Next up Truthdig reader Lane from Los Angeles—Obama was supposed to be a man who has learned from history (i.e. Vietnam, Lyndon Johnson, Iraq, Bush, ad infinitum). We’ve known for years our presence in the Middle East in general is the main contributing factor to terrorism. We all knew that al-Qaida was in Pakistan at the time Obama redoubled the commitment to Afghanistan. I was personally shocked at Obama’s decision to increase the commitment there, and now Obama is having to reconsider based on information everyone already knew. My question is what was it in the McChrystal Report that could possibly make a man with Obama’s intelligence go for this? Or what is it about Obama that could have been impressed by McChrystal? When Obama was elected I thought we had a smart man. I just don’t get it. Help me out with this.
9:27 Comment From Foucauldian
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:27:43 GMT
Comment: Heartless as it may seem, the discontinuation of the unemployment benefits may just be what the doctor ordered. The underclass has been kept relatively appeased with the measly checks.
9:28 Comment From Anthony Thomas
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:28:38 GMT
Comment: Intelligence has nothing to do with a captured government, and the installation of neoliberals and neoconservatives all over the government [and in] presidential-appointed positions makes it nearly impossible to do anything sweeping.
9:28 Bob Scheer
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:28:52 GMT
(To Lane) The answer can be given with a simple word: opportunism. That’s the quality that helped him become president; it’s a quality that’s encouraged by our elite education, which says get the right answer that powerful people want to hear rather than search for the truth. It’s a system that rewards so-called winners—people who care about career over more important values, and unfortunately, that’s the Obama we’re seeing. It’s not the kid struggling to define himself in a working-class community in Honolulu, but ,unfortunately, in the polished product of an elite education we have once again the prospect of the best and the brightest leading us dangerously astray. But we still see flashes of the Obama that we voted for, and hopefully as he goes down in the polls, he will play to his better nature.
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:28:59 GMT
Truthdig reader inge asks—I haven’t seen anything or anybody question the ACCURACY of the writer(s)’ article in Rolling Stones. Why is everybody believing it to be fact what’s in it? Why is that? Thank you.
9:30 Comment From Foucauldian
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:30:07 GMT
Comment: “But we still see flashes of the Obama that we voted for, and hopefully as he goes down in the polls, he will play to his better nature. ”
9:30 Comment From Foucauldian
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:30:23 GMT
Comment: I don’t see any basis for your optimism, Bob.
9:31 Bob Scheer
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:31:18 GMT
(To inge) Because if this guy [the Rolling Stone reporter] had not gotten it right, beginning with McChrystal, the people he wrote about would be screaming to the high heavens. I’ve been there as a journalist in the midst of controversial stories that rely on interviews, and I also helped launch Rolling Stone’s editor, Jann Wenner, who began at Ramparts, which I edited back in the ’60s. And being in what has been considered the “alternative,” as opposed to mainstream, media, we always knew that we’d better get our facts straight or we were quickly finished. And this is an incredibly well-reported story, and the fact that it has not been challenged attests to its veracity. Trust me, if these guys had a way of squirming out of it, we would have heard it by now.
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:31:31 GMT
Next question from Selma Goldberg—Gen. McChrystal: What EXACTLY has to happen which convinces you the war has been successful? Describe in detail the environment in Afghanistan and the evidence this will be lasting. And how long do you think this will take to achieve?
9:31 Comment From Foucauldian
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:31:44 GMT
Comment: McChrystal wouldn’t have apologized if the report wasn’t true.
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:31:49 GMT
(Steve, we will get to your question next.)
9:32 Comment From Steve
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:32:06 GMT
Comment: We (the left) are many—what do you think we have been doing wrong to be so ineffective?
9:33 Bob Scheer
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:33:19 GMT
Selma—I assume that’s a question you’re putting to McChrystal, which he answered in his original report, where he said quite candidly that this would be a very long, if not endless, battle for the hearts and minds of the Afghan people, and that it would involve using the U.S. military in its most inappropriate and most ineffectual campaign to do educational and political organizing to make Afghanistan a mirror image of Midwestern U.S. society. It ain’t gonna happen.