Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
unhappycamper
unhappycamper's Journal
unhappycamper's Journal
December 2, 2012
Air Force Stonewalls F-35 Defects
By William Boardman
General News 12/1/2012 at 22:31:28
None of the more notable supporters of basing the nuclear-capable F-35 stealth fighter-bomber at Burlington Airport in Vermont, not one, had the courage to tell the Burlington Board of Health that the F-35 would be good for the community's health. The available evidence points strongly to the F-35 being bad for people's health.
The Board of Health hearing on November 27 heard three health experts, two of whom criticized the plane's health impact, while the third called it "a very murky area." Of the dozen members of the audience of about 50 who spoke, all objected to the plane's deleterious effects.
The F-35 has faced local opposition for almost three years, opposition that has grown since the U.S. Air Force released a draft environmental impact statement in the spring of 2012, provoking widespread objections to its assumptions, methodology, and conclusions. To date, the Air Force continues to withhold documents relevant to the criticisms.
~snip~
No one from the Air Force came to the board of health hearing, nor did anyone from the Pentagon or the plane's maker, Lockheed Martin. None of the Vermont congressional delegation appeared or sent representatives -- not Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy who says he wants the F-35 in Burlington, not independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Democratic Rep. Peter Welch, who say the same thing. Outspoken supporter Governor Peter Shumlin was absent and so was more tepid supporter Burlington Mayor Miro Weinberger, both Democrats.
unhappycamper comment: Those external stores can't be very good for stealth ops. But then again they're great for bomb and missile manufacturers.
Is it time to dump this expensive POS?
Air Force Stonewalls F-35 Defects
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Air-Force-Stonewalls-F-35-by-William-Boardman-121201-806.htmlAir Force Stonewalls F-35 Defects
By William Boardman
General News 12/1/2012 at 22:31:28
None of the more notable supporters of basing the nuclear-capable F-35 stealth fighter-bomber at Burlington Airport in Vermont, not one, had the courage to tell the Burlington Board of Health that the F-35 would be good for the community's health. The available evidence points strongly to the F-35 being bad for people's health.
The Board of Health hearing on November 27 heard three health experts, two of whom criticized the plane's health impact, while the third called it "a very murky area." Of the dozen members of the audience of about 50 who spoke, all objected to the plane's deleterious effects.
The F-35 has faced local opposition for almost three years, opposition that has grown since the U.S. Air Force released a draft environmental impact statement in the spring of 2012, provoking widespread objections to its assumptions, methodology, and conclusions. To date, the Air Force continues to withhold documents relevant to the criticisms.
~snip~
No one from the Air Force came to the board of health hearing, nor did anyone from the Pentagon or the plane's maker, Lockheed Martin. None of the Vermont congressional delegation appeared or sent representatives -- not Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy who says he wants the F-35 in Burlington, not independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Democratic Rep. Peter Welch, who say the same thing. Outspoken supporter Governor Peter Shumlin was absent and so was more tepid supporter Burlington Mayor Miro Weinberger, both Democrats.
unhappycamper comment: Those external stores can't be very good for stealth ops. But then again they're great for bomb and missile manufacturers.
Is it time to dump this expensive POS?
December 2, 2012
Blanking Bradley Manning: NYT and AP Launch Operation Amnesia
By Chris Floyd
OpEdNews Op Eds 12/1/2012 at 17:50:44
On Thursday, Bradley Manning, one of the foremost prisoners of conscience in the world today, testified in open court -- the first time his voice has been heard since he was arrested, confined and subjected to psychological torture by the U.S. government.
An event of some newsworthiness, you might think. Manning has admitted leaking documents that detailed American war crimes in the invasion and occupation of Iraq. He has been held incommunicado for more than 900 days by the Obama administration. Reports of his treatment at the hands of his captors have sparked outrage, protests and concern around the world. He was now going to speak openly in a pre-trial hearing on a motion to dismiss his case because of that treatment. Surely such a moment of high courtroom drama would draw heavy media coverage, if only for its sensationalistic aspects.
