Just War.
Impossible to walk away from the irony of the American POTUS accepting the peace prize for his aspirations to make peace while ordering the launching of fresh offensives in Afghanistan. Unironic partisans chose the speech as occasion to praise POTUS. There is also the small matter of the fuss and inconsistency of the anti-war posse over the years. If POTUS Bush was a war-mongering villain for launching Afghanistan and Iraq, how is it that POTUS Obama is a peace-loving hero for relaunching Afghanistan? That is politics. The White House speechwriter tried the just war theory to hold together a peace speech about war. I first struggled with the idea of just war during Vietnam, when I was in college and faced with the Draft. What I remember is that it is a just war if someone else is obliged to fight it, and it is an unjust war if you are obliged to fight it. This makes Afghanistan a just war if you are the White House with a volunteer army.
POTUS Discovers History.
My reading of history is that the winners not only write the history books but also get to rewrite them with what we call revisionism. POTUS was mighty clear that he regarded Iraq as a "stupid" war when he was an Illinois politician running for president. There look to be plenty of voices in the Progressive part of the Democratic party who aim to say that Afghanistan is a "stupid" war. POTUS must now not only learn from history but accept that he is powerless in its theater of war. There is no exit from Afghanistan. POTUS Obama has now made the most critical and memorable decision of his presidency. History is written by the winner, and if POTUS is unsuccessful in conducting the war and explaining his conduct, he will be written and then revised as disappointing if not disastrous. Just war vs just jihad. Not good odds. Bet on the eagle and hope for luck.
Hitler Again.
POTUS speech referred to the Nazis as evil, yes, and then argued, "A nonviolent movement could not have stopped Hitler's armies." The facts do not support this conclusion. Neville Chamberlain flew to Germany in mid-September 1938 and sat with Hitler at Bertchesgaden. The two of them and a translator. Hitler wanted the Sudetenland. Chamberlain could have told him that any aggression on Prague would mobilize the French, who had 100 divisions. We know now that the German army's Prussian officer corps was ready to rise up against the Nazis in Berlin and sweep Hitler from the city. Chamberlain only needed to say, "No, you will not have Sudetenland, and I am calling on the French right after I depart Germany," and walked away. Nonviolently. It didn't happen. Why? Because Chamberlain believed that diplomacy was superior to war, and that concessions were reasonable, and that talk-talk was the only civilized behavior.
So you’ve never been hypnotized before, Mister Smith? There’s nothing to it, really. Just a different state of awareness, much like a schoolboy’s daydreams. I’ve done this many, many times before. Smokers, nail biters, dieters, insomniacs, you name it. No need for watches or pendulums in this office. Just have a seat in that comfy chair right over there, and lean back a little bit, then listen closely to the sound of my voice. That’s really all there is to it.
The first thing you should do is think about the muscles of your toes, your feet, your calves, Notice how loose and relaxed they are, almost as if a warm wave of contentment is coming up from the floor through the soles of your shoes. And it continues to rise the way a ray of sunlight will travel across a room, until slowly but surely it reaches your knees, your hips, your stomach, your chest, your neck, your jaw, and at last the top of your head. It’s very nice, very restful, like a trip to a secluded tropical beach. Nobody’s around for miles and miles. Just sand and seagulls and you, more tranquil than you’ve ever been in your life.
There, see how good you feel?
I’m gong to say some words and phrases now. Hitler. The Rhineland remilitarized. Chamberlain. Peace in our time. Munich. Appeasement. Furled umbrella. The Sudetenland. Hitler.
All history begins with those words and phrases. All history ends with those words and phrases. The lessons of those words and phrases apply to all situations everywhere for all time. We must return to those words and phrases until meaning itself drains away, in the manner of a word repeated endlessly.
Hitler. The Rhineland remilitarized. Chamberlain. Peace in our time. Munich. Appeasement. Furled umbrella. The Sudetenland. Hitler.
Whenever you come across those words and phrases, in a book or blog, or on radio or television, I want you to bathe in the warm certainty that our country is right to go to war with anybody anywhere, even with places you’ve never heard of and can’t find on a map, places such as Iraq and Serbia and Afghanistan and Iran, and to support policies to that end, and to become angry with others those who disagree. Failure to do any of these things will make you suddenly afraid, even guilty, but doing so will bring you great contentment and security, the sensation of fitting in.
We all know know how important it is to belong, don’t we, Mr. Smith? Yes, that’s right.
Now, when I count to three, Mr. Smith, you’re going to remember nothing of today, just that you had a pleasant chat. You will feel relaxed and good for the rest of the afternoon, and sleep well tonight.
One. Two. Three
Your coat is right there on the rack where you left it, Mr. Smith. Thank you and have a wonderful day. Oh, and on the way out don't forget to see Agnes about your next appointment.
Awesome post!
Pretty cool,Ken. You had me very relaxed.
For purposes of discussion, let's search for POTUS motive.
It seems to me expanding this war is against every stance he's ever taken, against the wishes of a screaming base, against the wishes of a lot of non-liberals such as the Buchanan wing, expensive in the face of deficits expensive domestics toys, his peace prize creds etc.
