January 9, 2013

'So many people died'

http://atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/OA10Ae02.html



'So many people died'
By Nick Turse
Jan 10, 2013

~snip~

Pham To told me that the planes began their bombing runs in 1965 and that periodic artillery shelling started about the same time. Nobody will ever know just how many civilians were killed in the years after. "The number is uncountable," he said one spring day a few years ago in a village in the mountains of rural central Vietnam. "So many people died."

And it only got worse. Chemical defoliants came next, ravaging the land. Helicopter machine gunners began firing on locals. By 1969, bombing and shelling were day-and-night occurrences. Many villagers fled. Some headed further into the mountains, trading the terror of imminent death for a daily struggle of hardscrabble privation; others were forced into squalid refugee resettlement areas. Those who remained in the village suffered more when the troops came through. Homes were burned as a matter of course. People were kicked and beaten. Men were shot when they ran in fear. Women were raped. One morning, a massacre by American soldiers wiped out 21 fellow villagers. This was the Vietnam War for Pham To, as for so many rural Vietnamese.

~snip~

In those years, "Vietnam" even proved a surprisingly two-sided analogy - after, at least, generals began reading and citing revisionist texts about that war. These claimed, despite all appearances, that the US military had actually won in Vietnam (before the politicians, media, and antiwar movement gave the gains away). The same winning formula, they insisted, could be used to triumph again. And so, a failed solution from that failed war, counterinsurgency, or COIN, was trotted out as the military panacea for impending disaster.

Debated comparisons between the two ongoing wars and the one that somehow never went away, came to litter newspapers, journals, magazines, and the Internet - until David Petraeus, a top COINdinista general who had written his doctoral dissertation on the "lessons" of the Vietnam War, was called in to settle the matter by putting those lessons to work winning the other two. In the end, of course, US troops were booted out of Iraq, while the war in Afghanistan continues to this day as a dismally devolving stalemate, now wracked by "green-on-blue" or "insider" attacks on US forces, while the general himself returned to Washington as Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director to run covert wars in Pakistan and Yemen before retiring in disgrace following a sex scandal.

January 8, 2013

Former leader (Gen. Stanley McChrystal) says U.S. owes Afghans enduring security

http://www.leaderpost.com/news/Former+leader+says+owes+Afghans+enduring+security/7787648/story.html

Former leader says U.S. owes Afghans enduring security
By Kimberly Dozier, The Associated Press January 8, 2013

Retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal said Monday he backs the White House's drawdown of U.S. forces in Afghanistan slated for 2014, but added the United States owes Afghans some sort of enduring security presence to support them.

"We have an emotional responsibility," Mc-Chrystal said of Afghanistan.

He commanded forces there before resigning over a controversial magazine article.

"We created expectations after 2001 in people" that the United States would be there to keep the country from sliding back into the chaos of the Taliban years, McChrystal said.

January 8, 2013

Obama Nominates John Brennan, 'Kill List' Architect, as New CIA Chief

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/01/07



John Brennan's career spans from the dark days of Bush's torture program to Obama's secretive 'kill list'

Obama Nominates John Brennan, 'Kill List' Architect, as New CIA Chief
Jon Queally, staff writer
Published on Monday, January 7, 2013 by Common Dreams

At a White House ceremony on Monday afternoon, President Obama officially nominated his top counterterrorism advisor John Brennan to be the next director of the CIA.

In his assessment of the decision, the Guardian's Glenn Greenwald argues that it should not be shocking that Brennan—who was withdrawn from consideration for CIA chief in 2008 because of his association with the CIA's torture program under President Bush—has now been brought back by President Obama in 2013.

Greenwald called Obama's nomination of Brennan a "symptom of Obama's own extremism (in the controversial areas of torture, targeted killings, and the US drone policy), not a cause."

Calling it a fitting choice, Greenwald said the decision

is a perfect illustration of the Obama legacy that a person who was untouchable as CIA chief in 2008 because of his support for Bush's most radical policies is not only Obama's choice for the same position now, but will encounter very little resistance. Within this change one finds one of the most significant aspects of the Obama presidency: his conversion of what were once highly contentious right-wing policies into harmonious dogma of the DC bipartisan consensus.

January 8, 2013

New climate change projections surpass previous estimates and threaten 187 million

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/07/new-climate-change-projections-surpass-previous-estimates-and-threaten-187-million/



New climate change projections surpass previous estimates and threaten 187 million
By Stephen C. Webster
Monday, January 7, 2013 14:58 EST

A new study published in the scientific journal Nature Climate Change estimates that at its worst, sea level rise attributed to the melting of Earth’s polar ice caps and glaciers may displace up to 187 million people within the next 100 years.

An assessment of expert opinion published Sunday finds that most leading climate scientists are divided on how rapidly the planet’s glaciers and ice caps will deteriorate, leading to a wide divergence of opinion on how much that melting will contribute to sea levels between present day and 2100.

After charting detailed responses from 26 leading experts, researchers came back with a median estimate of projected sea level rise at just 29 centimeters. The worst estimate is 84 centimeters.

