Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Alan Grayson: Afghan War 'Futile'/Afghan Affair More Than 'Nitpicking'

Published on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 by Politico.com

Alan Grayson: Afghan War 'Futile'

by Meredith Shiner

Florida Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson said Tuesday that the war in Afghanistan is "futile" and vowed to vote against the Pentagon's appropriations bill to protest President Barack Obama's decision to send more U.S. troops there.

[Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) says he'll vote against Pentagon appropriations bill to protest President Barack Obama's troop surge.  (Photo: John Shinkle)]Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) says he'll vote against Pentagon appropriations bill to protest President Barack Obama's troop surge. (Photo: John Shinkle)

"This is an 18th century strategy being employed against a 14th century enemy," Grayson said. " Other countries, one after the other, have given up on this strategy over the years. This war is costing us much too much in both lives and money. There's too much blood being shed in Afghanistan. There's too much blood being shed in Iraq. And there are simply better ways to accomplish the same goals."

Grayson answered with a definitive "yes" when asked if he intends to vote against the pending Department of Defense appropriations bill.

How many other anti-war Democrats will do the same isn't clear, and Grayson said he hasn't yet tried to garner support among those opposed to the troop escalation.

"Each one of us has to decide that for himself or herself, I guess. I don't know if you'll see a lot of that or not. But I do know that we're finding the futility of being the world's policeman is becoming more and more obvious," Grayson said.

Grayson is one of a dozen co-sponsors of a privileged resolution demanding an end to the war in Afghanistan. The leader of that effort, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), complained on the House floor Tuesday about efforts to attach an extension of unemployment benefits to the Pentagon appropriations bill.

"Unfortunately, we are now telling the American people that the only way they will get unemployment compensation is to support another $130 billion to keep wars going," Kucinich said. "What a cruel choice Congress is forcing on people out of work. Put your sons and daughters on the firing line, and we will pay you for being in the unemployment line."

Although Kucinich has not explicitly said he will vote against the legislation, a spokesperson for the Congressman noted he has yet to vote in favor of a war appropriations bill.

 © 2009 Politico.com

Article printed from www.CommonDreams.org

URL to article: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/12/15-8


Published on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 by The Toronto Star

Afghan Affair More Than 'Nitpicking'

by Linda McQuaig

The irritation of members of the Harper government has been palpable in recent weeks as they tap their toes impatiently, wondering when they can return to the serious business of waging war without all these rude interruptions about torture.

Last Friday on CBC Radio's The Current, Laurie Hawn, parliamentary secretary to Defence Minister Peter MacKay, complained about all the "nitpicking" and insisted that the Afghan detainee issue is not one that concerns Canadians.

This dismissive attitude – which permeates the Harper government – is puzzling.

At stake is whether Ottawa knowingly allowed prisoners to be transferred to situations where they would likely be tortured.

If true, this could amount to a war crime. Given the gravity of what's involved, how can any attempt to ferret out the truth be derided as mere "nitpicking?"

Recent U.S. history shows the danger of a too-casual approach to torture.

Former U.S. vice-president Dick Cheney had admitted he approved "waterboarding" on at least three detainees, and the "enhanced interrogation" of 33 others. George W. Bush also acknowledged authorizing these practices, explaining that "we had legal opinions that enabled us to do it."

The American Civil Liberties Union pronounced these admissions tantamount to confessions of war crimes.

Yet Cheney and Bush wander about freely; Cheney even still fancies himself a useful contributor to public debate.

This has some serious implications. This month, for the first time since Pew Research began polling on this question five years ago, a majority of Americans – 54 per cent – said torture could be justified against terrorist suspects, either sometimes or often.

This growing tolerance of torture may have something to do with the way the Obama administration – in its keenness to curry elusive Republican support – has declined to go after Bush and Cheney, even though the Convention Against Torture, signed by the U.S. in 1988, requires the prosecution or extradition of torturers.

Vowing to "look forward," the Obama administration has inadvertently sent a message to Americans that torture isn't really such a heinous crime.

If it was, surely the United States would go after its perpetrators – just like U.S. authorities (appropriately) are going after filmmaker Roman Polanski for a brutal rape he committed three decades ago. Truly serious crimes aren't forgotten or papered over in the interests of all getting along. They require punishment, partly to send a message that society condemns them.

Despite condemnation of torture in his Nobel Peace Prize speech last week, an accommodating Barack Obama has signalled his willingness to turn a blind eye to torture authorized by the White House, thereby bestowing on disgraced Republican practices the mantle of bipartisanship.

For that matter, much of Obama's Nobel speech was disturbingly Bushian. His defence of decades of U.S. military interventions was certainly more elegant and artful than anything that ever came out of Bush's mouth. But putting lipstick on a pig doesn't give her inner beauty.

The bipartisan consensus in the U.S. has effectively silenced public debate about torture.

To their credit, Canadian opposition parties have refused to be silent about torture – surely one of the clearest markers dividing the civilized world from the barbaric.

With admirable tenacity, opposition parliamentarians have sent a message that no amount of lipstick will pretty up this pig.

© Copyright Toronto Star 1996-2009

Linda McQuaig's column appears every other week in The Star.

Article printed from www.CommonDreams.org

URL to article: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/12/15-2



Donations can be sent to the Baltimore Nonviolence Center, 325 E. 25th St., Baltimore, MD 21218.  Ph: 410-366-1637; Email: mobuszewski [at] verizon.net


"The master class has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles. The master class has had all to gain and nothing to lose, while the subject class has had nothing to gain and everything to lose--especially their lives." Eugene Victor Debs


No comments: