Cindy Sheehan in Obamaland

So where are all you Bush haters now when your man, Obama, is doing all the same things Bush did, even worse I may say?

As Cindy says, your silence is "crashingly deafening."

http://www.counterpunch.com/walsh08262009.html

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+1]The Silence of the Antiwar Movement is Deafening [/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+2]Cindy Sheehan's Lonely Vigil in Obamaland [/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+1]By JOHN V. WALSH [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+3]C[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]indy Sheehan will be at Martha’s Vineyard beginning August 25 a short way from Obama’s vacation paradise of the celebrity elite but very far from the Afghanistan and Pakistan and Iraq where the body bags and cemeteries fill up each day as Obama’s wars rage on. She will remain there from August 25 through August 29 and has issued a call for all peace activists to join her there. For those of us close by in the New England states and in New York City, there would seem to be a special obligation to get to Martha’s Vineyard as soon as we can. [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]A funny thing has happened on Cindy Sheehan’s long road from Crawford, Texas, to Martha’s Vineyard. Many of those who claim to lead the peace movement and who so volubly praised her actions in Crawford, TX, are not to be seen. Nor heard. The silence in fact is deafening, or as Cindy put it in an email to this writer, “crashingly deafening.” Where are the email appeals to join Cindy from The Nation or from AFSC or Peace Action or “Progressive” Democrats of America (PDA) or even Code Pink? Or United for Peace and Justice. (No wonder UFPJ is essentially closing shop, bereft of most of their contributions and shriveling up following the thinly veiled protest behind the “retirement” of Leslie Cagan.) And what about MoveOn although it was long ago thoroughly discredited as principled opponents of war or principled in any way shape or form except slavish loyalty to the “other” War Party. And of course sundry “socialist” organizations are also missing in action since their particular dogma will not be front and center. These worthies and many others have vanished into the fog of Obama’s wars.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Just to be sure, this writer contacted several of the “leaders” of the “official” peace movement in the Boston area – AFSC, Peace Action, Green Party of MA (aka Green Rainbow Party) and some others. Not so much as the courtesy of a reply resulted from this effort - although the GRP at least posted a notice of the action. (It is entirely possible that some of these organizations might mention Cindy’s action late enough and quickly enough so as to cover their derrieres while ensuring that Obama will not be embarrassed by protesting crowds.) We here in the vicinity of Beantown are but a hop, skip and cheap ferry ride from Martha’s Vineyard. Same for NYC. So we have a special obligation to respond to Cindy’s call.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]However, not everyone has failed to publicize the event. The Libertarians at Antiwar.com are on the job, and its editor in chief Justin Raimondo wrote a superb column Monday on the hypocritical treatment of Sheehan by the “liberal” establishment. (1) As Raimondo pointed out, Rush Limbaugh captured the hypocrisy of the liberal left in his commentary, thus:[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Limbaugh has their number, just as they have his. Sometimes it is quite amazing how well each of the war parties can spot the other’s hypocrisy. But Cindy Sheehan is no one’s dupe; she is a very smart and very determined woman who no doubt is giving a lot of White House operatives some very sleepless nights out there on the Vineyard. Good for her.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Obama is an enormous gift to the Empire. Just as he has silenced most of the single-payer movement, an effort characterized by its superb scholarship exceeded only by its timidity, Obama has shut down the antiwar movement, completely in thrall as it is to the Democrat Party and Identity Politics. Why exactly the peace movement has caved to Obama is not entirely clear. Like the single-payer movement, it is wracked by spinelessness, brimming with reverence for authority and a near insatiable appetite to be “part of the crowd.” Those taken in by Obama’s arguments that the increasingly bloody and brutal AfPak war is actually a “war of necessity,” should read Steven Walt’s easy demolition of that “argument.” (2) Basically Obama’s logic is the same as Bush’s moronic rationale that “We are fighting them over there so we do not have to fight them over here.” There is a potential for “safe havens for terrorists,” as the Obamalogues and neocons like to call them, all over the world; and no one can possibly believe the US can invade them all. However, the ones which Israel detests or which allow control of oil pipelines or permit encirclement of China and Russia will see US troops sooner or later.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]The bottom line is that everyone in New England and NYC who is a genuine antiwarrior should join the imaginative effort of Cindy Sheehan in Obamaland this week and weekend. We owe it to the many who will otherwise perish at the hands of the war parties of Bush and Obama.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]1.See: http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/08/23/war-coverage-and-the-obama-cult/ [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Or go to Antiwar.com and make a contribution while you are there. It’s almost as good as CounterPunch.com.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]2.See:http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/08/18/the_safe_haven_myth[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]John V. Walsh can be reached at [email protected] He welcomes comments, and he looks forward to seeing crowds of CounterPunchers at Martha’s Vineyard this week and weekend.[/SIZE][/FONT]

From Liberal media darling to nattering fishwife in one election cycle.

I guess Cindy did not get the memo. Afghanistan is the "good" war.

Say it ain't so, Big O!

I don't like or agree with the war.But I still hate Bush!

Obama is doing exactly what he said he was going to do concerning Iraq and Afghanistan.

