SYNDICATED COLUMN: The Fog of Obama

Why Can’t Obama See His Wars Are Unwinnable?

Robert McNamara, one of the “best and the brightest” technocrats behind the escalation of the Vietnam War, eventually came to regret his actions. But his public contrition, which included a book and a series of interviews for the documentary “The Fog of War,” were greeted with derision.

“Mr. McNamara must not escape the lasting moral condemnation of his countrymen,” editorialized The New York Times in 1995. “Surely he must in every quiet and prosperous moment hear the ceaseless whispers of those poor boys in the infantry, dying in the tall grass, platoon by platoon, for no purpose. What he took from them cannot be repaid by prime-time apology and stale tears, three decades late.”

McNamara’s change of heart came 58,000 American and 2,000,000 Vietnamese lives too late. If the dead could speak, surely they would ask: why couldn’t you see then what you understand so clearly now? Why didn’t you listen to the millions of experts, journalists and ordinary Americans who knew that death and defeat would be the only outcome?

Though Errol Morris’ film served as ipso facto indictment, its title was yet a kind of justification. There is no “fog of war.” There is only hubris, stubbornness, and the psychological compartmentalization that allows a man to sign papers that will lead others to die before going home to play with his children.

McNamara is dead. Barack Obama is his successor.

Some call McNamara’s life tragic. Tragedy-inducing is closer to the truth. Yes, he suffered guilt in his later years. “He wore the expression of a haunted man,” wrote the author of his Times obit. “He could be seen in the streets of Washington—stooped, his shirttail flapping in the wind—walking to and from his office a few blocks from the White House, wearing frayed running shoes and a thousand-yard stare.” But the men and women and boys and girls blown up by bombs and mines and impaled by bullets and maimed in countless ways deserve more vengeance than a pair of ratty Nikes. Neither McNamara nor LBJ nor the millions of Americans who were for the war merit understanding, much less sympathy.

Now Obama is following the same doomed journey.

“We must try to put ourselves inside their skin and look at us through their eyes,” McNamara warned long after the fact, speaking of “America’s enemies” but really just about people—people who live in other countries. People whose countries possess reserves of natural gas (Vietnam) or oil (Iraq) or are situated between energy reserves and deep-sea ports where oil tankers dock (Afghanistan and Pakistan).

Why can’t President Obama imagine himself living in a poor village in Pakistan? Why can’t he feel the anger and contempt felt by Pakistanis who hear pilotless drone planes buzzing overhead, firing missiles willy-nilly at civilians and guerilla fighters alike, dispatched by a distant enemy too cowardly to put live soldiers and pilots in harm’s way?

“We burned to death 100,000 Japanese civilians in Tokyo—men, women and children,” McNamara said. “LeMay said, ‘If we’d lost the war, we’d all have been prosecuted as war criminals.’ And I think he’s right. He—and I’d say I—were behaving as war criminals.” 900,000 Japanese civilians died in all.

At least Japan started the war. What of Afghanistan and Iraq, where approximately 2,000,000 civilians have been killed by U.S. forces? Neither country attacked us. Shouldn’t Bush, Rumsfeld and the rest be prosecuted as war criminals? Why not Obama? After all, Obama is leaving 50,000 troops in Iraq after the war there is supposedly coming to an end. He’s escalating the unjustifiable, unwinnable tragedy in Afghanistan—there are 68,000 U.S. troops there now, probably going up to 100,000 by next year—while spreading the conflict into Pakistan.

“Make no mistake, the international community is not winning in Afghanistan,” concluded the Atlantic Council in 2008. Things have only gotten worse as U.S. troop presence has increased: more violence, more drugs, less reconstruction.

Like McNamara, Obama doesn’t understand a basic truth: you can’t successfully manage an inherently doomed premise. Colonialism is dead. Occupiers will never enjoy peace. Neither the Afghans nor the Iraqis nor the Pakistanis will rest until we withdraw our forces. The only success we will find is in accepting defeat sooner rather than later.

“What went wrong [in Vietnam] was a basic misunderstanding or misevaluation of the threat to our security represented by the North Vietnamese,” McNamara said in his Berkeley oral history.” Today’s domino theory is Bush’s (now Obama’s) clash of civilizations, the argument that unless we fight them “there” we will have to fight them here. Afghanistan and Iraq don’t present security threats to the United States. The presence of U.S. troops and drone planes, on the other hand…

In fairness to McNamara, it only took two years for him to call to an end of the bombing of North Vietnam. By 1966 he was advising LBJ to start pulling back. But, like a gambler trying to recoup and justify his losses, the president kept doubling down. “We didn’t know our opposition,” concluded McNamara. “So the first lesson is know your opponents. I want to suggest to you that we don’t know our potential opponents today.”

Actually, it’s worse than that. Then, like now, we don’t have opponents. We create them.

