That was our president today and I couldn’t have been prouder. Unflinching, reversing the muddled message of last week, once again regaining the moral authority of why we fight. That there are “just wars,” of which I’ve always believed Afghanistan is one. Today’s speech unraveling last week’s tangled rhetorical mess that had Pres. Obama talking about 30,000 more troops in Afghanistan, which I remain against, while simultaneously talking about a draw down by July 2011, which came off cravenly political, while ignoring the importance of why we’re in Afghanistan, which is in large part humanitarian, and the genesis of what brought us there. 9/11. Even if our strategic interests have broadened considerably, with Pakistan the real danger point today.
But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism – it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.
I raise this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter the cause. At times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world’s sole military superpower.
… In some countries, the failure to uphold human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are Western principles, foreign to local cultures or stages of a nation’s development. And within America, there has long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists – a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values.
I reject this choice. I believe that peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely or worship as they please; choose their own leaders or assemble without fear. Pent up grievances fester, and the suppression of tribal and religious identity can lead to violence. We also know that the opposite is true. Only when Europe became free did it finally find peace. America has never fought a war against a democracy, and our closest friends are governments that protect the rights of their citizens. No matter how callously defined, neither America’s interests – nor the world’s –are served by the denial of human aspirations.
… So let us reach for the world that ought to be – that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. Somewhere today, in the here and now, a soldier sees he’s outgunned but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still takes the time to teach her child, who believes that a cruel world still has a place for his dreams.
Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and still strive for justice. We can admit the intractability of depravation, and still strive for dignity. We can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that – for that is the story of human progress; that is the hope of all the world; and at this moment of challenge, that must be our work here on Earth.
I couldn’t help but think of Neda of Iran, if she’d lived, but also those like her, when Obama spoke about “a young protester awaits the brutality of her government,” and what the Iran regime continues to do to its people today.
It’s impossible to know why his Afghanistan strategy speech tried to escalate while talking about withdrawal, except that somehow the conflicts within Pres. Obama made it on paper, as no one is pleased about what Bush-Cheney left in their wake. The problem was what Obama said didn’t make any sense, as was illustrated by Clinton, Gates and even Jones having to do damage control, not only because Karzai and the Pakistanis were shaken by what he said, but because the reality is we will not be leaving Afghanistan anywhere close to 2011. That allowing the humanitarian reality in Afghanistan to turn into a slaughter, not only between tribes and Afghanis, but the desperate plight of women and girls that would be even worse, because of our invasion and subsequent neglect while Bush preemptively invaded Iraq. The United States, starting under Ronald Reagan, has caused a good deal of the problems in this country. We have a moral obligation to do what we can to make amends, before we leave, which I believe is at least five years down the road (and have said so on many occasions, regardless of the unpopularity of my position, which has never wavered).
The speech today begins a righting of what went terribly wrong on Obama’s Afghanistan strategy speech. The tone and content was pitch perfect, including the bravery of taking on whether he deserves the Nobel or not.
Picture above from Huffington Post.
Comments are open.
Baa, baaa. Obama is a buffoon. Peace
Thank you Taylor. I didn’t want to listen to him this morning. I will after reading your piece.
“which I believe is at least five years down the road (and have said so on many occasions, regardless of the unpopularity of my position, which has never wavered).”
My guess is that you haven’t wavered on this is that you recognize reality. 2 plus 2 is always going to be 4. That is what was so cynical about Obama’s rhetoric during the campaign. He knew what was not going to be possible and he kept selling it anyway. Obama wasn’t going to be bringing the troops home as quickly as he led his gullible followers to believe. Not because he didn’t want to but because world circumstances that impact the United States directly and with immediacy wouldn’t allow it. He knew it then as he knows it now.
Imhotep
I don’t think buffoons make sounds like sheep. They look to herd sheep; but buffoons don’t do it by making sheep noises. Think Glenn Beck, Limbaugh, etc.
That said I found a interesting site you might like to check in from time to time. It doesn’t seem very avtive – but I liked what I saw:
http://privatebuffoon.blogspot.com/2009/09/what-sounds-like-fun-story-that-i.html
Private Buffoon
Oh! a private buffoon is a light-hearted loon, If you listen to popular rumour; From the morn to the night he’s so joyous and bright, And he bubbles with wit and good humour! He’s so quaint and so terse, both in prose and in verse; Yet though people forgive his transgression, There are one or two rules that all family fools Must observe, if they love their profession. [Yeomen of the Guard, Gilbert & Sullivan]
I don’t usually engage with Imhotep,though many times I have wanted to ask why he ends his flame throwing with the word peace.
