War Handwavium

http://www.salon.com/2012/02/05/u_s_drones_targeting_rescuers_and_mourners/singleton/

During a three month period of drone attacks in Pakistan:

at least 50 civilians were killed in follow-up strikes when they had gone to help victims. More than 20 civilians have also been attacked in deliberate strikes on funerals

top Obama counter-Terrorism adviser John Brennan said this about drone strikes in Pakistan: “in the last year, ‘there hasn’t been a single collateral death” … “a detailed examination by the Bureau of 116 CIA ‘secret’ drone strikes in Pakistan since August 2010 has uncovered at least 10 individual attacks in which 45 or more civilians appear to have died.”

Law Professor Jonathan Turley lists ten major, ongoing assaults on core civil liberties in the U.S. Many of these abuses were accelerated during the Bush administration in the wake of 9/11, but all have been vigorously continued and/or expanded by President Obama.

Assassination of U.S. citizens; Indefinite detention; Arbitrary justice; Warrantless searches; Secret evidence; War crimes; Secret court; Immunity from judicial review; Continual monitoring of citizens; and Extraordinary renditions.

http://www.salon.com/2012/01/16/who_are_the_victims_of_civil_liberties_assaults_and_endless_war/singleton/

With the upcoming election between Obama and most likely Romney, this article gave rise to an Obama reelection slogan.

Obama: To Hell in a Handbasket More Slowly than Romney

I think it would make a great bumper sticker.

If you’ve been living under a rock, you may not have heard that there is a democratic revolt going on in Egypt. Timeline here:

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/01/201112515334871490.html

Mubarak has been the tyrant of Egypt for thirty years. Mubarak is supported by the US because he has kept peace with Israel and the Israeli lobby in American politics is rather strong. The US sends billions of dollars in foreign aid to Egypt every year and gives it miitary support as well. Egypt’s military uses American made hardware. They drive M1 Abrams tanks and fly F-16 fighter jets.

Unsurprisingly, the US response to democratic aspirations in Egypt has been luke warm at best. This appears to be motivated purely by self interest. The US government would prefer Mubarak remain in power because Mubarak does what we tell him to do. If Mubarak is thrown out of power, then whatever democratic government emerges in Egypt might make the people of Egypt the priority of the Egyptian government rather than prioritizing the wishes of those in Washington D.C.

So, basically, the politicians in Washington would rather have a dictator puppet who abuses his population rather than have a democratic Egypt who might not listen to the US.

It is my humble opinion that this is short-sighted, selfish, idiocy at its worst.

America should support democracy, end of story. And attempts to keep puppet dictators in power at the expense of the local population has repeatedly backfired on America. The Iranian REvolution that overthrew the American puppet dictator the Shah being the textbook example. The problem seems to be that no one ever reads the textbook and instead go with their “gut” or other idiocy.

A democratic Egypt, brought about with strong support from America, would bring stability to Egypt and could be a friend of America. A democratic Egypt, brought about by the people of Egypt overcoming interference from the American government trying to stop them, will only delay the inevitable switch to democracy but will result in creating a people who resent America for keeping them under tyranny.

As for the players involved, Mubarak needs to step down immediately or blood is eventually going to flow all over Egypt. He seems to be dragging his feet saying he will hold on to power until the elections in September. Which signals that he is completely out of touch with what is happening in the streets. The people in the streets are not going to wait until September and trust that Mubarak will step down. Mubarak has won every “democratic election” in Egypt for the last thirty years. (hint, because Mubarak cheats.)

He has a history proving he is untrustworthy. And now he is telling his people “trust me, I will step down in September”. To which the people of Egypt are rightly saying “Hell no”

AlBaradei: AlBaradei is one of the opposition leaders. He was also the former head of the UN nuclear watchdog group. I have a good feeling about him. He’s very smart and seems to be driven by objectiveness rather than self interest at the expense of everyone else and rather than some dogmatic value system.

Omar Suleiman: The head of Egyptian intelligence. He worked intimately with the CIA in helping American spies torture prisoners in America’s rendition/torture program. D.C. would obviously love to have him in power as he has shown a willingness to do the dirty-work of American interests. The fact that he so willingly tortures people for America (and if reports are to be believed, he also tortures Egyptians to maintain his own power and that of Mubarak), is a massive red flag that this guy shouldn’t be trusted to do what is in the best interest of the Egyptian people.