But if you relied on the nation's pre-eminent journal of news reportage, the New York Times, you could have easily missed notice of the event altogether, much less learned any details of what transpired in the courtroom. The Times sent no reporter to the hearing, but contented itself with a brief bit of wire copy from AP, tucked away on Page 3, to note the occasion.
That story -- itself considered of such little importance by AP that it didn't even by-line the piece (perhaps the agency didn't send a reporter either, but simply picked up snippets from other sources) -- reduced the entire motion, and the long, intricate, systematic government attack on Manning's psyche, to a matter of petty petulance on Manning's part, a whiner's attempt to weasel out of what's coming to him. This is AP's sole summary of the motion and its context:
unhappycamper comment: Too bad we detain/prosecute whistle-blowers and let war criminals go free.
Blanking Bradley Manning: NYT and AP Launch Operation Amnesia
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Blanking-Bradley-Manning--by-Chris-Floyd-121201-505.htmlBlanking Bradley Manning: NYT and AP Launch Operation Amnesia
By Chris Floyd
OpEdNews Op Eds 12/1/2012 at 17:50:44
On Thursday, Bradley Manning, one of the foremost prisoners of conscience in the world today, testified in open court -- the first time his voice has been heard since he was arrested, confined and subjected to psychological torture by the U.S. government.
An event of some newsworthiness, you might think. Manning has admitted leaking documents that detailed American war crimes in the invasion and occupation of Iraq. He has been held incommunicado for more than 900 days by the Obama administration. Reports of his treatment at the hands of his captors have sparked outrage, protests and concern around the world. He was now going to speak openly in a pre-trial hearing on a motion to dismiss his case because of that treatment. Surely such a moment of high courtroom drama would draw heavy media coverage, if only for its sensationalistic aspects.
But if you relied on the nation's pre-eminent journal of news reportage, the New York Times, you could have easily missed notice of the event altogether, much less learned any details of what transpired in the courtroom. The Times sent no reporter to the hearing, but contented itself with a brief bit of wire copy from AP, tucked away on Page 3, to note the occasion.
That story -- itself considered of such little importance by AP that it didn't even by-line the piece (perhaps the agency didn't send a reporter either, but simply picked up snippets from other sources) -- reduced the entire motion, and the long, intricate, systematic government attack on Manning's psyche, to a matter of petty petulance on Manning's part, a whiner's attempt to weasel out of what's coming to him. This is AP's sole summary of the motion and its context:
unhappycamper comment: Too bad we detain/prosecute whistle-blowers and let war criminals go free.
December 2, 2012
'The repressive treatment of Bradley Manning is one of the disgraces of Obama’s first term.
Bradley Manning: A Tale of Liberty Lost in America
by Glenn Greenwald
Published on Saturday, December 1, 2012 by The Guardian
Over the past two and a half years, all of which he has spent in a military prison, much has been said about Bradley Manning, but nothing has been heard from him. That changed on Thursday, when the 23-year-old US army private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks testified at his court martial proceeding about the conditions of his detention.
The oppressive, borderline-torturous measures to which he was subjected, including prolonged solitary confinement and forced nudity, have been known for some time. A formal UN investigation denounced those conditions as "cruel and inhuman". President Obama's state department spokesman, retired air force colonel PJ Crowley, resigned after publicly condemning Manning's treatment. A prison psychologist testified this week that Manning's conditions were more damaging than those found on death row, or at Guantánamo Bay.
Still, hearing the accused whistleblower's description of this abuse in his own words viscerally conveyed its horror. Reporting from the hearing, the Guardian's Ed Pilkington quoted Manning: "If I needed toilet paper I would stand to attention and shout: 'Detainee Manning requests toilet paper!'" And: "I was authorised to have 20 minutes sunshine, in chains, every 24 hours." Early in his detention, Manning recalled, "I had pretty much given up. I thought I was going to die in this eight by eight animal cage."
The repressive treatment of Bradley Manning is one of the disgraces of Obama's first term, and highlights many of the dynamics shaping his presidency. The president not only defended Manning's treatment but also, as commander-in-chief of the court martial judges, improperly decreed Manning's guilt when he asserted in an interview that he "broke the law".
Bradley Manning: A Tale of Liberty Lost in America
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/12/01'The repressive treatment of Bradley Manning is one of the disgraces of Obama’s first term.