The results are significantly worse than the last projection (PDF) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2007, which suggested that at best the world would see 18 centimeters of sea level rise, and at worst 59 centimeters.

January 6, 2013

Even Dancing With the Stars Couldn't Keep Tom DeLay From Prison

http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/17731-even-dancing-with-the-stars-couldn-t-keep-tom-delay-from-prison



Tom DeLay's Actual Mugshot

Even Dancing With the Stars Couldn't Keep Tom DeLay From Prison
MARK KARLIN, EDITOR OF BUZZFLASH AT TRUTHOUT
Friday, 04 January 2013 17:15

Whenever you get despairing that a minority of the nation and media has been on an accelerating free-fall into Dante's Inferno – dragging the rest of us through the flames -- remember that even the mightiest of the evil doers can be brought to justice.

You can't get anymore joyful than hearing that Tom DeLay, a firm believer in the health benefits of Dioxin and last seen publicly shimmying his booty in satin bolero pants on "Dancing with the Stars," has just been sentenced to three years in prison. As The Huffington Post reports:

~snip~

DeLay, House Majority Leader from 2003-05 and was the capo dei capi (Godfather) of the Republican caucus under House Speaker Dennis "Where's the Chicken?" Hastert. I recall an aide of DeLay being quoted as saying that (paraphrased) "You don't just kick a Democrat when he's down, you roll him in a carpet and toss him over the cliff." That was how DeLay played: down, mean, merciless, dirty, and well-oiled with "K Street Project" money. The former Texas bug exterminator (we are not making this up) could bite a copperhead snake's head off and swallow it down with a martini.

DeLay was a Chamber of Commerce man, but his social right wing policies also aligned him with the padded wall squad. He was sort of a mad dog precursor to the Tea Party financed by the Koch Brothers.

January 6, 2013

Do war-weary troops have drinking problem? Marines launch get-tough policy.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2013/0104/Do-war-weary-troops-have-drinking-problem-Marines-launch-get-tough-policy

Do war-weary troops have drinking problem? Marines launch get-tough policy.
By Anna Mulrine, Staff writer / January 4, 2013

~snip~

The new policy – in which all Marines will be tested randomly twice a year – was announced as 2012 drew to a close and in the wake of startling recent statistics about the rise in binge drinking among troops since 2001.

Ten years later, that figure had grown to nearly half. At the same time, nearly one in four troops surveyed called themselves “heavy” drinkers.

And this heavy drinking has consequences, says Col. Timothy Foster, chief of staff of Marine and Family Programs at the US Marine Corps Division Headquarters, in an interview this week.

“If you look at the number of behavioral health issues – whether it’s suicide, sexual assault, or spousal abuse – all of those have one factor in common, and that is alcohol,” he says. “If we put our efforts towards reducing alcohol abuse and misuse in the Corps, these other things will not be totally eliminated, but it will certainly have an effect on those.”



unhappycamper comment: Japan and Okinawa receive much of the bad, stupid and criminal behavior --> http://www.democraticunderground.com/11792073

January 5, 2013

The 'War on Terror' - by Design - Can Never End

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/01/04-6



A U.S. Army soldier takes cover as a Black Hawk chopper takes off from a U.S. military base in Arghandab valley near Kandahar.

The 'War on Terror' - by Design - Can Never End
by Glenn Greenwald
Published on Friday, January 4, 2013 by The Guardian

It is precisely the intrinsic endlessness of this so-called "war" that is its most corrupting and menacing attribute, for the reasons Maddow explained. But despite the happy talk from Johnson, it is not ending soon. By its very terms, it cannot. And all one has to do is look at the words and actions of the Obama administration to know this.

There's no question that this "war" will continue indefinitely. There is no question that US actions are the cause of that, the gasoline that fuels the fire.

In October, the Washington Post's Greg Miller reported that the administration was instituting a "disposition matrix" to determine how terrorism suspects will be disposed of, all based on this fact: "among senior Obama administration officials, there is broad consensus that such operations are likely to be extended at least another decade." As Miller puts it: "That timeline suggests that the United States has reached only the midpoint of what was once known as the global war on terrorism."

The polices adopted by the Obama administration just over the last couple of years leave no doubt that they are accelerating, not winding down, the war apparatus that has been relentlessly strengthened over the last decade. In the name of the War on Terror, the current president has diluted decades-old Miranda warnings; codified a new scheme of indefinite detention on US soil; plotted to relocate Guantanamo to Illinois; increased secrecy, repression and release-restrictions at the camp; minted a new theory of presidential assassination powers even for US citizens; renewed the Bush/Cheney warrantless eavesdropping framework for another five years, as well as the Patriot Act, without a single reform; and just signed into law all new restrictions on the release of indefinitely held detainees.