Afgan is a demonstrable loser for western powers; both the Saudis and Iranians are conspiring against us there, the leaders are beyond corrupt, their is no "social capital", allies are not very helpful, Pakistan is not a great ally, etc.
How on earth does he not take his one best chance to get out of Afgan??
Is there an upside, or a downside, we can't see and he won't say?
I must say it doesn't add up. I felt the same way about Iraq but gave GB the benefit of the doubt. But so far BO has given us an incongruous decision--most important war since creation but a pittance of additional troops. Bullied by generals?
What can he possibly be thinking? It doesn't add up.
Politically speaking, Obama is in exactly the same position Bush was in. He is set to lose his base. True believers will not now suddenly say that war is right simply because a Democrat says so without having to admit to a double standard.
For some, little this president can say or do will seriously diminish him. They are known to fall into one of two categories: one, those who happily acknowledge and submit to the perceived higher power of the Obama brand; and, two, those who have placed their bets on Obama, the man, and are counting on him to sweep them to the winning side of history. The latter have already started to re-think their positions. It is they who account for Obama's crashing poll numbers.
There is no upside for the Obama administration in any of this. The country is so polarized, it is impossible for him to draw converts from the Conservative/Republican side, even if it should occur to him to adopt all their positions. The popularity contest is lost; the campaign is over. Obama is now free to do whatever he wants within that sliver of time he has been afforded.
Perhaps the single most astounding indicator of Barack Hussein Obama's decline is a recent poll that states that a whopping 44% would now rather have George W. Bush back to run the country.
http://peterkoelliker.blogspot.com/
Thankis. For some reason I kept hearing Mr. Batchelor's dulcet tones when I wrote it. Odd. I must get my ears checked.
Is this a chat room? Sorry, didn't mean to break up the club, but, has anyone heard of this before--->
Are you lonely? Feeling dejected? Got the Holiday Blues?
Do you wish things were like they were back in the 1950's... back the way it really ought to be?
Don't be forlorn any longer! I just found a new website that won't accept those old excuses for your doldrums. It's called "wedon'tacceptthoseoldexcuseshere" and they will not only reject your negativism with a hearty "Get Over It!!" they will also flood the message board with notes from members who won't allow you to get a spiteful word in edgewise. They don't get all puggily snugly, either.... they get your goose for being a gadfly!!
Check 'em out and have a Happy Holiday season and a Merry Christmas!!
Merry Christmas, Spencer! The best of everything!
*Why don't you pass the time by playing a little solitaire?*
I am unconvinced by JB's argument. Isn't the threat of violence the same thing as violence? Because Hitler would obviously have tested Chamberlain's willingness to carry through on the threat, and then it would have evolved into either the need for actual violence, or further threats, either way proving Obama's point.
Now, let's discussing something REALLY important. Besides Ben Nelson, Bill Nelson, Olympia Snowe, and Joe Lieberman, and the other 39 automatic NO voes, who else can be counted on to defeat the Reid Bill?
Ken, thanks for this -- one of the funniest posts ever on this all too often absurd and surreal blog. All that's missing is perhaps a reference to Israel, the Jews, nukes, and Ahmadinejad that this post would be damn perfect. Nevertheless... Hard to walk away from the irony and staggering hypocrisy that Batchelor and his partisan neocon friends like John Bolton, Bill Kristol, et. al., are getting the endless war in Afghanistan that they so desire.
Doubtless, the moment we (ever) end our benevolent occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, you can be sure that Batchelor, Cheney, Palin, etc. etc. will cynically play the "Stab in the Back" card against Obama and other "traitor" Dems for the next election cycle.
Let's be honest: Obama has the thankless task of changing the diapers of other peoples children. He's damned no matter what he does or says. (And if you doubt this, just read Peter K's regular vomit contributions of fact-free, logic-free non-arguments).
When it comes to war and foreign policy, Batchelor is no less of a partisan than, say, Kristol or Cheney.
John --- who are you kidding with this post?
I sure don't agree with GT about Obama being some sort of helpless victim in all this - he begged for the job and lied through his teeth many times to get it, after all - but there is one thing that rings true in GT's comments: it does seem like JB and others here love the conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and elsewhere. The Georgia thing ended up being a tempest in a teapot but that was the main focus of the show for weeks, and in retrospect it wasn't worth the time spent on it. And JB is not alone in his somewhat morbid fascination for these pointless wars. One is tempted to paraphrase Voltaire: "If Afghanistan did not exist, it would have been necessary for the John Batchelor Show to invent it."
BTW we don't need to stab Obama in the back, we'll do it in the front. I don't like him - he's an enemy to freedom loving people everywhere. He's a danger to us all and we should use every legal means we can to unseat him in 2012. Plainly enough said for you, GT?
To me the most frustrating thing about fighting pointless wars like Afghanistan is that it dissipates our power so that we're not prepared when the chance for a really important and stimulating confrontation comes along. For example, let's invade Cuba. It's close-by, convenient, nobody likes the Castros, the people are so poor they probably don't even have the energy to resist the invasion anymore, and we can free up some tasty cigars that take years to get here via the black market and are all dried out and burn unevenly by the time they finally do.