Your ass is really sore eh? On Nov 3, 10:15 am, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > Election 2010: A Disaster for PeaceBut look for the silver lining…byJustin > Raimondo, November 03, 2010 > The expected Election Day Republican “wave” thatbroke over our headsis a > disaster for the anti-interventionist cause in the immediate sense – but > there may be a silver lining. > The disaster is embodied in the various GOP warmongers who will be placed in > key positions in Congress, and a good case could be made that among the worst > of the worst will be the probable majority leader in the House:Eric Cantor. > Cantor is a walking, breathing stereotype, a neocon through and through, who > pays lip service to the “tea party”-ish idea of limiting government spending, > but is in reality committed to lavishing tax dollars on any project as long > as it can be somehow construed as contributing to US security. > Thus,ForeignPolicy.comreferences his views on “foreign aid” and the > budget:“Cantortold theJewish Telegraphic Agency that the president’s proposed > budget might have to be rejected outright if Republicans take power – after > separating out U.S. aid for Israel, of course.”Cantor is a big fan of > Israel’s, and hasgone so faras to say that, in the context of tensions > between Washington and Tel Aviv overthe settlementsand other issues, “Israel > is not the problem” – leaving unspoken the presumption the US is at fault. In > line withthe Israel lobby’scampaignto goad us into war with Iran, he demands > that the US cease negotiations with Tehran, impose draconian sanctions > unilaterally, and openly threaten the use of force. > Another rabid Republican interventionist isSen. John Kyl, the junior Senator > from Arizona, and currently the minority whip. If the Republicans take the > Senate, he’ll be in a position to stake out his claim on foreign policy > issues, in which he has taken an inordinate interest in the past. His major > shtick is opposition to the START treaty, and he shares this opposition with > his Senate Republican colleague, Jim DeMint, of South Carolina. As > ForeignPolicy.computs it:“Most incoming Tea Party candidates don’t focus on > foreign policy, but manywill owe allegianceto DeMint because he has been > filling their campaign coffers. They could be inclined to follow suit with > his unilateralist, militaristic worldview, which many see as based on > hisneoconservative ideologyrather than a realistic pursuit of U.S. interests > in [a] multipolar world order.”One example of his influence over the tea > party candidates: DeMint was an early endorser of Rand Paul, > whosemovetowardneoconnish foreign policy positions provokedmy ireinthis > column. Now that Rand has been elected, will he embrace the neocons, or will > he stay true to his nationwide libertarian constituency? Of course, if we > were talking abouthis father, Ron Paul, we would have nothing to worry about. > As it is, however … > SenatorJohn McCainwill retain his position on the Senate Armed Services > Committee, and, if the GOP wave is big enough to take the Senate, he’ll be > the chairman. Together with Rep.Buck McKeon(R-CA), who is slated to become > chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, the two of them will be > pressuring President Obama to keep capitulating to Gen. David Petraeus and > the hawks in the Pentagon. The crunch will come when it comestimeto “draw > down” the troops in Afghanistan, in the summer of 2011. > Far worse than anyone I have yet mentioned isIleana Ros-Lehtinen, Florida > Republican, who never saw a war she didn’t salivate at the prospect of and > hascalled for the assassinationof Fidel Castro. She is a militant supporter > of Israel,constantly criticizes the USfor not kowtowing quickly enough to Tel > Aviv, and is avocal supporter of the Mujahideen-e-Khalq, aMarxist terrorist > organizationthat has provided much of thephony “intelligence”purporting to > show Iran is developing nuclear weapons. She will be chairwoman of the House > Foreign Affairs Committee when the GOP takes the House. > The big problem with a Republican-dominated House is that those GOPers who > take an interest in foreign policy issues are invariably hawks: these are the > committed neocons, like Cantor and Kyl. The tea partiers, for their part, > avoid the issue, focused exclusively as they are deficits, taxes, and > budget-cutting. > There is, however, a silver lining to all this: the Empire is going bankrupt. > Our invasion of Iraq is estimated by economist Joseph Stiglitz to cost some3 > trillion dollars, when all is said and done.NeoconsBill Kristol and the heads > of the American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation came out > with an op ed warning the tea party types not to go near their precious > “defense” budget with the cost-cutter’s knife. But the tea partiers are > unlikely to listen to Kristol & Co., or, indeed, any members of the > Republican establishment, who, after all, presided over the spendthrift Bush > administration all the while proclaiming their support for what they called > “big government conservatism.” > Objectively, the momentum for cost-cutting will run upagainstthe neocons’ > militarism, and a conflict seems inevitable. Yet nothing is inevitable when > it comes to human affairs, so we’ll just have to see what happens. > Another discouraging aspect of the GOP’s triumph is that it will give Obama > very little room to maneuver on domestic matters – and he’ll have little > choice but to concentrate more of his attention on foreign policy. This is > not good, from an anti-interventionist viewpoint, because the President will > no doubt use foreign policy issues to gain Republican support for his > domestic initiatives. This increases the influence of the > McCain-Cantor-Petraeusmore-troops-to-Afghanistan lobby – but it gets worse…. > Although I have often suggested that Obama might turn to war in order to pump > some semblance of life into the economy, now we have David Broder, the > mandarin of the establishment columnists,sayingthe same thing. After > describing the President’s helplessness before the vagaries of the business > cycle, he avers:“What else might affect the economy? The answer is obvious, > but its implications are frightening. War and peace influence the > economy.“Look back at FDR and the Great Depression. What finally resolved > that economic crisis? World War II. Here is where Obama is likely to prevail. > With strong Republican support in Congress for challenging Iran’s ambition to > become a nuclear power, he can spend much of 2011 and 2012 orchestrating a > showdown with the mullahs. This will help him politically because the > opposition party will be urging him on. And as tensions rise, and we > accelerate preparations for war, the economy will improve. > “The nation will rally around Obama because Iran is the greatest threat to > the world in the young century. If he can confront this threat and contain > Iran’s nuclear ambitions, he will have made the world safer and may be > regarded as one of the most successful presidents in history.” > Aside from the fact that the war did not lift us out of the Depression –see > Robert Higgsforthe real story– this scenario is perfectly credible. As a > self-described political pragmatist, the President is prone to taking the > easy way out, and while the economy may not improve as war preparations are > ratcheted up, this is not likely to deter either Obama orhis Keynesian > economic advisers, who believe that any and all government spending > –including military spending– is the key to recovery. > In the short term, the contours of the electoral disaster for the antiwar > movement are large, but in the mid-to –long term the contradictions of the > “tea party” movement may start to rip this winning coalition apart. Are > “defense” expenditures and extravagantly expensive “nation-building” projects > boondoggles, or are they essential for the survival of the Republic? This is > a debate that will break out in the GOP sooner rather than later, and the > results should be … interesting.Postscript: More silver lining – at least > thewar > criminallost.http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/11/02/election-2010-a-disaster-for-peace/
-- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