Bradley Manning: A Tale of Liberty Lost in America
by Glenn Greenwald
Published on Saturday, December 1, 2012 by The Guardian
Over the past two and a half years, all of which he has spent in a military prison, much has been said about Bradley Manning, but nothing has been heard from him. That changed on Thursday, when the 23-year-old US army private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks testified at his court martial proceeding about the conditions of his detention.
The oppressive, borderline-torturous measures to which he was subjected, including prolonged solitary confinement and forced nudity, have been known for some time. A formal UN investigation denounced those conditions as "cruel and inhuman". President Obama's state department spokesman, retired air force colonel PJ Crowley, resigned after publicly condemning Manning's treatment. A prison psychologist testified this week that Manning's conditions were more damaging than those found on death row, or at Guantánamo Bay.
Still, hearing the accused whistleblower's description of this abuse in his own words viscerally conveyed its horror. Reporting from the hearing, the Guardian's Ed Pilkington quoted Manning: "If I needed toilet paper I would stand to attention and shout: 'Detainee Manning requests toilet paper!'" And: "I was authorised to have 20 minutes sunshine, in chains, every 24 hours." Early in his detention, Manning recalled, "I had pretty much given up. I thought I was going to die in this eight by eight animal cage."
The repressive treatment of Bradley Manning is one of the disgraces of Obama's first term, and highlights many of the dynamics shaping his presidency. The president not only defended Manning's treatment but also, as commander-in-chief of the court martial judges, improperly decreed Manning's guilt when he asserted in an interview that he "broke the law".
December 2, 2012
DIA sending hundreds more spies overseas
By Greg Miller, Published: December 1
The Pentagon will send hundreds of additional spies overseas as part of an ambitious plan to assemble an espionage network that rivals the CIA in size, U.S. officials said.
The project is aimed at transforming the Defense Intelligence Agency, which has been dominated for the past decade by the demands of two wars, into a spy service focused on emerging threats and more closely aligned with the CIA and elite military commando units.
When the expansion is complete, the DIA is expected to have as many as 1,600 “collectors” in positions around the world, an unprecedented total for an agency whose presence abroad numbered in the triple digits in recent years.
The total includes military attachés and others who do not work undercover. But U.S. officials said the growth will be driven over a five-year period by the deployment of a new generation of clandestine operatives. They will be trained by the CIA and often work with the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command, but they will get their spying assignments from the Department of Defense.
unhappycamper comment: Oh goodie! Now we have competition between spy agencies.
DIA sending hundreds more spies overseas
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/dia-to-send-hundreds-more-spies-overseas/2012/12/01/97463e4e-399b-11e2-b01f-5f55b193f58f_story.htmlDIA sending hundreds more spies overseas
By Greg Miller, Published: December 1
The Pentagon will send hundreds of additional spies overseas as part of an ambitious plan to assemble an espionage network that rivals the CIA in size, U.S. officials said.
The project is aimed at transforming the Defense Intelligence Agency, which has been dominated for the past decade by the demands of two wars, into a spy service focused on emerging threats and more closely aligned with the CIA and elite military commando units.
When the expansion is complete, the DIA is expected to have as many as 1,600 “collectors” in positions around the world, an unprecedented total for an agency whose presence abroad numbered in the triple digits in recent years.
The total includes military attachés and others who do not work undercover. But U.S. officials said the growth will be driven over a five-year period by the deployment of a new generation of clandestine operatives. They will be trained by the CIA and often work with the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command, but they will get their spying assignments from the Department of Defense.
unhappycamper comment: Oh goodie! Now we have competition between spy agencies.
December 2, 2012
General Motors pushed hard for tax breaks in Ypsilanti Township, Mich. Some $200 million later, this is what remains
As Companies Seek Tax Deals, Governments Pay High Price
~snip~
For years, mayors and governors anxious about local jobs had agreed to G.M.’s demands for cash rewards, free buildings, worker training and lucrative tax breaks. As late as 2007, the company was telling local officials that these sorts of incentives would “further G.M.’s strong relationship” with them and be a “win/win situation,” according to town council notes from one Michigan community.
