A War the Pentagon Doesn’t Want?
Dave Lindorff writes about the violent arrest of a female Iraq war vet at an anti-Syria-intervention rally. Here is the video of the arrest:
These particular agents of the police state are National Park Rangers policing the Independence Mall in Philadelphia. Here’s Lindorff describing the landscape:
Independence Mall is a three-block piece of property run by the National Park Service in Philadelphia. A favored spot for tourists from all over the nation and the world, with the restored Independence Hall at one end, where the Declaration of Independence and Constitution were written and where the Bill of Rights was passed into law, protecting freedom of speech and assembly, and the Constitution Center at the other end, where the US Constitution and its guarantees of freedom are celebrated, it is also a favored locale for protest actions, such as the protest and march against a US attack on Syria, which took place just before Yates’ arrest.
The brutal assault on this peaceful folksinger offers a stark view of the reality of America’s burgeoning police state, set as it was against the image of the building where America’s founding documents offered the hope for such a different kind of state. The park’s rangers Saturday certainly sent many foreign tourists home with a whole different view of the “Land of the Free” not to mention the “Home of the Brave.”
Among the majority of Americans opposing this intervention are veterans who know all too well what the reality of war means. A retired major general, Robert H. Scales, articulated his perception in the Washington Post yesterday regarding why this war is a war the Pentagon doesn’t want. Here is Scales describing the general sentiment of the soldiers he has talked to:
They are embarrassed to be associated with the amateurism of the Obama administration’s attempts to craft a plan that makes strategic sense. None of the White House staff has any experience in war or understands it. So far, at least, this path to war violates every principle of war, including the element of surprise, achieving mass and having a clearly defined and obtainable objective.
The opposition to intervention is overwhelming. The polls, town hall meetings, and military personnel tasked with carrying out this intervention don’t want to do it.
What is finally being understood (I hope) is that the War on Terror declared after 9/11 is total bullshit. There is no other explanation for why our supposed dreaded enemy—Al Qaeda-affiliated jihadists—were somehow transformed in Syria to freedom-fighting rebels.
The justification for intervening in Syria has become surreal and incoherent, changing like the colors of a chameleon. I wonder what Tester thinks, being such an advocate for our veterans. Are you going to vote for war, Jon? I’m sure Max will have no problem voting yes, and it sounds like Steve Daines is a no.
We will see, next week, if overwhelming public sentiment against a US military intervention is enough to give Tester cover for a no vote.