One man's opinion

Bill Michtom's Blog

Bill Michtom

Bill Michtom
Portland, Oregon, USA
January 29
Your most imperial you-ness
Patience of Job Computer Services
I was born at an early age and have continued to live until now. So far, so good.


DECEMBER 17, 2009 11:24PM

The oath of office and Obama

Rate: 2 Flag

Justifying war in the face of Gandhi and King, Obama said the following receiving his Nobel "Peace" Prize:

"I know there is nothing weak, nothing passive, nothing naive in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.

But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone."

 The problem is that he misinterprets his oath of office, which reads as follows:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." 

Just thought I'd mention. 

 And while I'm checking out the man's speech, there's this:  

"Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaida's leaders to lay down their arms." 

Al Qaeda demands a few things: that the US and it's allies get out of Muslim countries, that it stop supporting Israel's oppression of the Palestinians, and that it stop propping up the Saudi monarchy. And these desires are not, by light years, out of concert with the desires of the majority of the general public of Islam.

Has the US ever proposed some version of this on which to negotiate? Because, if it has, I've missed it. 

Obama goes on: "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."

This last statement is certainly up for debate, but that his use of it while pretending that his government has ever done anything to make arms anything but the only choice, is disingenuous to an extreme.

Following that, he claims, "Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest — because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other people's children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity."

Would the citizens of Vietnam, Grenada, Honduras, Cambodia, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Iran, Iraq, and so many more, agree with that analysis? Would the Afghans, where we trained and funded the Taliban and al Qaeda? 

Those countries alone account for more than three million dead  at the hands of Obama and his predecessors.

Go through the rest of the speech, check history while you do it. It is disgusting to listen to this avatar of "change" and "hope." What you read are the quintessential justifications of imperialism, the lies of the ruling classes of the world.

And, as usual, I don't mean that in a good way. 

Your tags:


Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:


Type your comment below:
I agree with your analysis.

I was surprised to hear about Obama's peace prize. But on these days you maybe shouldn't be surprised of anything any more.
In all his actions Obama seems to be following his predecessor's foreign policies. They should give the next peace price to Bush, for his great teachings how his followers should act.
Thanks, Hannu. I think we should start a campaign for W's Nobel. At least it would be realistic.
Very nice Bill. Don't mean you toot my own horn, but you might enjoy a piece that I wrote:

Obama: When Empire + Militarism Equals Peace?