Yet at least 50 properties on the 2009 liquidation list were in towns and states that had awarded incentives, adding up to billions in taxpayer dollars, according to data compiled by The New York Times.
~snip~
A Times investigation has examined and tallied thousands of local incentives granted nationwide and has found that states, counties and cities are giving up more than $80 billion each year to companies. The beneficiaries come from virtually every corner of the corporate world, encompassing oil and coal conglomerates, technology and entertainment companies, banks and big-box retail chains.
The cost of the awards is certainly far higher. A full accounting, The Times discovered, is not possible because the incentives are granted by thousands of government agencies and officials, and many do not know the value of all their awards. Nor do they know if the money was worth it because they rarely track how many jobs are created. Even where officials do track incentives, they acknowledge that it is impossible to know whether the jobs would have been created without the aid.
unhappycamper comment: It's a NYT article and probably requires fact checking as do most of Murdoch's 'newspapers'.
As Companies Seek Tax Deals, Governments Pay High Price
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/02/us/how-local-taxpayers-bankroll-corporations.html?hpGeneral Motors pushed hard for tax breaks in Ypsilanti Township, Mich. Some $200 million later, this is what remains
As Companies Seek Tax Deals, Governments Pay High Price
~snip~
For years, mayors and governors anxious about local jobs had agreed to G.M.’s demands for cash rewards, free buildings, worker training and lucrative tax breaks. As late as 2007, the company was telling local officials that these sorts of incentives would “further G.M.’s strong relationship” with them and be a “win/win situation,” according to town council notes from one Michigan community.
Yet at least 50 properties on the 2009 liquidation list were in towns and states that had awarded incentives, adding up to billions in taxpayer dollars, according to data compiled by The New York Times.
~snip~
A Times investigation has examined and tallied thousands of local incentives granted nationwide and has found that states, counties and cities are giving up more than $80 billion each year to companies. The beneficiaries come from virtually every corner of the corporate world, encompassing oil and coal conglomerates, technology and entertainment companies, banks and big-box retail chains.
The cost of the awards is certainly far higher. A full accounting, The Times discovered, is not possible because the incentives are granted by thousands of government agencies and officials, and many do not know the value of all their awards. Nor do they know if the money was worth it because they rarely track how many jobs are created. Even where officials do track incentives, they acknowledge that it is impossible to know whether the jobs would have been created without the aid.
unhappycamper comment: It's a NYT article and probably requires fact checking as do most of Murdoch's 'newspapers'.
December 2, 2012
Prototype of European combat drone makes maiden flight
By Agence France-Presse
Saturday, December 1, 2012 14:32 EST
A prototype of a European combat drone, the Neuron, made its maiden flight Saturday from a base in the south of France, project leader Dassault Aviation announced.
“It inaugurates the next generation of combat aircraft, whether piloted or not, with the ambition of preserving European autonomy in this field,” the French defence ministry said in a statement.
“It’s a major accomplishment on both the technological and industrial levels,” it added.
The aircraft, which has no vertical tail in order to make it as furtive as possible, flew for 25 minutes under the watch of two test pilots based on the ground.
unhappycamper comment: Perhaps we could sync up our 'kill lists' for more efficiency.
Prototype of European combat drone makes maiden flight
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/01/prototype-of-european-combat-drone-makes-maiden-flight/Prototype of European combat drone makes maiden flight
By Agence France-Presse
Saturday, December 1, 2012 14:32 EST
A prototype of a European combat drone, the Neuron, made its maiden flight Saturday from a base in the south of France, project leader Dassault Aviation announced.
“It inaugurates the next generation of combat aircraft, whether piloted or not, with the ambition of preserving European autonomy in this field,” the French defence ministry said in a statement.
“It’s a major accomplishment on both the technological and industrial levels,” it added.
The aircraft, which has no vertical tail in order to make it as furtive as possible, flew for 25 minutes under the watch of two test pilots based on the ground.
unhappycamper comment: Perhaps we could sync up our 'kill lists' for more efficiency.
