I generally agree with Sander's point of view and his unwillingness to be shy about expressing anti military industrial complex views. BUT when I see him standing next to the Democratic suit (now much a much larger one) that sold the Democratic Party out to corporations and their parasites......I wonder.
Now Gaza? Is a there a politician in WA that has the cojones to take on AIPAC? If there is, they are out of work. They all hate being bullied by this the representatives of a foreign power, but far be it from them to work in concert to push back against their corrosive power.
Our relationship with Iraq becomes even more complex when you recall that not only was Saddam a tyrant, he was our tyrant. He rose to power because of the clandestine support of the US. He was unpopular and it is doubtful he would have been able to seize power without the US backing him. The US then goaded him to fighting a bloody and useless 8 year war with Iran which he lost.
When Saddam invaded Kuwait (who were slant drilling in Iraqi oil fields and which used to be part of Iraq before the British carved up the Middle East into oil rich, pro western principalities) we retaliated and sanctions were imposed. This becomes even more convoluted when you recall that the US Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, gave Saddam a virtual green light by say the US would not interfere.
As for the rest of the "speech", it takes a man of great character and stature to admit mistakes and to signal a new direction that tries to amend those mistakes.
Obama is a "small" man, of questionable character, who plays amoral games involving domestic politics instead of governing. The Pentagon is in charge of his foreign policy.
I generally agree with Sander's point of view and his unwillingness to be shy about expressing anti military industrial complex views. BUT when I see him standing next to the Democratic suit (now much a much larger one) that sold the Democratic Party out to corporations and their parasites......I wonder.
Now Gaza? Is a there a politician in WA that has the cojones to take on AIPAC? If there is, they are out of work. They all hate being bullied by this the representatives of a foreign power, but far be it from them to work in concert to push back against their corrosive power.
Our relationship with Iraq becomes even more complex when you recall that not only was Saddam a tyrant, he was our tyrant. He rose to power because of the clandestine support of the US. He was unpopular and it is doubtful he would have been able to seize power without the US backing him. The US then goaded him to fighting a bloody and useless 8 year war with Iran which he lost.
When Saddam invaded Kuwait (who were slant drilling in Iraqi oil fields and which used to be part of Iraq before the British carved up the Middle East into oil rich, pro western principalities) we retaliated and sanctions were imposed. This becomes even more convoluted when you recall that the US Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, gave Saddam a virtual green light by say the US would not interfere.
As for the rest of the "speech", it takes a man of great character and stature to admit mistakes and to signal a new direction that tries to amend those mistakes.
Obama is a "small" man, of questionable character, who plays amoral games involving domestic politics instead of governing. The Pentagon is in charge of his foreign policy.