Barack bombs

When it was announced in October of 2009 that Barack Obama had been chosen to receive the Nobel Peace Prize just nine months into his presidency, I defended the choice.

Although Obama had announced a major escalation of the war in Afghanistan in March of 2009 – announcing he intended to send 4,000 more troops on top of the 17,000 additional troops he already deployed – I defended him.

Even though the detestable Maverick from Phoenix – the guy who thought it prudent to sing, “Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran” in public – praised this move, I defended him.

Although Obama had announced in February 2009 that our combat mission in Iraq wouldn’t end until August 31, 2010 – three months later than he promised during the campaign – and pointed out that a U.S. “force” numbering between 35,000 and 50,000 will stay behind in non-combat roles and final troops won’t leave until December 31, 2011, I defended him.

And when Obama ordered some 34,000 more U.S. soldiers to Afghanistan that November, I defended him.

Last night he addressed the nation about Libya and tried to justify his decision to authorize military action. I’m finished defending him.

In fact, I think he needs to return his peace prize to Oslo to salvage its credibility lest it become as political and meaningless as the Grammys or the Golden Globes.

I watched the speech – which ended with the obligatory, offensive “God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America” – and was struck by how Dubya-like the 44th president sounded. I’m not alone. One Facebook friend posted, “I cried a little when I realized his speech was as platitude-filled as any of GW Bush's.” Another Facebook friend really let the Candidate of Hope and Change have it:

“I don't agree with anything Obama said. Is this about anything other than protecting the Libyan oil fields? I personally don't think so. We watched civilians slaughtered in Rwanda, we watched civilians slaughtered in Darfur. If we spent all these resources creating an energy policy instead of dropping bombs, we wouldn't give a damn about what is happening in Libya or anywhere in the Middle East and Northern Africa. This is not leadership, this is doing the bidding for the rich and powerful who want the region destabilized to drive up the cost of oil.

“I voted for this President because I wanted change. After Bush I wanted our democracy back and I wanted some investment in our future. I am tired of wars for oil and wars ‘cause of terror. We will be protecting oil fields for the next 20 years or until we are so weakened and bankrupt by the greed of those in power. I hate that Obama has caved to the rich and powerful in this country. We have lost our government and it just sickens me. When we help the people in the Congo, Somalia, Sudan, Rwanda, and the Ivory Coast from being slaughtered, maybe then I will believe this is not about oil. Until then, spare me all this bullshit.”

At least 919,967 people – soldiers, civilians, contractors and journalists – have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq since the U.S. and coalition attacks, based on lowest credible estimates. More than 300 times as many people have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq than on September 11, 2001. The two wars combined have cost $1.1 trillion since 2001. That money could have funded a whole lot of road and bridge repairs, new schools and teacher salaries, life-saving health care, domestic violence and homeless shelters, libraries, college scholarships and other needs.

George Orwell’s classic novel, 1984, describes a world of perpetual war and government surveillance where the individual is always subordinated to the state and the slogans “War is peace,” “Freedom is Slavery” and “Ignorance is Strength” are introduced. Has fiction become nonfiction?


Sources: Alternet.org, Unknownnews.net, costofwar.com