December 2, 2012
?12
Wall Street Journal Omits George W. Bush From Graphic On 2-Term 'Presidencies And Growth' (IMAGE)
Posted: 11/30/2012 6:08 pm EST Updated: 11/30/2012 6:08 pm EST
As the "fiscal cliff" draws nearer and politicians polish their ability to duck blame, a Friday editorial in the Wall Street Journal has bravely taken the lead in analyzing past presidents' economic performance -- and wags a stern finger in Obama's direction.
Included alongside the analysis, which focuses on economic growth experienced under two-term presidents, is a chart fittingly titled, "Presidencies and Growth."
President Obama's first four years in office are listed, as are Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan's eight years. But what about George W. Bush?
Either by accident or intention, New York Magazine notes, it seems the Wall Street Journal has omitted the 43rd U.S. President from its chart. (Bush's father, President George H.W. Bush, is also missing, but with more justification. The elder Bush came up one term shy of fitting into a debate on two-term presidents and growth.)
Wall Street Journal Omits George W. Bush From Graphic On 2-Term 'Presidencies And Growth' (IMAGE)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/30/wall-street-journal-george-w-bush_n_2220817.html?utm_hp_ref=business?12
Wall Street Journal Omits George W. Bush From Graphic On 2-Term 'Presidencies And Growth' (IMAGE)
Posted: 11/30/2012 6:08 pm EST Updated: 11/30/2012 6:08 pm EST
As the "fiscal cliff" draws nearer and politicians polish their ability to duck blame, a Friday editorial in the Wall Street Journal has bravely taken the lead in analyzing past presidents' economic performance -- and wags a stern finger in Obama's direction.
Included alongside the analysis, which focuses on economic growth experienced under two-term presidents, is a chart fittingly titled, "Presidencies and Growth."
President Obama's first four years in office are listed, as are Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan's eight years. But what about George W. Bush?
Either by accident or intention, New York Magazine notes, it seems the Wall Street Journal has omitted the 43rd U.S. President from its chart. (Bush's father, President George H.W. Bush, is also missing, but with more justification. The elder Bush came up one term shy of fitting into a debate on two-term presidents and growth.)
December 1, 2012
Exclusive: U.S. Army officials said to back new scout helicopter
By Andrea Shalal-Esa
WASHINGTON | Fri Nov 30, 2012 8:37pm EST
(Reuters) - U.S. Army officials this week backed a plan to buy new armed scout helicopters instead of extending the life of the Army's aging fleet of OH-58 Kiowa Warrior helicopters, sources familiar with the Army's plans told Reuters on Friday.
Army acquisition chief Heidi Shyu and other officials agreed to start the new acquisition program for the smaller military helicopter at a meeting on Thursday, but senior Army and Pentagon officials must still sign off on the new acquisition program, said the sources, who were not authorized to speak publicly.
It will be the Army's third attempt to start replacing the OH-58 helicopters, which were built by Bell Helicopter, a unit of Textron Inc. The basic OH-58 airframe dates back to the Vietnam War era, although it has been upgraded and modernized several times since then to keep it current.
~snip~
If the new "Armed Aerial Scout" program survives the budget process, it would be the latest in a string of Army efforts to buy a new fleet of armed light helicopters that began in 2004 after cancellation of the Comanche helicopter program.
unhappycamper comment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAH-66_Comanche
Boeing-Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche
The Boeing-Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche was an advanced five-blade armed reconnaissance and attack helicopter designed for the United States Army. The RAH-66 program was canceled in 2004, before mass production began, after nearly $7 billion was spent on the program.
During the early 1980s, the U.S. Army began formulating a requirement for the replacement of its helicopters then in service, resulting in the Light Helicopter Experimental program. In 1991, the Boeing-Sikorsky team was chosen to produce prototypes. The Comanche would incorporate stealth technologies, featuring a number of designs previously untried. It was to employ advanced sensors in its reconnaissance role, and was intended to designate targets for the AH-64 Apache. The aircraft was also armed with missiles and rockets to destroy armored vehicles. Two RAH-66 prototypes were built and conducted flight testing from 1996 to 2004. Since the cancellation the prototypes have been placed on display.
