Jeremy Scahill debates David Corn over Obama's Foreign Policy on Democracy Now (1 of 3)

[balantz]

Run time: 09:26 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBRB06m2SZc   Posted on YouTube: November 20, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: November 20, 2008 By DU Member: balantz Views on DU: 966

 
Part Two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig1RoPROCb4

Part Three: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qcw4fwE2Xg

[Helga Scow Stern]

1. Excellent. Thanks for posting! n/t

[balantz]

2. You are welcome.

I miss Ojai and S.B. That beautiful land was once my home. Maybe someday I'll make it back there.

[IsItJustMe]

3. Something to chew on. That is for damn sure. We will see.

[JohnyCanuck]

4. K&R n/t

[waiting for hope]

5. Where is the change?

K&R!

[JohnyCanuck]

6. "...foreign policy team is now dominated by the hawkish, old-guard Democrats of the 1990s"

This Is Change? 20 Hawks, Clintonites and Neocons to Watch for in Obama's White House

By Jeremy Scahill, AlterNet. Posted November 20, 2008.

A who's who guide to the people poised to shape Obama's foreign policy.

U.S. policy is not about one individual, and no matter how much faith people place in President-elect Barack Obama, the policies he enacts will be fruit of a tree with many roots. Among them: his personal politics and views, the disastrous realities his administration will inherit, and, of course, unpredictable future crises. But the best immediate indicator of what an Obama administration might look like can be found in the people he surrounds himself with and who he appoints to his Cabinet. And, frankly, when it comes to foreign policy, it is not looking good.

Obama has a momentous opportunity to do what he repeatedly promised over the course of his campaign: bring actual change. But the more we learn about who Obama is considering for top positions in his administration, the more his inner circle resembles a staff reunion of President Bill Clinton's White House. Although Obama brought some progressives on board early in his campaign, his foreign policy team is now dominated by the hawkish, old-guard Democrats of the 1990s. This has been particularly true since Hillary Clinton conceded defeat in the Democratic primary, freeing many of her top advisors to join Obama's team.

"What happened to all this talk about change?" a member of the Clinton foreign policy team recently asked the Washington Post. "This isn't lightly flavored with Clintons. This is all Clintons, all the time."

Amid the euphoria over Obama's election and the end of the Bush era, it is critical to recall what 1990s U.S. foreign policy actually looked like. Bill Clinton's boiled down to a one-two punch from the hidden hand of the free market, backed up by the iron fist of U.S. militarism. Clinton took office and almost immediately bombed Iraq (ostensibly in retaliation for an alleged plot by Saddam Hussein to assassinate former President George H.W. Bush). He presided over a ruthless regime of economic sanctions that killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and under the guise of the so-called No-Fly Zones in northern and southern Iraq, authorized the longest sustained U.S. bombing campaign since Vietnam.

http://www.alternet.org/audits/107666/this_is_change_20_hawks,_clintonites_and_neocons_to_watch_for_in_obama%27s_white_house/?page=entire

[bertman]

7. Finally got to view these clips. FANTASTIC. Scahill is a very articulate spokesman for our side.

His last point about how many Congressmen and Senators there are who were opposed to the War from the beginning is very telling.

Scahill is performing an essential public service by being a "free agent" in analyzing Obama's actions versus his rhetoric.

[slipslidingaway]

8. Thanks, do not know very much about this group...

Michèle Flournoy was mentioned at the beginning of the second video.

Center for a New American Security
http://www.cnas.org/


Greenwald on John Brennan

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/11/16/brennan/index.html

"Last Wednesday, I wrote:

It simply is noteworthy of comment and cause for concern -- though far from conclusive about what Obama will do -- that Obama's transition chief for intelligence policy, John Brennan, was an ardent supporter of torture and one of the most emphatic advocates of FISA expansions and telecom immunity...

[jonnyblitz]

9. ...

:kick:

[sattahipdeep]

10. A future as certain as the recent past?

JEREMY SCAHILL: Right. I mean, many of these people—I mean, you have, at the top of the list, you have Dennis Ross, who was both George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton’s Middle East envoy, and Martin Indyk. Both of them work very closely with AIPAC, as well as the Project for a New American Century.

JEREMY SCAHILL: I mean, I think, you know, you have Obama, the orator, and you have Obama’s rhetoric. And then you have what I think is more important, which is who is he surrounding himself with and what are his actual foreign policies. And I know David is intimately familiar with this, but a lot of people who are Obama supporters haven’t actually read the plan.

On the issue of Gitmo, Obama sends one message, but then brings on board as his intelligence transition team John Brennan, who Glenn Greenwald I think rightly described as an advocate of torture, someone who has passionately defended the US extraordinary rendition program, which began under President Clinton, the government-sanctioned kidnap-and-torture program; Jami Miscik, as well, you know, another person who has spoken out in favor of these harsh interrogation tactics, as they’re called. So you have the stated policy, and then you have the people and their track records. And I think history is—best qualifies us to, you know, speak about what’s actually going to happen.

:shrug: The big loser? The American public ?

Project for a New American Century - Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O46CAysNAoM

Michèle Flournoy

Center for a New American Security - Part 2?

http://www.cnas.org/