He made it perfectly clear during the election that he was going to gradually withdraw troops from Iraq and he also clearly stated he would add more troops to Afghanistan/pak.

natrone23 said:

Obama is doing exactly what he said he was going to do concerning Iraq and Afghanistan.

He made it perfectly clear during the election that he was going to gradually withdraw troops from Iraq and he also clearly stated he would add more troops to Afghanistan/pak.

Click to expand...

that's right. He certainly said he'd do what he's doing, but the media never painted him as a warmonger, and the typical Obama supporter thought he was against war. I can't tell you how many times I see antiwar stickers on cars right next to peace signs and Obama stickers.
No matter what Obama said, most of his supporters thought he would end all US war.
And now that he's bombing the world just like Bush did, they don't care because their man, Obama is doing it and not some evil Republican. But there is no mention anywhere of the evil that the Democrats do.

It is disgusting.

I strongly disagree with the Administration's plans to "pause" the long overdue removal of our combat brigades from Iraq. We cannot wage war without end in Iraq while ignoring mounting costs to our troops and their families, our security and our economy. While the Administration puts our drawdown on permanent pause, bin Laden is on the loose, Afghanistan is sliding toward chaos, and we're spending billions of dollars a week in Baghdad instead of helping Americans who are struggling here at home. Our military leaders are concerned that Iraq is setting back our ability to respond to other priorities, and a Blue Ribbon Panel warned late last month that our National Guard is short of the equipment it needs to address crises at home. Instead of false promises and a faulty strategy, the American people need a rapid and responsible removal of our combat brigades that relieves the burden on our military, pressures the Iraqis to reconcile, and allows us to finally focus on the priorities that George Bush has neglected.

-Barak Obama



Obama says he would withdraw from Iraq by end-2008

Sep 12, 2007

" 'I am here to say that we have to begin to end this war now,' the Illinois senator said in excerpts from a speech he was to deliver later in Iowa. The excerpts were released by his presidential campaign.


He said he would immediately begin to pull out troops engaged in combat operations at a pace of one or two brigades every month, to be completed by the end of 2008."

Obama's Promise to withdraw troops in Iraq by 2009


[youtube]4WYTKj8pU5M[/youtube]

Obama: U.S. to withdraw most Iraq troops by August 2010


February 27, 2009

"Let me say this as plainly as I can: By August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end,"


Obama confirms Iraq US troop withdrawal by 2011


"Barack Obama today reaffirmed his pledge to withdraw US troops from Iraq by the end of 2011 and sought to steel Americans' resolve as he sends more forces to confront the Afghanistan Taliban."


Yeah... So... where exactly on the campaign trail do you see the promise to increase troops in Afghanistan? I can't find it.

[youtube]AUV69LZbCNQ[/youtube]

I wonder who wrote the script that these people are reading.

Do you see that they are being told what to say?

In any case, Obama is continuing the policies of the Bush administration.
Bush invaded Afghanistan. Obama sent more troops there.
Obama continues what Bush started. Yeah. That is change I can believe in!

And like the war in Afghanistan is a war based on reason? The Bush haters didn't think so when Bush sent our men to go blow up little brown people and die, but when Obama sends troops to Afghanistan, it is done as a result of well-reasoned thought???

This video just proves my point.

Just change the parties and it all the sudden becomes OK to blow up Afghans. Because now it is based on 'reason'.

Right....

ViRedd said:

So far, Obama has killed ONE MILLION innocent Afghani civilians. (I got this info from the same place Med-'O-Mao gets his stats on Iraq from).

Click to expand...

Either Bush HAD to stay in Iraq, or Obama doesn't have to... but just likes killing people in mud huts.

You can't have it both ways. Either it is necessary for security, or it is a horror show we should not be involved in. Either side of the aisle, drawing a distinction between them is ridiculous.


Prediction: We will still be in Iraq after Obama's presidency. We will establish a Ramstein, with a coolish Arabesqe name. Strikestan... Shockistan... Kickasstan.

What...huh now your just being dishonest your last two articles say the same thing, read the articles next time not just the titles!

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/27/obama.troops/index.html

President Obama said Friday he plans to withdraw most U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of August 2010. .



1 of 2






Between 35,000 to 50,000 troops will remain in Iraq, he said. They would be withdrawn gradually until all U.S. forces are out of Iraq by December 31, 2011 -- the deadline set under an agreement the Bush administration signed with the Iraqi government last year.


"Let me say this as plainly as I can: By August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end," Obama said in a speech at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina.




http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25118045-601,00.html


"But angering liberal backers, Obama said up to 50,000 US troops would stay in a new role in Iraq until the end of 2011"


"Let me say this as plainly as I can: by August 31, 2010 our combat mission in Iraq will end" Obama said, laying out a new war strategy.

I intend to remove all US troops from Iraq by the end of 2011," Obama said, adding the post-2010 residual force would number between 35,000 and 50,000 troops"

what... huh? said:

Prediction: We will still be in Iraq after Obama's presidency. We will establish a Ramstein, with a coolish Arabesqe name. Strikestan... Shockistan... Kickasstan.

Click to expand...

I totally would move to Kickasstan.
That would totally kick ass.