The Muslim Brotherhood: This is an organization that has been around for not quite a century. They generally oppose violent measures. Osama Bin Laden condemned them for being non-violent. Several splinter groups have left the Muslim Brotherhood to form new organizations because MB wasn’t violent enough for them.

And yet in America, they seem to be portrayed as the boogeyman. I assume this is partly religious prejudice on the part of the West, and partly a fear that a strong democracy in Egypt is a democracy that cannot be made a puppet.

One problem right now is that the democratic revolt really has no leaders of any sort. This whole thing could collapse into being nothing more than changing the name of which thug runs the country. Only if the democratic aspirations can be represented politically, by leaders strong enough to stand up to thugs like Mubarak and Suleiman, will real democracy have any chance of surving the next few months.

My hope would be a strong, diverse group of leaders form some kind of transitional government. Bring in AlBaradei and the Muslim Brotherhood. Odds are that Sulieman and several of Mubarak’s thugs are going to try to hold on to some power, so they will have to be tolerated for a while longer. But then create a constitution which supports real democratic reform, get rid of the thugs through real elections, and maybe the people of Egypt will have a government that looks out for their best interests.

Mubarak still hasn’t stepped down and is still holding on for September, so I’m not entirely convinced this won’t yet result in some kind of Tiananmen Square crackdown and blackout. But right now, there is still hope for democracy in Egypt.

If Obama continues on this current path, he is on track to become the biggest disappointment of an entire generation.

First, the background from Glenn Greenwald:

Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian citizen and British resident, was arrested in Pakistan in 2002 and then “rendered” by the U.S. to multiple countries (such as Morocco); held incommunicado (no access to lawyers, the International Red Cross or anyone else) and interrogated by U.S. agents until 2004; and then shipped off to Guantanamo, where he has remained ever since.

In May, 2008, Mohamed was accused in a Guantanamo military commission with various acts of Terrorism that carry the death penalty if he’s convicted. The key evidence against him are the confessions the U.S. obtained during that 2002-2004 time period. After charging him, the U.S. Government refused to provide his lawyers with documents and other evidence that would enable Mohamed to prove that those confessions were obtained via torture.

Both the Bush administration and the Obama administration leaned on the British government to stop the publication of documents that showed the US tortured Mohamed. Right wingers claimed that releasing this information would result in fire and brimstone falling from the sky, cats and dogs sleeping together, the end of the world as we know it.

But on 10 February 2010, the British courts ruled the documents must be released, that the fact that the US tortured Mohamed must be made public.

Now, I grant you that it’s only been a week, but it would appear that the world hasn’t come to an end. Though, my cat and my dog have been getting along better than usual.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/02/19/exceptionalism/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/10/law-binyam-mohamed-case

From the Department of Public Relations, Nobel Peace Prize winning President Barack Obama ordered a missile strike in Yemen and the strike ended up killing 49 civilians. Al Queda has already issued a statement thanking the US for improving its recruiting drive.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20091220/twl-49-civilians-killed-in-air-strike-lo-3cd7efd.html

from Glenn Greenwald

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/12/21/terrorism/index.html

Obama is going to build a new supermax facility in Thompson, Illinois. It will be used to house some of the prisoners who had previously been held at Guantanamo, specifically, it will hold prisoners who aren’t going to get a trial, who are going to be held indefinitely without trial, or who will be put before a military commission.

So, this prison has exactly the same problems as Guantanamo. When Obama pledged to close Gitmo, many assumed that meant he was going to return the US to a nation based on law and due process and rights for the accused. But apparently, Obama just meant that he was going to change its address.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/12/15/gitmo/index.html

Year: troop levels in Afghanistan (year: troop levels in Vietnam)

2001: 1,300 (1959: 760)

2002: ? (1960: 900)

2003: 10,000 (1961: 3,025)

2004: 17,000 (1962: 11,300)

2005: 20,000 (1963: 16,300)

2007: 26,000 (1964: 23,300)

2008: 31,000 (1965: 184,300)

2009: 82,000 (1966: 385,300) (Obama sent 20,000 in the summer and approved 30,000 in December)

General McChrystal’s 2009 report estimates Afghanistan will need 500,000 troops over the next 5 years.