The speech Obama gave this morning in Oslo was the one I wanted him to give last week on Afganistan.Was it just last week?
He gave us his world view with all of it’s nuances,he gave us the limitations of his moral views on war and what he believes the core message is of all the great faiths.He spoke of peaceful men who had come before him King,Mandela and Gandi but he explained the limitations of their beliefs when it came to defending a country and it’s people.
He told his audience of Europeans that he was not apologizing for the US being the indespensible country that also kept them safe while they carped at us.He revealed himself to be a pragmatist as Commander in Chief not an idealist. Now we know where he stands.He gave us insight into his deliberations leading up to his decisions on Afganistan.It was a really good speech.
My only question is why he trusted his European audience more than he trusts his US audiences to get the nuances. That might say more about us than it does about him.
9/11 was eight years ago. Afghanistan did not attack us and is not a direct threat to us today. Ordering 30,000+ more troops into Afghanistan is not morally justified. Obama’s acceptance speech coupled with his actions is a mockery of the principles behind the Nobel Peace Prize.
Only Obama can talk war, but then accept the Nobel Peace prize. With that said, I think that Afghanistan is a threat to peace, not just of the US, but of the world.
Afghanistan was a staging area for Islamic terrorists. It still is. Therefore, IT IS a direct threat to other countries.
Present evidence that Afghanistan is a staging area for Islamic terrorists that are currently a direct threat to the US. If you cannot then you’re just going by what some people say. Some people said Iraq was a direct threat because Hussein had WMDs. I didn’t believe them either.
But at least Bush never was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize.
What everyone, including the people I’m hearing from via emails, are neglecting to mention is that we are primarily engaged in a nation building project in Afghanistan. No one wants to say it, but that’s a very big part of what we’re doing.
Thank you Taylor. A lot of people seem to forget the world wide entreaties to help Afghanistan misery at the hands of the Taliban – pre-9/11 (1990′s). Remember the dread of coming winter, starvation, brutality and civic, religious and cultural destruction at the hands of the Taliban?
In my opinion, Obama’s speech in Oslo was for consumption by the US electorate – not Europeans or the Nobel audience. They didn’t seem to like it.
But take that a step further, djjl. What segment of the US electorate? The answer tells a tale.
There is no such thing as a “just war.” No war is a “just war.” Unfortuantely, Obama, and everybody on the Right who just looovveedd his speech in Oslo today, just do not get that. Self-defense can be “just” but never war. Wars are fought to rearrange the deck chairs. To exert one’s will over another’s by force. The evil that Obama sees in the world is his own image in the mirror looking back at him. Peace
i found his speech to be his best yet rivaling jfk oratory. this one really resonated with me strongly. his theme on just war, reference to nazism and al queda was interesting. this is one that will be read and watched by historians in the yrs ahead.
Yes, there is such a thing as a “just war.” All you need to do is think.
djjl, an example of a “just war.” Just one example will do. Not an example of someone defending themselves after a war has been started by someone else. Rather a war that was begun by someone for a justifiable reason. Here’s a hint, World War II is not a legitimate example. That war was begun by Hitler. Peace
texan4hillary, then you agree with Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich and Glenn Beck among other right wing warmongers. If those folks agreed with me I would hang my head in shame. But, you are certainly entitled to your opinion and the company you keep. Peace
You’ve made the point, Imhotep. WWII is a perfect example of a “just war.” You really seem to be wanting to talk about the pre-emptive war as initiated by Bush. Not at all the same thing.
THINK
yep thats right! im a right wing govt hating nutjob who loooves me some war! oh please.
Obama’s Afghanistan war is not a “just war.” What a sight to see any Democrats buying that line at all. It’s a Bush line and that’s why right wingers praised Obama’s speech, which was nothing but a prettied-up version of the same old fearmongering and warmongering that a couple of years ago Democrats condemned.
Afghanistan never attacked us, poses less threat to us than some other countries right now, and 9/11 was 8 years ago.
And sending 30,000 military troops into a nation is not nation building, it’s war.
30,000+ troops is guns and bombs and killing. Nation building is money and energy being spent in an entirely different way.
Zaldonis
How does nation building occur? What is involved?
Try googling “just war” and considering any number of definitions/explanations.
Here, I’ll give you the google link for “just war”
http://www.google.com/search?q=just+war&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1753/
Nation building
One of many that all acknowledge military necessity.
djjl, your “just war” ‘google’ is talking about self-defense and not, as you so wisely recognized, pre-emption. Which is why the Catholic Church would not support either bush’s illegal invasion of Afghanistan or of Iraq. Israel is a strong supporter of the “just pre-emptive war” doctrine which flies in the face of all ethics, morality and international law. It was Moshe Dayan who sold this illegitimate concept to Golda Meir which allowed her to start the Six Day War in 1967 and steal Jerusalem and the West Bank. Baby bush was sold this same illegal concept by Cheney (a devout Zionist) and the neo-cons (all devout Zionists) to justify invading Afghanistan and Iraq. For Obama to not only continue, but to expand, these illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan makes him no better, ethically, than bush or Cheney. They are all war criminals. Which is why Obama wants us to “look forward and not backwards.” Peace
Imhotep
We’re in Afghanastan – we were BEFORE Obama was elected. It is immoral to walk out a leave it broken. Then we’ll be back to the 1990′s and discussing the coming bitter winter and the hundreds of thousands of Afghans facing starvation because the US walked out of a nation the US had further torn down. A police force is necessary to bring a civic credibility to the country. It just isn’t as easy as we’d like. Kind of like Colin Powell told Bush “you break it, you own it” and with that goes all the moral imperatives to fix what you broke. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1844476
I know what a just war is about – which is why WWII was a perfect example of a just war. Read your comments at Imhotep says:10 December 2009 at 7:27 pm which perfectly illustrate you didn’t know what a just war meant.
I agree about Cheney/Bush/Gonzalez, etc.
Imhotep
Just in case you haven’t been here long enough to know wome of our individual history about who we supported, support, etc; here’s my 2 cents:
I was a Hillary Clinton supporter.
I was very skeptical of Obama, his experience, his credentials, his political history, his cynicism, and his willingness to play REALLY dirty (see Donnie McClurkin as a little starter).
I NEVER thought he was who he portrayed himself to be and there was NO evidence to back up that portrayal.
I am terribly disappointed in his “leadership” at this point.
I want him to succeed on behalf opf the American people – not on behalf of Wall Street, Black Water, Big Pharma, the medical industrial complex or the military industrial complex.
I hope for a truly successful Presidency. I think he has the talent to do it – just not sure he wanted to be POTUS for the truly right reasons. He’s going to have to develop a spine, an unwavering commitment to the well being of the American Main Street, and a moral compass that he is committed to follow. I pray everyday that he will.
It’s just that I don’t see every single comment uttered by Obma or every action taken as being evidence of evil and or immorality.
WWII was a just war if, and only if, “we the people” agreed that it was a just war. Hitler started WWII in September, 1939 when he invaded Poland. Until December, 1941, “we the people” of these United States had declared our neutrality concerning Hitler’s war in Europe. That is a fact. On December 7, 1941 the Japanese attacked our naval base at Pearl Harbor. Hawaii was a US territory and not a part of the USA. On December 8, 1941 the USA declared war on Japan. That is a fact. Three days later (December 11, 1941), while the country was in a war fever, the USA declared war on the axis powers. Had Pearl Harbor not been attacked, the United States would never have entered WWII. Why Japan attacked the USA is well documented. Why US intelligence failed so miserably in detecting that an attack was imminent is an open question. The United States seems to show a pattern of these intelligence breakdowns just before we go to war with people. Coincidence? If the reason for entering a war is illegitimate than that war is no longer a “just war.” That is a fact according to your source. Peace
Now to your point about Obama. Obama is not a stupid man. Every utterance that he makes is carefully calculated. He has two audiences to address when he speaks. One is international and one is domestic. His international audience is far more skilled at interpreting the nuisance of his words than is his domestic audience. There are lots of reasons for that, some educational and some historic. When one is able to hear his words from an international perspective than one can see Obama’s, P.T. Barnum-like domestic quality. What makes him immoral and evil (a very harsh word) is the fact that he is fully aware that he is fooling his countrymen, and women, into believing one thing when he knows that the opposite thing is actually true. Obama is a huckster. But, not a very good huckster because his patter is wearing thin and he has feet of clay. Peace