COPYRIGHT 2009 TED RALL

Financial Times Plagiarizes Ted Rall

You don’t have to be a regular reader to know that I’ve been depicting Barack Obama in Hello Kitty regalia for about one year: flags, banners, you name it. Most recently, I did an Obamaman cartoon that depicts our lame superhero president wearing a Hello Kitty logo on his chest.

Now a sharp-eyed FOR points out that an illustrator for the Financial Times has rather brazenly ripped off my meme.

Usually, these things are less than cut and dry. But it’s pretty hard to believe that any illustrator could be unaware of my use of the Hello Kitty imagery to define Obama–it ain’t as branded as Generalissimo El Busho yet, but come on. This one fails the smell test.

Suffice it to say that, if this sort of thing annoys you, it is possible to email the Financial Times a letter to the editor.

SYNDICATED COLUMN: Sorry, Mr. Bush

The Poor Get Poorer, Presidents Get Worse

I miss Bush.

Stop the presses and shut off the RSS feeds: the bashiest of the Bush-bashers is starting to appreciate the Exile of Crawford.

I haven’t forgiven George W. Bush for stealing two elections, starting two wars, bankrupting the treasury and doing his damnedest to turn the U.S. into a fascist state. He deserves one of hell’s hottest picnic spots for refusing to lift a finger to bring the 9/11 murderers to justice. Bush was stupid. He was vicious. He should be in prison.

He was the worst president the U.S. had ever had. Until this one.

On major issues and a lot of minor ones, Obama is the same as or worse than Bush. But Bush had an opposition to contend with. Obama has a compliant Democratic Congress. Lulled to somnolent apathy by Obama’s charming manners, mastery of English (and yes, the color of his skin), leftist activists and journalists have been reduced to quiet disappointment, mild grumbling and unaccountable patience.

I don’t care about window dressing. Sure, it’s nice that Obama is intelligent. But policies matter—not charm. And Obama’s policies are at least as bad as Bush’s.

Guantánamo was but the beginning of Obama’s betrayals. First he ordered the camp closed—not immediately but in a year. Now he’s expanding the U.S. concentration camp at Bagram—where 600 innocent men and children are being tortured—so he can send the 245 Gitmo prisoners there. In the Bush era, Gitmo POWs received legal representation. Obama has ordered that the POWs sent to Bagram not be allowed to see a lawyer.

You saw the headline: “OBAMA BANS TORTURE.” But it was a lie. Obama’s CIA director told Congress that there’s a “review process that’s built into [Obama’s] executive order” that allows torture to continue. Leon Panetta said the Obama Administration will keep using at least 19 torture techniques against detainees. In addition, Team Obama will “look at those kinds of enhanced techniques to determine how effective they were or weren’t and whether any appropriate revisions need to be made as a result of that.”

As editorial boards of liberal newspaper tut-tut and the feds convene committees, the screams of the victims pierce the night.

Bush was the biggest spender in history, running up a $1.8 trillion deficit with wasteful wars and tax cuts. But next to Obama, Bush was a tightwad. Glamour Prez hasn’t been around six months, yet the Congressional Budget Office reports that he already has quadrupled the deficit by an extra $8.1 trillion. “The total debt held by the public [will] rise from 57 percent of GDP in 2009 to 82 percent (!) of GDP in 2019,” reports U.S. News & World Report.

Obama is sinking us into financial oblivion 72 times faster than Bush.

Where’d the money go? Mostly to insurance companies. Banks. Brokerage firms. Who used it to redecorate their offices and give themselves raises.

Against logic and history Obama claimed his bailout package would create jobs. Instead, unemployment has risen by 1.3 million. Has Obama’s plan saved a single homeowner from foreclosure? Reporters can’t any.

I liked Bush better. He wasted our money when the economy wasn’t quite as sucky. And he didn’t insult us by pretending to care. Come on, Barack, smirk! Truth in advertising!

I know: he’s a politician. Politicians break promises. As the presidential scholar Stephen Hess says: “There are some pledges that a candidate reverses when he becomes president because things look different. He knows things that he didn’t know then.”

“Some”? Obama hasn’t even tried to keep a single major promise. He hasn’t gotten rid of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” His ballyhooed “cap and trade” law on emissions is toothless. Remember Obama’s pledge to renegotiate NAFTA to strengthen environmental regulations? Forgotten.

In Obama’s case, “things look[ing] different” has meant giving in to entrenched dirtbags, like the spooks who read your emails and the entrenched Pentagon torturers who don’t want us to see photos that make Abu Ghraib look like child’s play.

(An official familiar with the photos in question tells me they include, among other atrocities, U.S. personnel sodomizing a child.)

Obama has done more damage than Bush. And no one’s stopping him. Which makes him worse.

Sorry, Mr. Bush. If I’d known what was coming, I would’ve been nicer.

COPYRIGHT 2009 TED RALL

New Animation Coming Soon

Coming soon: a new animation. This time, Obama gets headlines for doing good things. The devils, of course, are in the details.

