Subscribe

Popularise CC

Join News Letter

Read CC In Your
Own Language

CC Malayalam

Editor's Picks

Mumbai Terror

Financial Crisis

Iraq

AfPak War

Peak Oil

Alternative Energy

Climate Change

US Imperialism

US Elections

Palestine

Latin America

Communalism

Gender/Feminism

Dalit

Globalisation

Humanrights

Economy

India-pakistan

Kashmir

Environment

Book Review

Gujarat Pogrom

WSF

Arts/Culture

India Elections

Archives

Links

Submission Policy

About CC

Disclaimer

Fair Use Notice

Contact Us

Subscribe To Our
News Letter

Name: E-mail:

Printer Friendly Version

Trying To Win With A Lousy Hand

By Case Wagenvoord

13 November, 2009
Countercurrents.org

As Obama dithers in order to give his shrinking liberal base the impression that he’s really agonizing over a decision that’s already been made for him over escalating the war in Afghanistan, the right is trotting out the old argument to explain how we “lost” Vietnam.

The first flaw, here, is that you can’t lose something that was never yours to begin with. But then, a core delusion of imperial thinking is that the United States owns the world. Therefore, any country that doesn’t toe the line is “lost.”

According to the right, we lost Vietnam because the American people lost their will, and this loss of will was aided and abetted by a liberal press, all of which demoralized our citizen army that lost its stomach for a good fight.

The truth is that in a democratic society an administration cannot pursue a war once popular support is lost. That is the nature of a democracy.

However, we must be cautious before we draw a parallel between Afghanistan and Vietnam. There are some crucial differences. Back in the sixties we were still a democracy with a functioning and independent press that wasn’t embedded in Pentagon briefing rooms. This is no longer the case. Back then, we had a citizen army that had to believe in what it was fighting for. Alas, no more. A professional army fights because it is paid to do so.

Obama will escalate Afghanistan for two reasons. First, he is committed to the long war, also known as the Eternal War of the Empty Policy. Second, any democratic administration, no matter how liberal, lives in fear of the right’s pit bulls, and instead of tearing their throats out it moves as quietly and cautiously as possible less it awakens the sleeping dogs. The pack needs its wars and aggression so it can live out its macho fantasies of unbridled power.

I understand Obama is a poker player. It would be nice if he took the lessons he’s learned at the table and carried them into his policy making. With Afghanistan, he is like the player six cards into a game of seven-card stud who stays in a game with a jack-high hand even though his opponent across the table has two aces showing. A basic rule of poker is you don’t stay in a game with a bad hand simply because you have money in the pot.

Case Wagenvoord blogs at http://belacquajones.blogspot.com. He welcomes comments at [email protected].



Leave A Comment
&
Share Your Insights

Comment Policy

Fair Use Notice


 

Share This Article



Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands of people more. You just share it on your favourite social networking site. You can also email the article from here.



Disclaimer

 

Subscribe

Feed Burner

Twitter

Face Book

CC on Mobile

Editor's Picks

 

Search Our Archive

 



Our Site

Web