The quicker you admit a mistake the better, right? My earlier post on Obama's speech was wrong. It wasn't B-, it's B+, maybe even A-. I got too hung up on the language, which I didn't care for. Its goodness lay in the signals it sent of a change in attitude toward the world and in American values. The "nonbelievers" line struck a chord. So did the "we are ready to lead once more." Subtle notes, but notes all the same.
And so, to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and we are ready to lead once more.
Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with the sturdy alliances and enduring convictions.
I'm correcting myself because of the news programs I watched, which selected some of these bits to suggest the revolution in our values that may be occurring. And from Jack Ross, who writes:
After Gaza, the last thing America can afford to do is bomb lots of Muslim civilians, and this has forced Obama and those around him to face facts about Afghanistan and avoid a potentially catastrophic escalation.
Too much tea leaf reading. Obama's choices with respect to Israel are extremely limited. He really cannot change US policy there. Ross is right in that he cannot embrace Israel's war too closely without losing the potential good will that so many Moslems feel towards him today. He will obviously want to work on that good will. But on the other hand he cannot betray his Israeli supporters. I suppose he will work to persuade the Israelis from embarrasing the US yet again, but we know that if they feel too pushed, they will strike back. When they do I doubt that Obama will be able to do much about it. Walt and Mearshimer know this. Basically, all that Walt can say is to not listen to Obama's new found neocon friends even though he must realize that if and when the lobby makes its push the US will have little choice but to obey.
Obama NOW, at this moment, has the political capital from the grass
roots of the land, to bypass AIPAC et all and speak directly to the American people, who will support a balanced hand in the middle east. He can do what Carter and W & M did with their much more limited power. He could, for example, announce to the world that he is taking the 3 billion annual dole to Israel and giving it all to the Palestinians to help them rebuild while Hillary is over there pushing
a peace pact negotiation. Will he do something like that? What then, do you suppose is the least he will do in the next three months?
He could at least have our UN team stop siding exclusively with Israel every time the Palestine issue comes up. The world too will work for Obama change.
well, if "you" (complacent imperialists, happy with genocide all over the world) are "once more ready to lead", then the rest-of-the-world (you know, the little people) will have to damn well make sure you don't get the opportunity to do so.
Posted by: citizen | January 21, 2009 at 12:07 AM
You're onto something. The #8 most important issue with the Citizen's Book on change.gov (now closed) was take the money away from Israel.
!!!
if the jewish press turn on obama, he will turn into carter. they made carter into a joke by the middle of his presidency. and they didn't have the power then that they do now.
Hundreds of tents set up in Egypt at Rafah crossing for Palestinian refugees; Israel promotes ethnic cleansing in Gaza:
http://www.uruknet.de/?p=m51038&hd=&size=1&l=e
I think Obama can compete with the whole jewish press from his
bully pulpit–8 years of stupid, useless war and trillions of dollars of
debt, and the internet, plus Katrina, 20 million illegal aliens, the real threat of a second depression–Carter did not have such items–
Obama remembers that Clinton blew it on the first day of his presidency with the Gays in the Military thing, something not at all central to his goals. The right ate him up on that (even though he was obviously correct).
Obams's priority is, as it should be, the economy. I don't see him using up any of his political capital on Israel/Palestine, at least not now.
That said, he is bright and he comes out of both the academic community and the African American community, both generally pro-Palestinian. I cannot believe that he doesn't realize that supporting Israel hurts our country, that intrancegent US support for Israel is dooming the two state option, the only option that is both moral and will allow Israel to survive, both democratic and Jewish.
So my gut sense is he is on our side on all this but he isn't going to waste any political capital on it. Why have AIPAC on your ass when most Americans are more concerned with the financial crisis?
inauguration benediction closer:
Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when
black will not be asked to get in back,
when brown can stick around…
when yellow will be mellow…
when the red man can get ahead, man;
and when white will embrace what is right.
Anyone know if this supplement to Obama's speech is in MSM?
Gaza invasion was powered by US taxpayer; let me count the ways, starting with the fact the US buys Israel the gas to power its jets and tanks, etc:
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/01/16/gaza_invasion/
Gravel: Obama will not go the distance
Wed, 21 Jan 2009 07:21:42 GMT
Former US Democratic presidential candidate Mike Gravel says Barack Obama will not assert the leadership needed to stabilize the Mideast.
"The American presidency to the White House and the Congress are not prepared to step up to the table and assert its leadership role in the Middle East," the influential former senator from Alaska said in an exclusive interview with Press TV.
Gravel said "a proper and fair resolve to the Palestinian-Israeli problem" is not going to happen during the four-year Obama term in office.
"They are just not going to do it. They are not going to do it during Obama's reign," he said.
Gravel blamed special interest groups supporting Israel for getting in the way of peace, suggesting that the Israeli lobby in America to be an obstacle in the way of Obama.
The 78 year-old, who ran for the Democratic nomination against Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential campaign, said one of the ways to resolve Middle East crises would be to develop close relations with Iran.
"One of the keys to solving that problem is, of course, bringing Iran into the picture and recognizing that if we developed an understanding — a proper relationship with Iran — they would be the key to helping with Hamas and Hezbollah on the Palestinian side," Gravel added.
The new president of the United States has promised to do his best in attempting to tackle foreign policy issues from his first full day in office on Wednesday.
Other than naming former senator George J. Mitchell (D-Maine) as his Middle East envoy, Obama plans to convene the National Security Council to launch a reassessment of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.
Before his inauguration, Obama caused global disappointment by refraining from commenting on the Israeli military operations against the populated Gaza Strip.
Protesters gathered at Obama's transition office in Washington DC early in January to demand him to do more.
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has also commented on the issue of Barack Obama entering office.
"We believe Obama should take the first honest step to defy the past eight years of US polices and rectify these policies," the Iranian diplomat said Monday.
"He should recognize the new Middle East," he said.
The United States has been subject to severe criticism in the Middle East for the support it lends to Israel, for its war on terror and for its pursuit of pressure policies.
I'm not sure under what spell americans are by now enthralled because all this mere monkey can see in that "benediction" is a list of complains in the form of bad poetry.
I cannot understand the meaning of "yellow be mellow" other than ignorance (if they think asians will ever care to feel guilty about blacks they are in wittyesque insanity territory), but since he was at it – bad poetry, that is – why not throw in some "when jew will be few" and let us have a laugh?
Anyway as the amount of trash over Washington's lawns is a sure indication of the quality of the current crop of americans, I guess "white will embrace flight" might have if not a benediction effect at least a prophetic one.
Grade inflation is at work in the rating of Obama's speech.
I think he flunked when he basically declared war on Muslims/Arabs/Venezuelans by saying "Each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries". In other words, the declared enemies of the US are all foreign oil producers.
But it took a little African-American kid on the morning news to pick up on another thing wrong with the speech. When asked by the reporter what he would have liked Obama to say, the kid replied sagely that he would have wished him to say "God bless the world" instead of just "God bless America".
So the speech falls squarely in the good ole American tradition of jingoism and exceptionalism. Just delivered by a more attractive interlocuter than in past years.