Exclusive: U.S. Army officials said to back new scout helicopter
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/01/us-army-helicopter-idUSBRE8B002T20121201Exclusive: U.S. Army officials said to back new scout helicopter
By Andrea Shalal-Esa
WASHINGTON | Fri Nov 30, 2012 8:37pm EST
(Reuters) - U.S. Army officials this week backed a plan to buy new armed scout helicopters instead of extending the life of the Army's aging fleet of OH-58 Kiowa Warrior helicopters, sources familiar with the Army's plans told Reuters on Friday.
Army acquisition chief Heidi Shyu and other officials agreed to start the new acquisition program for the smaller military helicopter at a meeting on Thursday, but senior Army and Pentagon officials must still sign off on the new acquisition program, said the sources, who were not authorized to speak publicly.
It will be the Army's third attempt to start replacing the OH-58 helicopters, which were built by Bell Helicopter, a unit of Textron Inc. The basic OH-58 airframe dates back to the Vietnam War era, although it has been upgraded and modernized several times since then to keep it current.
~snip~
If the new "Armed Aerial Scout" program survives the budget process, it would be the latest in a string of Army efforts to buy a new fleet of armed light helicopters that began in 2004 after cancellation of the Comanche helicopter program.
unhappycamper comment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAH-66_Comanche
Boeing-Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche
The Boeing-Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche was an advanced five-blade armed reconnaissance and attack helicopter designed for the United States Army. The RAH-66 program was canceled in 2004, before mass production began, after nearly $7 billion was spent on the program.
During the early 1980s, the U.S. Army began formulating a requirement for the replacement of its helicopters then in service, resulting in the Light Helicopter Experimental program. In 1991, the Boeing-Sikorsky team was chosen to produce prototypes. The Comanche would incorporate stealth technologies, featuring a number of designs previously untried. It was to employ advanced sensors in its reconnaissance role, and was intended to designate targets for the AH-64 Apache. The aircraft was also armed with missiles and rockets to destroy armored vehicles. Two RAH-66 prototypes were built and conducted flight testing from 1996 to 2004. Since the cancellation the prototypes have been placed on display.
December 1, 2012
Sucking Up to the Military Brass
Thursday, 29 November 2012 13:10
By William J Astore, TomDispatch | News Analysis
Few things have characterized the post-9/11 American world more than our worshipful embrace of our generals. They’ve become our heroes, our sports stars, and our celebrities all rolled into one. We can’t stop gushing about them. Even after his recent fall from grace, General David Petraeus was still being celebrated by CNN as the best American general since Dwight D. Eisenhower (and let’s not forget that Ike commanded the largest amphibious invasion in history and held a fractious coalition together in a total war against Nazi Germany). Before his fall from grace, Afghan War Commander General Stanley McChrystal was similarly lauded as one tough customer, a sort of superman-saint.
Petraeus and McChrystal crashed and burned for the same underlying reason: hubris. McChrystal became cocky and his staff contemptuous of civilian authority; Petraeus came to think he really could have it all, the super-secret job and the super-sexy mistress. An ideal of selfless service devolved into self-indulgent preening in a wider American culture all-too-eager to raise its star generals into the pantheon of Caesars and Napoleons, and its troops into the halls of Valhalla.
The English used to say of American troops in World War II that they were “overpaid, over-sexed, and over here.” Now we’re overhyped, oversold, and over there, wherever “there” might happen to be in a constantly shifting, perpetual war on terror.
In our particular drama, generals may well be the actors who strut and fret their hour upon the stage, but their directors are the national security complex and associated politicians, their producers the military-industrial complex’s corporate handlers, and their agents a war-junky media. And we, the audience in the cheap seats, must take some responsibility as well. Even when our military adventures spiral down after a promising opening week, the enthusiastic applause the American public has offered to our celebrity military adventurers and the lack of pressure on the politicians who choose to fund them only serve to keep bullets flying and troops dying.