SYNDICATED COLUMN: Half Healthcare, 100% Dead

Time for Obama to Get Serious

Half measures are boring.

That political reality derailed Bill Clinton’s 1993 healthcare reform plan. And it will likely unravel that of Barack Obama.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office finds that Obama’s plan, sponsored by Senators Chris Dodd and Ted Kennedy, “would reduce the number of uninsured only by a net 16 million people. Even if the bill became law, the budget office said, 36 million people would remain uninsured in 2017,” reported The New York Times. Yet it would cost at least $1 trillion over ten years.

Americans like Obama’s basic idea: “Seventy-two percent of those questioned [in the latest Times/CBS News poll] supported a government-administered insurance plan–something like Medicare for those under 65–that would compete for customers with private insurers. Twenty percent said they were opposed.” The support is broad. But it isn’t deep.

“Pay higher taxes for a healthcare plan that probably won’t help you personally, even if you’re uninsured” isn’t much of a sales pitch. No one is going to call their Congressman, much less march in the streets, to demand action for a half-measure–or, in this case, a quarter-measure. Without public pressure to push back against drug and insurance company lobbyists, nothing will change.

Like every mainstream Democrat since Jimmy Carter, Obama is a militant moderate, elevating triangulation and compromise-for-its-own-sake to the status of Holy Writ. But radical problems–and the state of healthcare in America surely qualifies–require radical solutions.

More than that, simplicity sells. French- or U.K.-style socialized medicine–everyone covered, every doctor’s visit free, every pill free, every doctor a government employee–might indeed cost three times more than Obama’s incomprehensibly vague, vaguely incomprehensible proposal. But it’s easy to understand. Moreover, as James D. Miller notes in his book “Game Theory at Work,” people crave certainty:

“What would you rather have: 1) $100,000 or 2) a 50 percent chance of getting $200,000 and a 50 percent chance of getting nothing? Both choices give you on average $100,000. The majority…would prefer the first choice: the sure thing. Most people dislike risk, which is why so many of us buy insurance.”

When we can afford it.

When citizens evaluate a political proposal, the first thing they ask themselves is: what’s in it for me? Thus the appeal of a gimmick like George W. Bush’s $300 tax rebate checks. No one seriously believed they would stimulate the economy. But hey, three hundred bucks is three hundred bucks.

Right out of the gate, Obama’s “public option” plan tells the public that there’s probably only one thing in it for them: higher taxes. Most Americans do have insurance. They don’t like their deny-deny-deny insurance companies, but there’s nothing for them in the Obama-Dodd-Kennedy proposal. Some Democrats have even floated the idea of taxing health benefits!

At least 47 million Americans have no insurance. And that number is going up fast. But the CBO says only one of out of four of people without insurance would be helped by Obama’s “public option.” The rest would pay higher taxes–and still remain uninsured. Why should they get excited about The Return of Hillarycare?

As president-elect, Obama said he planned to “keep [his] finger on the pulse” of the American people. “One of the worst things I think that could happen to a president is losing touch with what people are going through day to day,” he said. But it is painfully clear that “the bubble that exists around the president” has already enveloped him.

There is no true middle ground on healthcare. The most civilized and efficient approach, tried and tested by the rest of the industrialized world, is fully socialized medicine. Put the insurance vampires out of business. Cutting out the health profiteers and encouraging preventative care will save hundreds of billions of dollars a year.

Failing a comprehensive solution, let the free market reign. True, 20,000 Americans will continue to die each year due to lack of insurance. But private healthcare corporations will continue to invest in innovative treatments and medications. The city of Hartford will keep adding shiny new skyscrapers to its skyline–and our taxes won’t go even higher over this issue.

Obamacare offers the worst of both worlds–it would be expensive and inadequate.

COPYRIGHT 2009 TED RALL

July 2 in Seattle: Cartoonapalooza!

Come and meet some of the nation’s best editorial cartoonists–plus me–on Thursday, July 2 in Seattle. Tickets are $25. Show starts at 7:30 at Town Hall.

Cartoonapalooza features “Pulitzer Prize-winner Mike Peters, syndicated editorial cartoonist and creator of the popular cartoon strip, Mother Goose and Grimm; Jack Ohman, the Portland Oregonian’s much-honored cartoonist; provocative cutting-edge cartoonist and columnist Ted Rall; Mark Fiore, the leading pioneer in the new field of animated editorial cartoons; Signe Wilkinson of the Philadelphia Daily News, a Pulitzer Prize-winner and one of the nation’s top female cartoonists; Matt Bors, creator of Idiot Box and other alternative editorial cartoons, and me, David Horsey, two-time winner of the Pulitzer Prize.”

Many other top political cartoonists will be in the audience. All the cartoonists will be available for lingering and malingering after the show!

keyboard_arrow_up
css.php