Category: News

It’s obvious that Democrats used the antiwar movement during the George W. Bush years.

Clearly, they saw the war in Iraq as a way to make Republicans look bad. Maybe it was because they wanted the Democratic Party in power due to its position on guns, abortion, immigration and LGBTQ issues.

Democrats who protested the invasion of Iraq still say they’re opposed to war. Yet they voted for a man who before he was elected, said, "I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war."

Then they voted for him again in 2012 after he dropped bombs on six Muslim countries.

And for the most part, those same Democrats have not been active in the antiwar movement since Barack Obama took office.

Yep, the antiwar movement was used. And as part of that movement, I can say that many of us are angrier today with the Democrats than we were with the Republicans when Bush was in office.

Continue reading “Step Up to the Plate, Democrats”

Iraq is in midst of turmoil, with ISIS’s territorial gains and the Kurds’ rapid oil exports shifting the fragile country’s balance of power. Washington, DC finds itself once again in the center of the conflict with Iraq’s leaders, raising the question of whether the Obama administration should provide assistance to the country in crisis. The President has received some praise for withdrawing troops from two unpopular wars but is faced with criticism for being hesitant to send US ground troops. The reality is dark for Iraq, and there is nothing that the White House can do to save the country from the havoc ISIS has unleashed on the country.

In a classified meeting on May 11, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki requested that the United States "provide Iraq with the ability to operate drones" according to the New York Times. However, Maliki also reassured that if the US are not willing to equip Iraq with unmanned aerial vehicles, he preferred that the US carry out airstrikes on their own at ISIS target areas. Five days later, Maliki urged the US to use airstrikes over a phone call with Vice President Joe Biden and submitted a written request immediately afterwards. Although President Obama initially turned down the request for airstrikes against ISIS targets, the Administration is running out of options, as they have rejected the idea of sending ground troops.

The Obama Administration has been supplying Iraq with their foreign military sales program with a total of $15 Billion in supplying the country in chaos with F-16 jets, drones, tanks, arms, and Apache attack helicopters. Baghdad has been urging the US to deliver military weapons to stabilize its country, but the Iraqi military does not seem sufficiently trained to effectively use such complex military hardware.

So, President Obama finds himself faced again with using airstrikes as the most reliable option. However, the use of drones on ISIS targets poses more risks than benefits. Drones strikes almost always results in more blowback and terrorist threats than intended. The airstrikes kill indiscriminately, leaving numerous civilians dead and destroying infrastructure.

Continue reading “There’s No Such Thing as ‘Other Military Options’ in Iraq”

Interview with Charles Goyette

President Obama chose his West Point commencement address to reaffirm the globalist, interventionist posture that has characterized his presidency. This week against the backdrop of Iraq descending into chaos with hundreds a casualties a day and Libya descending into violence, Charles Goyette talks with Ron Paul about the toxic U.S. foreign policy. The hypocrisy of Washington’s shape-shifting positions on foreign elections from Syria to Ukraine and from Egypt to Crimea are also part of the conversation on The Weekly Podcast.

Listen to the audio here.

Charles Goyette is New York Times Bestselling Author of The Dollar Meltdown and Red and Blue and Broke All Over: Restoring America’s Free Economy. Check out Goyette and Paul’s national radio commentary: Ron Paul’s America and the Ron Paul and Charles Goyette Weekly Podcast. Goyette also edits The Freedom and Prosperity Letter.

Ralph Nader wrote a very perceptive essay in the wake of the edifying defeat of the despicable arch-imperialist, Israel Firster and reliable servant of Wall St. Banksters, Eric Cantor, at the capable hands of the libertarian leaning Professor David Brat. It was titled "Can Progressives Learn From Eric Cantor’s Defeat"? Can they? Yes. Will they? It is highly doubtful. It is difficult to learn if you think you have nothing more to learn.

But here we are interested only in the lessons of Cantor’s electoral humiliation at the hands of Brat for the progressive antiwar, anti-Empire movement. (For the significance of the Brat victory beyond the matter of war, see this.) What do we mean by Progressive? "Progressive" for the most part is little more than a change of name for what was once called "liberal." One looks in vain for a self-described liberal these days only because they have rebranded themselves.

Here are two relevant quotes from Nader’s essay:

“(The Brat victory) has several takeaways for progressives besides envy and shame over why they do not directly take on the corporate Democrats.”

“Unfortunately the driving energy of progressives, including the dissipating Occupy Wall Street effort, is not showing up in the electoral arena. The political energy, the policy disputes and the competitive contests are among the Republicans, not the Democrats…”

Continue reading “The Progressive Antiwar Movement: RIP?”

An excellent interview with scholar of Russian studies Stephen F. Cohen on Russia Today on the subject of “The New Cold War.” Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus at New York University and Princeton University. He writes for The Nation.

Barack Obama has a chance to be a hero.

With Republicans and hawks pushing him to do something in Iraq, he could go in front of the nation today and assertively say:

"It was you, Republicans, who got us into this war in Iraq to begin with, based on false assertions and flat out lies. So I will not listen to you now as you tell the American people that the US must again take military action in Iraq. Remember I was opposed to the Iraq war the first time and given the disaster that we see in Iraq today, I was right. So Senator McCain, William Kristol, and all you other "think tank" talking heads who are trying to create more carnage in Iraq, it’s time for you to crawl into your cubbyhole and keep your mouth shut. You got it wrong the first time and you’re getting it wrong again. As the leader of this country, I will not allow the US to make another mistake in Iraq."

If Obama said these things, 80% of America would give him a standing ovation.

The New York Times, the Washington Post, and CNN would all applaud his leadership and American’s reputation around the world would greatly improve. His approval rating would shoot through the roof and it would mean that Obama’s constituency would feel emboldened and proud to be a member of the Democratic Party.

But it’s almost a certainty that Obama will not say this, or anything even remotely close to this, primarily for three reasons.

Firstly, Obama made himself an easy target of Republican critics who claim Iraq is a mess today because the US withdrew too soon. But the troop withdrawal from Iraq was signed into law by George W. Bush – Obama was simply carrying out the law that was in place before his inauguration. By wrongly taking credit for ending the Iraq war, Obama has put himself in a position where he cannot counter Republican criticism of a premature troop withdrawal.

Continue reading “Arming ISIS in Syria … Then Bombing Them in Iraq?”