Sucking Up to the Military Brass
http://truth-out.org/news/item/13045-sucking-up-to-the-military-brass-generals-who-run-amuck-politicians-who-could-care-less-an-embedded-media-and-usSucking Up to the Military Brass
Thursday, 29 November 2012 13:10
By William J Astore, TomDispatch | News Analysis
Few things have characterized the post-9/11 American world more than our worshipful embrace of our generals. They’ve become our heroes, our sports stars, and our celebrities all rolled into one. We can’t stop gushing about them. Even after his recent fall from grace, General David Petraeus was still being celebrated by CNN as the best American general since Dwight D. Eisenhower (and let’s not forget that Ike commanded the largest amphibious invasion in history and held a fractious coalition together in a total war against Nazi Germany). Before his fall from grace, Afghan War Commander General Stanley McChrystal was similarly lauded as one tough customer, a sort of superman-saint.
Petraeus and McChrystal crashed and burned for the same underlying reason: hubris. McChrystal became cocky and his staff contemptuous of civilian authority; Petraeus came to think he really could have it all, the super-secret job and the super-sexy mistress. An ideal of selfless service devolved into self-indulgent preening in a wider American culture all-too-eager to raise its star generals into the pantheon of Caesars and Napoleons, and its troops into the halls of Valhalla.
The English used to say of American troops in World War II that they were “overpaid, over-sexed, and over here.” Now we’re overhyped, oversold, and over there, wherever “there” might happen to be in a constantly shifting, perpetual war on terror.
In our particular drama, generals may well be the actors who strut and fret their hour upon the stage, but their directors are the national security complex and associated politicians, their producers the military-industrial complex’s corporate handlers, and their agents a war-junky media. And we, the audience in the cheap seats, must take some responsibility as well. Even when our military adventures spiral down after a promising opening week, the enthusiastic applause the American public has offered to our celebrity military adventurers and the lack of pressure on the politicians who choose to fund them only serve to keep bullets flying and troops dying.
December 1, 2012
Reining in Obama and His Drones
Published on Friday, November 30, 2012 by Common Dreams
by Ralph Nader
Barack Obama, former president of the Harvard Law Review and a constitutional law lecturer, should go back and review his coursework. He seems to have declined to comport his presidency to the rule of law.
Let’s focus here on his major expansion of drone warfare in defiance of international law, statutory law and the Constitution. Obama’s drones roam over multiple nations of Asia and Africa and target suspects, both known and unknown, whom the president, in his unbridled discretion, wants to evaporate for the cause of national security.
More than 2,500 people have been killed by Obama’s drones, many of them civilians and bystanders, including American citizens, irrespective of the absence of any “imminent threat” to the United States.
As Justin Elliott of ProPublica wrote: “Under Obama…only 13 percent (of those killed) could be considered militant leaders – either of the Pakistani Taliban, the Afghan Taliban, or Al Qaeda.” The remaining fatalities, apart from many innocent civilians, including children, were people oppressed by their own harsh regimes or dominated by U.S. occupation of their country. Aside from human rights and the laws of war, this distinction between civilian and combatant matters because it shows that Obama’s drones are becoming what Elliott calls “a counterinsurgency air force” for our collaborative regimes.
Reining in Obama and His Drones
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/11/30-8Reining in Obama and His Drones
Published on Friday, November 30, 2012 by Common Dreams
by Ralph Nader
Barack Obama, former president of the Harvard Law Review and a constitutional law lecturer, should go back and review his coursework. He seems to have declined to comport his presidency to the rule of law.
Let’s focus here on his major expansion of drone warfare in defiance of international law, statutory law and the Constitution. Obama’s drones roam over multiple nations of Asia and Africa and target suspects, both known and unknown, whom the president, in his unbridled discretion, wants to evaporate for the cause of national security.
More than 2,500 people have been killed by Obama’s drones, many of them civilians and bystanders, including American citizens, irrespective of the absence of any “imminent threat” to the United States.
As Justin Elliott of ProPublica wrote: “Under Obama…only 13 percent (of those killed) could be considered militant leaders – either of the Pakistani Taliban, the Afghan Taliban, or Al Qaeda.” The remaining fatalities, apart from many innocent civilians, including children, were people oppressed by their own harsh regimes or dominated by U.S. occupation of their country. Aside from human rights and the laws of war, this distinction between civilian and combatant matters because it shows that Obama’s drones are becoming what Elliott calls “a counterinsurgency air force” for our collaborative regimes.
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Mar 16, 2005, 11:12 AMNumber of posts: 60,364
