the war machine/police state. Canada is spending over a BILLION just for security for the upcoming g8/g20 think-tank meetings, guess the cops get to keep the weapons and upgrades, eh.

From the poor to the rich and always spinning,.

[DFW]

41. Helen ALWAYS speaks her mind. I just got back from a 3 hour dinner with her

She was great, as usual. As most of you know, she has been a family friend for about 40 years.

Most was off the record, as usual, but there are a couple of choice bits she said I could post.

I'll post separately about it.

[sabrina 1]

43. Thank you, looking forward to it ~

[DFW]

55. Here you go!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8436578

[mikita]

53. I hope I haven't missed your post!

I love this woman. She is a rare and precious human being.

[DFW]

54. I just posted it. Here's the link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8436578

[Jamastiene]

44. Helen Thomas, ftw.

I was helping my aunt when I heard her ask that. I damn near broke my neck trying to get back in front of TV in time to hear the rest of her question...and it was worth it.

[midnight]

47. K&R

[Doc Martin]

48. God bless her!

[spiritual_gunfighter]

49. Did you get all that Helen?

It took him 4 minutes to say "never".

[joe black]

57. God bless you Helen.

[katandmoon]

58. K&R for Helen Thomas.

[avaistheone1]

59. Helen has lifted my spirits this morning.

I always count on her to ask the important questions.

[ProudDad]

62. Helen Thomas -- connecting the dots for over 50 years!!!

She's the only one who dares mention the elephant in the room - the permanent war "economy"...

And is laughed at for her effort...

Patted on the head...

Then not called on for another 6 months...

www.transitionus.org - POWER DOWN...

[ProudDad]

65. Welcome to the Bush III Administration

war, war and more war...

war budget for 2010-2011 - $1,200,000,000,000 and COUNTING...

sick, sick, sick...

PISS ON ALL FLAGS!!!

[tomm2thumbs]

70. 'spare us' = 'cut the bullsh*t'

but she's too much a lady to say it

[defendandprotect]

71. Actually, US created the Taliban and Al Qaeda . . .

AND, btw, most of our journalists know that --

Al Qaeda was an old organization picked up by the Nazis and post-WWII

passed onto the CIA.

We resurrected Al Qaeda/Taliban during Carter years . . . financing it thru

ISI-Pakistan -- and used it -- AS US HAS ALWAYS USED RELIGION AS A TOOL -- to

bait the Russians into Afghanistan . . . "in hopes of giving them a Vietnam type experince."

US also worked to create a violent faction of Islamic religion --



Anyone interested can read about both of those efforts here . . .


Repeated from my journal --

QUOTE --

The right wing wealthy have kept right wing stuff going ---

from Bill Buckley's mag to all the right wing organizations --

After Bill Buckley died some right wing memos came floating out making clear

that the CIA had been financing right wing members of Congress -- two that were

named were Sen. Strom Thurmond and Rep. Gerry Ford.

CIA took right wing many from any right wing sources -- including KKK.

Pat Buchanan also was financed by them.

GOP gave start up funding for the Christian Coalition -- Richard Scaife financed

Dobson's organization -- and other right wing wealthy financed Bauer's organization.

Using religion as a tool of conquest is an old pattern for the right wing.

And, take a look at this . . .



The US spent $100's of millions shooting down Soviet helicopters yet didn't spend a penny helping Afghanis rebuild their infrastructure and institutions.

They also spent millions producing jihad preaching, fundamentalist textbooks and shipping them off to Afghanistan. These were the same text books the Western media discussed in shocked tones and told their audiences were used by fundamentalist teachers to brainwash their charges and to inculcate in young Afghanis a jihad mindset, hatred of foreigners and non-Muslims etc.


Have you heard about the Afghan Jihad schoolbook scandal?

Or perhaps I should say, "Have you heard about the Afghan Jihad schoolbook scandal that's waiting to happen?"

Because it has been almost unreported in the Western media that the US government shipped, and continues to ship, millions of Islamist textbooks into Afghanistan.

Only one English-speaking newspaper we could find has investigated this issue: the Washington Post. The story appeared March 23rd.

Washington Post investigators report that during the past twenty years the US has spent millions of dollars producing fanatical schoolbooks, which were then distributed in Afghanistan.

"The primers, which were filled with talk of jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines, have served since then as the Afghan school system's core curriculum. Even the Taliban used the American-produced books..." -- Washington Post, 23 March 2002 (1)

According to the Post the U.S. is now "...wrestling with the unintended consequences of its successful strategy of stirring Islamic fervor to fight communism."

So the books made up the core curriculum in Afghan schools. And what were the unintended consequences? The Post reports that according to unnamed officials the schoolbooks "steeped a generation in violence."

How could this result have been unintended? Did they expect that giving fundamentalist schoolbooks to schoolchildren would make them moderate Muslims?

Nobody with normal intelligence could expect to distribute millions of violent Islamist schoolbooks without influencing school children towards violent Islamism. Therefore one would assume that the unnamed US officials who, we are told, are distressed at these "unintended consequences" must previously have been unaware of the Islamist content of the schoolbooks.

But surely someone was aware. The US government can't write, edit, print and ship millions of violent, Muslim fundamentalist primers into Afghanistan without high officials in the US government approving those primers.

http://www.tenc.net/articles/jared/jihad.h ...




If you're interested, US created Taliban/Al Qaeda . . .


The CIA's Intervention in Afghanistan
Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski,
President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser

Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998

Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs <"From the Shadows">, that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?

Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

Q: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

Q: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?

http://www.takeoverworld.info/brzezinski_i ... ...

[mikita]

76. yes, most journalists know it,

and one would *guess* most presidents do too, especially if they're bright.

[Obamaknowzz]

98. This press corp is no different than the last, albeit more sychophantic.

These gutless wonders of a Press corp know goddamn well what Obama is saying is BULLSHIT!! They know the CIA's link to the drug peddling, Al Qaeda as an asset, and the lust for oil. Motherfucker!! When is this shit going to stop???

Thank Helen Thomas for repeatedly asking the basic question: "What are we doing there?"

Obama is under somebody's thumb period.

[Cha]

107. What Pres Obama is saying is not Bullshit.

[Obamaknowzz]

128. Well, back it up. Don't send me on a wild goose chase...

The least you could have done was point me to something remotely associated with the subject: Afghanistan.

[Shining Jack]

118. I totally agree.

It's deja-vu all over again.Bushit excuses.:grr: