Which Side Are You On?

by Peter Deccy

Yesterday’s New York Times had a troubling story of a 52 minute battle between a company of US troops and two Afghan soldiers who had lived and fought alongside the Americans. The account made clear these were two extremely well trained Afghan soldiers. Two Americans and the two Afghan soldiers were killed in yet another so-called ‘green on blue’ attack.

This year, 22 US, NATO and other coalition troops have been killed by men in Afghan uniform.

It’s worth noting that contrary to the common myth that these attacks are conducted by Taliban infiltrators, it appears that many of the attacks are actually caused by the intense and growing hatred many Afghan soldiers have for the foreign occupation of their country.

It’s a reminder how post traumatic stress inflicts the people of Afghanistan, a country that has endured over 30 years of war, to a far larger degree than we are perhaps aware. At what point is the cost of unending US and NATO military operations too high?

It also begs the question, will the insurgency ever end as long as foreign troops occupy Afghanistan? What have the best efforts and tremendous sacrifices made by our troops, and the hundreds of billions of dollars spent, actually accomplished in the longest war in America’s history?

“I think we’d both say that what we found is that the Taliban is stronger,” Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein told CNN having just returned from a fact-finding trip to Afghanistan with Republican Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan.

The insurgency grows stronger, along with the ill-will and mistrust of our Afghan allies, fueled by images of US military personnel urinating on dead Taliban fighters, the murder of 16 Afghan civilians by a US soldier and Koran burnings.

The US and NATO strategy in Afghanistan is failing, and will continue to fail, as long as foreign troops occupy the country. How can the Obama administration justify keeping 20,000 to 30,000 troops in Afghanistan for another 12 years while many of our allies are preparing an earlier than planned exit?

At the NATO summit in Chicago, Peace Action and our allies in the peace and justice movement will press the question and demand our troops return home.

A few Peace Action media hits around the Obama visit to Afghanistan and Bin Laden anniversary

Peace Action West’s Political Director Rebecca Griffin’s excellent op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle focused on public opinion and opportunities to end the war while stressing diplomacy, political and economic development support for Afghanistan.

Field Director Judith Le Blanc’s response to the president’s speech from Kabul addressed the cost of the war to both the Afghan and U.S. people (watch for this piece, it could show up in your local paper, as it is being distributed nationally by the Oregon Peace Institute’s op-ed service, and it was also published with a different headline on Counterpunch).

Executive Director Kevin Martin and U.S. Labor Against the War’s Michael Eisenscher called for the troops to come home now, not at the end of 2014 or worse, 2024, in an essay on Common Dreams.

Martin again, on Chicago public radio station WBEZ’s excellent Worldview program yesterday, spoke of the president’s trip in the context of the public’s clear support for ending the war rapidly, upcoming congressional action on Afghanistan, and the NATO Summit in Chicago later this month (my segment is from yesterday, 5.2.12, and begins 16 minutes into the program, lasts about 22 minutes, with two good callers!)

Don’t go to war with Iran: Cleveland Peace Action’s Norman Robbins published by the Cleveland Plain Dealer

Published: Friday, March 30, 2012, 10:52 AM     Updated: Friday, March 30, 2012, 11:26 AM

 By Plain Dealer guest columnist 

View full sizeMichael Kamber, The New York TimesU.S. soldiers salute as flag bearers exit during a symbolic flag-lowering ceremony marking the end to U.S. military involvement in Iraq, in Baghdad, Dec. 15, 2011.

As the late Barbara Tuchman, the eminent historian, explained in “The March of Folly,” certain types of belief have consistently led to national disasters. These include “not allowing oneself to be deflected by the facts,” self-imprisonment in the “we-have-no-alternative argument,” and “underestimation of the opponent.” Are these themes operative with respect to war with Iran, as they were in the run-up to the disastrous Iraq war?

Just prior to the Iraq war, most Americans were convinced by press and government accounts that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that it was ready to use, even though U.N. inspectors were reporting negative findings. Today, most Americans believe Iran is building a nuclear weapon, even though American and Israeli intelligence report that Iran has not yet decided to do so.

Enrichment of uranium (at levels useful only for energy) and development of missiles (necessary for defense) are certainly elements of nuclear “capability,” but most experts believe Iran would need one to two years to make a single effective bomb if and when it decided to go ahead. For what it’s worth, Iran’s supreme religious leader has staked his reputation on a fatwa condemning nuclear weapons.

Bombing Iranian nuclear facilities because, at some time in the future, Iran may decide to build nuclear weapons, is a flagrant violation of international law.

A major difference from the Iraq war run-up is that so many military leaders have spoken out against war. Most former or present Israeli military and intelligence leaders oppose an attack, one or more pointing out that: Iran is not an “existential threat” to Israel; an attack would push Iran to actually develop a nuclear weapon; the attack would only delay such development by one to three years; and the repercussions could be disastrous.

Many American military leaders agree, adding that an Israeli attack could drag the United States into a bloody and protracted war with a country three times the size of Iraq that has already united once against a powerful aggressor (Iraq). And polls show that Americans have seen enough death, injury and psychological damage to our troops to be more careful about putting them in harm’s way once more.

Again, unlike the Iraq war run-up, Americans already feel the pain of conflict with Iran in escalating gasoline prices. Neither domestic oil production nor conservation would greatly impact world oil prices. Three-fourths of our gasoline costs are directly related to global oil prices, which respond dramatically to uncertainty. Threats of an attack on Iran, and Iran’s counterthreat to close off Persian Gulf oil shipments, increase this uncertainty. If war breaks out, gasoline prices could easily double, with major damage to our economy.

It is unconscionable that otherwise progressive American politicians, who genuinely care about Americans who are struggling, so dutifully line up to vote against the interests of these Americans when it comes to laws and resolutions that could lead to a draining war with Iran.

Lastly comes the “no-alternative-to-war” argument, which claims that neither sanctions nor diplomacy will work. For sure, they won’t work if we continue to demand that Iran cannot enrich uranium even to the low levels necessary for nuclear power (about 17 times less than necessary for a bomb). Anyone who knows Iran’s sad historical experience with colonial powers will understand why Iran’s insistence on the right to enrich uranium has become a national rallying point. That domestic opinion enables Iran to withstand “crippling” sanctions, and to stall negotiations.

Demanding indefinite cessation of any enrichment, as in current Senate and House resolutions, is an absolute deal-breaker.

If we really want to prevent Iran from building a bomb, a “don’t trust, but verify” approach has a far greater chance of success than military action, which could backfire and do just the opposite. Unfortunately, Americans have seen little coverage of proposals by arms control experts that allow Iran to enrich uranium to low levels for nuclear power and under strict controls, in exchange for more intrusive inspections and transparency.

So why aren’t we pursuing this important diplomatic option instead of our March of Folly? If our best military minds tell us an attack on Iran will solve nothing and make things worse, why isn’t the majority of Congress paying attention? Is their fear of offending powerful interests greater than their commitment to America’s chances for peace and prosperity?

Norman Robbins is an emeritus professor at Case Western Reserve University and Iran consultant to Cleveland Peace Action.

2012: Out Now

by Peter Deccy, Peace Action

U.S. military leaders are still pressing to keep the bulk of US troops in Afghanistan until 2014, removing only the remaining 22,000 “surge” forces President Obama promised would be withdrawn this summer. That will leave over 68,000 US troops in Afghanistan. For what? Is there any reason to believe that two more years of fighting will make us safer? Will we look back and declare another two years of war was worth the cost of hundreds of billions of dollars and the horrific loss of life? Not likely.

Peace Action is working to recruit co-sponsors for H.R. 780 – the Responsible End to the War in Afghanistan Act, introduced by Representative Barbara Lee (D-CA). You can help build the demand by calling your Representative today at 202-224-3121 and asking her or him to co-sponsor the Lee bill.

After meeting with U.S. Defense Secretary Panetta earlier this month, Afghanistan’s President Hamid Karzai said, “Afghanistan is ready right now to take all security responsibilities completely.” A bold assertion to be sure, and one that should be put to the test as an alternative to a war strategy that is costing too many civilian lives, poisoning future relations with Afghanistan (and Pakistan as well) and one our Afghan allies vehemently oppose. What is the President waiting for?

Most Americans are fed up with the war and want the same thing. A new Rasmussen poll shows 53% of likely voters support the immediate and complete withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan. As support for the present military strategy continues to erode and the justifications for continuing the US investment in blood and treasure wear thin, now is the time for peace advocates to raise their voices.

Call 202-224-3121 today and tell your Representative to support H.R. 780 – the Responsible End to the War in Afghanistan Act.

In the wake of the horrific murders of 16 Afghan civilians, nine of them children, the U.S. should revisit its timeline for transfer of security to Afghan forces and accelerate the departure of all foreign troops. It’s time our troops came home.

Peace Action of New York State: Press Release on “New” Pentagon Strategy Announced by President Obama and Secretary of Defense Panetta Today

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                  CONTACT: Alicia Godsberg

(646) 723-1749

alicia@panys.org

 

New Defense Strategy: Not Sounding That New

 

NEW YORK CITY, N.Y. (January 5, 2012) — Today the President, Secretary of Defense, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff outlined a new strategy for the Department of Defense. This new direction focused on reorienting the U.S. military toward the Asia-Pacific region and decreasing the number of active duty service members. President Obama proudly reminded the crowd that the Pentagon’s budget will continue to grow, even if it does so at a slower rate, and will remain higher than at the end of President Bush’s last term. Secretary Panetta and Chairman Dempsey stated that the U.S. will retain the ability to fight more than one war at a time, and the U.S. will retain a safe, secure, and reliable nuclear deterrent. This broadly outlined “new” strategy does not sound all that different than the one we have now, which is contributing to our country’s economic decline by maintaining expensive and useless nuclear weapons and projecting U.S. power needlessly around the world.

Nuclear weapons were only hinted at in the press conference, with President Obama stating:

We’ll continue to get rid of outdated Cold War-era systems so that we can invest in the capabilities we need for the future…

The Pentagon’s report on this new strategy was also released today, stating:

It is possible that our deterrence goals can be achieved with a smaller nuclear force, which would reduce the number of nuclear weapons in our inventory as well as their role in U.S. national security strategy. 

 

The U.S. has a stockpile of 8,500 nuclear weapons. Approximately $700 billion of tax payer money will be spent on nuclear weapons programs in the next decade. Billions can be saved by:

-          Cutting the Navy’s procurement of new nuclear-capable submarines from 12 to 8. Savings = $27 billion over 10 years and $120 billion over the life of the program.

-          Delaying work on a new long-range nuclear-capable bomber. Savings = at least $18 billion over the next decade.

-          Cancelling the Mixed Oxide Fuel Plant. Savings = $4 billion.

-          Cancelling the construction of a new plutonium pit/nuclear weapon core factory (CMRR-NF). Savings = at least $3 – $5 billion.

Additional savings can come from eliminating the approximately 1,000 U.S. military bases overseas, starting with the European bases left over from the Cold War that ended over 20 years ago. Closing 300 bases alone would save at least $12 billion.

Specific budget cuts will be outlined in the weeks to come, leading up to the new budget that will be released in February. Peace Action New York State will continue to work to cut unnecessary nuclear weapons programs and close overseas bases, and redirect that money to help our communities and fund human needs.

 

 

About Peace Action New York State

PANYS is dedicated to promoting the non-violent resolution of conflict, the abolition of nuclear weapons, and changing federal spending priorities away from the military and toward human needs. We believe that war is not the suitable response to conflict, that every person has the right to live without the threat of nuclear weapons, and that America has the resources and responsibility to both protect and provide for its citizens. Peace Action New York State is part of the national organization Peace Action, which is the largest grassroots peace organization in the country. Peace Action recognizes that real change comes from the bottom up and is committed to educating and organizing at the grassroots level in over 30 states across the country.

 

http://www.panys.org

https://twitter.com/PeaceActionNY

tiny.cc/PANYSfacebook

Powerful Op-Ed on the Iraq War in the Kansas City Star by Peace Action national board Co-Chair Dave Pack

Posted on Tue, Jan. 03, 2012

 

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/01/03/v-print/3350801/the-iraq-war-was-our-greatest.html

Iraq War Was the United States’ Greatest Foreign Policy Disaster 

By DAVID J. PACK
Special to The Star

We should all stop to take solemn note that the last U.S. combat troops left Iraq on Dec. 17, 2011, nominally ending a war that was started by President George W. Bush in March 2003, almost 9 years ago.

I say “nominally” because the war continues in many very real ways for all Iraqis, but especially for some 3.5 million who are either internally displaced within Iraq or refugees in another country. It also continues for many of the 1,500,000 Americans who have served in Iraq and suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder and other physical and mental health problems that have contributed to more of our troops committing suicide than dying in combat in recent years.

I view the Iraq War as the greatest foreign policy disaster in the history of the United States to this point in time (though the War in Afghanistan is running a good race here). It was an unprovoked act of military aggression against a nation that had not attacked us and posed no meaningful threat to us.

We were lied to about Iraq’s supposed weapons of mass destruction. We were told it was about democracy and saving Iraqis from Saddham Hussein.

Tell that to the 100,000 or more Iraqis who have died during the war. Tell that to the Texans whose congressional districts were gerrymandered to elect more Republicans to Congress in 2004, or to voters in Ohio who saw voting machines placed abundantly in conservative areas but sparingly in liberal areas by a GOP state administration.

If we care about democracy, we need to look to the home front because our own democracy is increasingly an empty sham.

What is the reality of present day Iraq after our expenditure to date of over $800 billion, some 4,500 U.S. combat deaths, over 1,000 U.S. troop suicides and over 30,000 injured? The war has left a ruined country that was formerly one of the most advanced in the Middle East in terms of health and education:

Up to 70 percent lack access to clean water.

Up to 80 lack access to sanitation.

Half of the doctors are either dead or have emigrated.

Average electricity availability is 14.6 hours per day.

The $800 billion will grow substantially despite the war’s nominal end because as a nation we must keep our commitment to care for the veterans of this war.

To understand the magnitude of the potential costs, note that the Department of Veteran’s Affairs has a proposed budget of $132 billion for 2012.

Sadly, the number of suicides will also grow with passing years.

While damning this war as a moral, humanitarian, financial, and foreign policy disaster for this country, let us affirm the sacrifices of the 1,500,000 who have served in Iraq. Their sacrifice is no less for them having been placed under false pretenses in a war that should not have been.

Indeed, for many of them the sacrifice has been overwhelming as they have returned to Iraq for additional tours of duty. So let’s honor those who served. Let’s be certain they receive the benefits they deserve for their service.

The sad reality is that the people who get us into misguided wars like this are inclined to deny war’s terrible consequences and seek to get out of paying for them so they can get on with their next war.

Don’t let our politicians break the promises made to our veterans.

David J. Pack, of Lenexa, is co-chairman of the board of the national peace group Peace Action, is on the board of their local affiliate PeaceWorks Kansas City and is a member of the Kansas City American Friends Service Committee Program Committee.

Ending Iraq War: Op-ed in Bloomfield (NJ) Life newspaper by New Jersey Peace Action Executive Director

 

BY MADELYN HOFFMAN

GUEST COLUMNIST

Bloomfield Life, December 28, 2011

 

As 2011 ends, it is time to reflect upon continuing U.S. involvement in overseas wars and the impact that involvement has here at home. It is a good time to reflect on the role that protest played in getting us here and what those protests still want to achieve so the U.S. is genuinely safe and secure.

On Dec. 17, the last U.S. soldier was photographed leaving Iraq and the media proclaimed an end to the war which began on March 19, 2003 – almost nine years ago. The war cost the U.S. taxpayer more than $800 billion and claimed 4,483 U.S. soldiers’ lives. At the war’s height, the war in Iraq was costing taxpayers $12 billion each month.

Additionally, more than 1 million Iraqi civilians died, and 4.5 million became refugees. And during the last two years, more U.S. soldiers died by their own hands than in combat. On average, we lose 18 veterans to suicide each day.

So while it is important to mark the “official end” to the Iraq War, it is difficult to muster many cheers. Instead, it is critical to conduct an honest assessment of what happened.

First, we must acknowledge that U.S. presence in Iraq has not ended. The Project On Government Oversight argues that taxpayers will now provide funding for 14,000 to 16,000 contractors in Iraq. According to POGO, some of the companies who will provide contractors in Iraq – KBR, DynCorp and Blackwater – are in the POGO Federal Contractor Misconduct Database (www.contractormisconduct.org). All three contractors have extensive misconduct histories, yet they continue to operate.

Second, U.S. presence in Afghanistan remains – and may extend past 2014. According to a Dec. 20 article in the New York Times, the senior American commander in Afghanistan, Gen. John R. Allen, suggested that American forces could remain in the country beyond 2014, despite increasing public opinion to withdraw forces from Afghanistan at an accelerated pace.

Lastly, we need to acknowledge the role that “The Protester,” Time Magazine’s “Person of the Year,” played in changing the course of this war, and what these protesters would like to see in 2012.

Bloomfield-based New Jersey Peace Action opposed the war in Iraq starting in the summer of 2002, many months before the war began. More than 800 protesters marched in Newark in December 2002, drawing the connection between the tremendous costs for war and how each dollar spent on the war would be a dollar taken away from programs and services that cities like Newark require.

Hundreds participated in national marches in Washington, D.C., and millions rallied worldwide on Feb. 19, 2003, trying to prevent the war in Iraq from ever beginning. That anti-war movement continued even after the first bombs were dropped, in an effort to end the war as quickly as possible.

Bloomfield residents started a weekly peace vigil in front of the Bloomfield Public Library shortly after the war began and continued it for years, as part of this national and international effort to stop the war.

While the consistent activism did not stop the United States from starting a war against Iraq, the ongoing activism did influence public opinion to the point where, by 2006, the majority of those polled were against the war. The 2006 elections, when many pro-war elected officials were beaten by anti-war challengers, were seen as a reflection of this shift.

Public opinion against the Iraq war deterred decision-makers from authorizing an invasion of Iran.

Protests to end the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and to treat returning veterans well upon their return continue today. NJPA is part of a national “Move the Money” campaign to take at least 25 percent of the money from the military budget and move it into funding programs that address community needs.

According to the National Priorities Project, war spending for Iraq and Afghanistan for 2011 was $169.4 billion. This is more than enough money to erase every state’s budget deficit. No deficits mean more money for towns like Bloomfield and a lighter burden on local taxpayers.

NJPA, joined by Bloomfield residents, recently participated on day 170 of the People’s Organization for Progress’ Campaign for Jobs, Peace, Equality and Justice. The campaign honors the 381-day, 1955 bus boycott in Montgomery, Ala., which led to the desegregation of city buses. POP’s call is for jobs – with the understanding that the overseas wars must end, so that money can be used to help create much-needed jobs.

All are invited to participate in the these efforts to end the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and bring the war dollars home for our communities – for education, housing, jobs, health care and more.

“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.” – Dwight D. Eisenhower

The author is executive director of Bloomfield-based New Jersey Peace Action.

Tomorrow, we will honor the other 1%: our service members and veterans.

Less than 1% of the nation serves in our Armed Forces, and like many of you mentioned in your comments on the Iraq War, we are deeply gratified that many of them are returning home this winter. However, it has not escaped our attention that for many, this is not a homecoming, but rather a redeployment to Kuwait, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.

At Peace Action, we will continue to work hard until each and every service member comes home.

Amidst unemployment, a 12-18 month backlog at the VA, and a rising suicide epidemic, returning veterans are marching with the 99%. Source: Veterans News Now.

But what are they coming home to?

