The worse thing about the Obama presidency is that he has decieved so many Americans. That's the best thing too, because thanks to the President, I have been released from the idea that the plurality of Americans know or care about what this government does. The upside of that is that I can concentrate on more ethical pursuits. The downside is that to the same extent, I leave the field open to the sort of rabble who elect the skunks that get elected. My hope is that the edifice I can build in my ethical pursuits can withstand the idiocy that is bound to follow the skunks & rabble. Yes, I can hope.
I am heartened by Obama's simplistic foreign policy. It lacks the conviction and force of the previous president who was fortunate enough to have common sense on his side, as well as public sentiment. I still say that the greatest thing that GWBush did was to pull the American miliatary out of the closet into the light of true international coalitions to rid the world of real bad guys. Unfortunately, he pulled some whips and chains out of that closet too, and guess whose hands they fell into. Somebody, it turns out, who doesn't mind using them at all.
I'm talking about drone warfare, which is rather the worst kind of deniable cluster bombing. The deniability of state on state warfare is the perfidy that has removed all of the valor from our current conflicts. We don't really know who the enemy is in Pakistan and the President doesn't seem to care to tell us. He backbites while withdrawing support for his own war, promising to remove troops whenever, no matter what circumstances and replace them with machines. The president sees war as a nasty business, always and everywhere. So he prosecutes it mechanically.
Glenn Greenwald exposes the hypocrisy. His essay must be written for people motivated by the notion that hypocrisy is the greatest crime - those who look for nothing more than that. I cannot believe that he is a Pacifist, but anyway. The facts are in: Drones terrorize. Do you suppose the Democrats will turn against war if Romney wins?
Essentially, the Guardian UK is quite likely to be the sort of publication that rants against collateral damage, and ultimately that is what the their beef is. Obama broke their hearts when he 'murdered innocent civilians', you know the sort of thing demon Republicans are supposed to be all about. And so their lot will weep bitter tears as they vote him in again.
Here's the thing of course. Do you know how many people died at Abu Graibh? None. If I recall correctly a prisoner was forced to wear women's underwear on his head. Maybe he even got bit by a dog. Do you think Obama will face the truth of his collateral damage? I don't.