January 5, 2013

US pushes to finish Afghan dam as challenges mount

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/jan/05/us-pushes-to-finish-afghan-dam-as-challenges-mount/?ap

US pushes to finish Afghan dam as challenges mount
By HEIDI VOGT, Associated Press
3:15 a.m., Jan. 5, 2013

KAJAKI, Afghanistan — In the approaching twilight of its war in Afghanistan, the U.S. is forging ahead with a giant infrastructure project long criticized as too costly in both blood and money.

It's a $500 million effort to refurbish the massive Kajaki dam and hydro-electric power system with an extensive network of power lines and transmission substations. It is supposed to bring electricity to 332,000 people in southern Afghanistan, increase crop yields and build up a cohort of trained Afghan laborers in a region badly in need of them.

But completion, which originally was envisaged for 2005, now is projected for some time in 2015, the year after most combat troops will have left the country. And there are some crucial ifs:

If a convoy carrying 900 tons of concrete can make it up a dangerous road to the dam site without being attacked by the Taliban. If the Afghan army can hold out in an area that took thousands of U.S. Marines to secure. If the Afghan government can take on the management of the dam.

January 4, 2013

I Agree with Republicans

http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/jayne-lyn-stahl/47406/i-agree-with-republicans

I Agree with Republicans
by Jayne Lyn Stahl | January 3, 2013 - 12:21am

Okay, I've gotta admit, I agree with Republicans. It's not enough to raise taxes. We've got to cut spending, too, so let's tell Boeing, Lockheed Martin, GE, and all the other defense contractors who eat up billions annually in taxpayer revenue that we're cutting their funding by, oh, say, 39.4%? Oh, and yes, what about federal subsidies to the oil cartel, farm subsidies, pharmaceuticals, WalMart, and to big tobacco? Those are entitlement programs that also need to be cut. The best way to cut Social Security is on the back of Lockheed Martin.

Consider that, in fiscal year ending 2011 alone, according to CNBC, there were more than $530 billion in government contracts awarded to defense contractors. Yes, that's almost as much revenue as will be raised in a decade by the recent fiscal cliff deal. http://www.cnbc.com/id/42494839/10_Companies_That_Make_Billions_From_The_US_Governmen
If you're thinking President Obama has already cut defense spending over the past four years, you're right, but they're small cuts phased in over ten years. Reportedly, the Obama administration has phased in cuts to defense over the next decade that will be pretty much equal to the revenue that will be raised from raising taxes on individuals earning over $400,000 a year. http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/09/11/romney-obama-defense-differences-fall-to-budget/

This is what has Republicans in a snit. They don't want any cuts to defense. Republicans also don't want anything more than a marginal, cosmetic increase on taxes even for those whose income puts them squarely in the upper 1%.

Republicans want to ensure that war contractors don't lose one night's sleep over any budget reform they authorize. They want to continue to cater to the drone lobbyists, yes, the ones who would have you think that an unemployment check is essentially no different than welfare, the ones who would like to roll back health care benefits under Medicaid so that many disabled are no longer covered, the ones who would like a voucher system instead of "Obamacare." These are the folks in big Pharma's back pocket. These are the folks who have worked desperately for generations to keep warning labels off a pack of cigarettes. These are the folks who are in Smith Wesson's pocket, and who hide behind a sense of constitutional entitlement, calling it their Second Amendment right to bear arms.

January 4, 2013

America's Political Dysfunction at Root is an Unwillingness to Cut War Spending

http://www.opednews.com/articles/America-s-Political-Dysfun-by-Dave-Lindorff-130103-300.html



America's Political Dysfunction at Root is an Unwillingness to Cut War Spending
By Dave Lindorff
OpEdNews Op Eds 1/3/2013

I was asked earlier this week by an reporter for PressTV, the state television network in Iran, if I could explain why the US political system seemed to be so dysfunctional, with Congress and the President having created an artificial budget crisis 17 months ago, not "solving" it until the last hour before a Congressional deadline would have created financial chaos, and even then not solving the problem and instead just pushing it off for two months until the next crisis moment.

I thought for a moment, trying to come up with a simple way to explain the peculiar politics of a fake democracy where two equally pro-capitalist, pro-imperialist parties vie with genuine bitterness for patronage spoils and legal bribes, all the while ignoring the real wishes and needs of the public, and then it hit me: it is really all about US militarism and the unwillingness of the either of the two political parties to admit honestly to to American people how much they are being gouged to allow the US government and its corporate owners to continue in their attempt to control the world.

~snip~

The US currently spends almost as much on its military and on paying for current and past wars in terms of interest on war debt and care for wounded and aging soldiers as the entire rest of the world spends on arms and war. Approximately $1.3 trillion gets spent each year in taxpayer's dollars and in more borrowed funds (50 cents of every federal tax dollar goes to pay for the US military, the intelligence apparatus, veterans' benefits and other related military costs). It is simply ludicrous, given this situation, to imagine that the US can significantly reduce its budget deficit either by raising taxes or by cutting social spending.

Think of it this way. The US is currently running a $1.3 trillion deficit (that is federal spending less tax revenue). That deficit, significantly one must note, almost exactly matches the amount that is being spent annually on the US military, and on military/intelligence-related activities...