Crisis of employment: With a record high average number of deployments under their belts, our veterans are returning home to face a higher rate of unemployment than their civilian counterparts.

Crisis of care: An alarming suicide epidemic is pervading the military, with active-duty memberstaking their own lives at the rate of one every 36 hours. After a decade of continuous war, PTSD rates are as high as 50% among deployed troops. Despite this alarming epidemic, the average new claim processing time at the VA appears to be an astounding 12 to 18 months!

Meanwhile, both the House and Senate Veterans Committees are willing to cut funding to Veterans Affairs.

Peace Action says: Move the Money!

By cutting wasteful Pentagon spending, we could save billions of dollars from our federal budget. Billions of dollars that could be used for critical human needs, such as care for our returning veterans.

Your generous contribution to Peace Action will help build the movement to Move the Money from wars and weapons to human needs. Honor our troops this Veterans Day by helping build a more peaceful and just world.

Troops to come home from Iraq: Share your thoughts!

After nearly 9 years, the U.S. is withdrawing troops from Iraq.

There is no doubt in my mind that this couldn’t have happened without you.

Before this war even began, you responded to President Bush’s announcement by hitting the streets and taking part in the largest worldwide protests in history. After the first bombs fell, you continued marching in protest after protest in city after city. Over the years, you’ve called, wrote, and even occupied Congress. You’ve spent cold nights in solemn vigils waving to passing cars. You’ve forwarded Action Alerts, registered voters, and spread the word to friends and family. You’ve joined with thousands of others to support Peace Action and maintain a nationwide network of concerned and committed activists.

By 2008, you had made the war in Iraq an inescapable election issue.

President Obama, our first black President, was elected under pressure to end this war. After his election, you kept the pressure on. Now, President Obama has announced that the 41,000 U.S. troops currently deployed to Iraq will return home by December 31.

In our tireless struggle, we must count our victories.

This is a momentous victory for you, after years of unwavering commitment. This is a victory for an entire generation of youth, who have grown up only knowing war. This is a victory for the Iraqi people, who have suffered by the millions and ultimately refused to allow U.S. troops to remain after the agreed upon deadline. And this is a victory for our troops and their families, who are no longer put in danger for an unnecessary war.

Of course, our work is not done.

The State Department is planning to maintain an army of thousands of private security contractors in Iraq. Our service members are returning home to a devastated economy with few job prospects and facing the possibility of redeployment to Afghanistan. Our veterans face a rising suicide epidemic and will require our care for decades to come. We will have to call upon all of our collective power to remain vigilant for peace.

As move into 2012, our work continues. We will continue to push for negotiations in Afghanistan, we will keep up the pressure to make ending the Afghanistan War an election-year issue, and together we will shift our national priorities to move the money from wars and weapons back to our communities.

Humbly for Peace,
Kevin Martin
Executive Director, Peace Action

You’ve spent years working to end this war. We want to hear from you! What do you think about the troop withdrawal? Post your thoughts today!

Peace Action of New York State LTE in New York Times

Alicia Godsberg, Executive Director of Peace Action of New York State, had a sharp letter to the editor published in yesterday’s New York Times on cutting nuclear weapons spending (it’s the fourth letter down, text also below).

To the Editor:

The military budget needs to be cut, but your editorial takes aim at the wrong place. Instead of cuts in pay and benefits for our soldiers, cuts should come from the billions spent on nuclear weapons.

Debate in Washington dismisses almost $700 billion in spending over 10 years on nuclear weapons. New nuclear-capable submarines have an estimated price tag of $116 billion, and a new nuclear-capable bomber could cost $3.7 billion.

Additionally, new nuclear weapon facilities at an estimated $10 billion are on the way. And what for? Nuclear weapons are unable to protect Americans from today’s threats, and President Obama has stated that the United States seeks the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.

The crisis in spending is a crisis of priorities. To cut the pay and benefits of our military would be shameful when wasteful spending on nuclear weapons needs to be cut instead.

ALICIA GODSBERG
Executive Director
Peace Action New York State
New York, Sept. 27, 2011