2010: ? (1967: 485,600)

2011: ? (1968: 536,100)

2012: ? (1969: 475,200)

2013: ? (1970: 334,600)

2014: ? (1971: 156,800)

McCrystal’s 2009 report estimates that troop withdrawal will occur around this time.

2015: ? (1972: 24,200)

2016: ? (1973: 50)

Anyone else see a pattern???

http://www.warhw.com/2009/08/10/us-troop-levels-in-afghanistan-by-year/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-andrews/classified-mcchrystal-rep_b_298528.html

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/U.S._Troop_levels_in_Vietnam_War

In January, Obama supported the release of photos showing Americans torturing prisoners. By May, Obama had reversed his position, signing into law a specific exemption preventing the photos from being made public. In November, a US court overturned a lower court’s decision to release the photos, saying the new law needed to be taken into account.

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/principles-by-digby-what-is-lesson-here.html

Less than a year into his presidency, Obama has won the Nobel peace prize.

This same day, Glenn Greenwald notes the accomplishments that Obama has achieved in those few months:

In February, the Obama DOJ went to court to block victims of rendition and torture from having a day in court, adopting in full the Bush argument that whatever was done to the victims is a “state secret” and national security would be harmed if the case proceeded. The following week, the Obama DOJ invoked the same “secrecy” argument to insist that victims of illegal warrantless eavesdropping must be barred from a day in court, and when the Obama administration lost that argument, they engaged in a series of extraordinary manuevers to avoid complying with the court’s order that the case proceed, to the point where the GOP-appointed federal judge threatened the Government with sanctions for noncompliance. Two weeks later, “the Obama administration, siding with former President George W. Bush, [tried] to kill a lawsuit that seeks to recover what could be millions of missing White House e-mails.”

In April, the Obama DOJ, in order to demand dismissal of a lawsuit brought against Bush officials for illegal spying on Americans, not only invoked the Bush/Cheney “state secrets” theory, but also invented a brand new “sovereign immunity” claim to insist Bush officials are immune from consequences for illegal domestic spying. The same month — in the case brought by torture victims — an appeals court ruled against the Obama DOJ on its “secrecy” claims, yet the administration vowed to keep appealing to prevent any judicial review of the interrogation program. In responses to these abuses, a handful of Democratic legislators re-introduced Bush-era legislation to restrict the President from asserting “state secrets” claims to dismiss lawsuits, but it stalled in Congress all year. At the end of April and then again in August, the administration did respond to a FOIA lawsuit seeking the release of torture documents by releasing some of those documents, emphasizing that they had no choice in light of clear legal requirements.

In May, after the British High Court ruled that a torture victim had the right to obtain evidence in the possession of British intelligence agencies documeting the CIA’s abuse of him, the Obama administration threatened that it would cut off intelligence-sharing with Britain if the court revealed those facts, causing the court to conceal them. Also in May, Obama announced he had changed his mind and would fight– rather than comply with — two separate, unanimous court orders compelling the disclosure of Bush-era torture photos, and weeks later, vowed he would do anything (including issue an Executive Order or support a new FISA exemption) to prevent disclosure of those photos in the event he lost yet again, this time in the Supreme Court. In June, the administration “objected to the release of certain Bush-era documents that detail the videotaped interrogations of CIA detainees at secret prisons, arguing to a federal judge that doing so would endanger national security.” In August, Obama Attorney General Eric Holder announced that while some rogue torturers may be subject to prosecution, any Bush officials who relied on Bush DOJ torture memos in “good faith” will “be protected from legal jeopardy.” And all year long, the Obama DOJ fought (unsuccessfully) to keep encaged at Guantanamo a man whom Bush officials had tortured while knowing he was innocent.

It’s kind of difficult to reconcile that Obama won the peace prize after doing all of THAT. Then I read a FAQ that reveals some of the myths about the Nobel peace prize:

Myth: The Nobel peace prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.

Fact: More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.

So, maybe the Nobel commission is hoping Obama will stop continuing Bush’s torture doctrines. But the headliner reason given is because of Obama’s initives to reduce nuclear weapon stockpiles. Maybe the torture stuff might be a nice bonus.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eu_nobel_peace

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/10/08/photos/index.html

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091009/ap_on_re_eu/eu_nobel_peace_myths