Wednesday, 16 March 2011
Where Is Westminster's Dennis Kucinich?
On Thursday, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D) of Ohio introduced a privileged resolution, with 16 original co-sponsors, that will require the House of Representatives to debate whether to continue the war in Afghanistan.
The Pentagon doesn't want Congress to debate Afghanistan. It wants Congress to fork out over ¢33 billion more to pay for the current American military escalation, no questions asked, no restrictions imposed for a withdrawal timetable or an exit strategy.
Isn't it ironic that an American socialist is calling for the end of the Afghan war when his President has continued George Bush's policies.
Where's Westminster's Dennis Kucinich? Only 14 MPs voted against the continuation of this war with 310 in favour. Isn't it a disgrace that 322 MPs couldn't be bothered to vote on this issue when they surely are all fully aware of the public mood.
James Arbuthnot, the tory chairman of the Commons defence committee said: 'it was a mistake to describe the conflict as a "war" and seen [sic] rather as part of a "wider global security mission in the Middle East region as a whole"'. His boss is considering an even wider global security mission this week.
Which label the Afghanistan conflict is given doesn't concern me, but the continuous loss of life and these words of Liam Fox do: "A more secure Afghanistan cannot come without military means but not by military means alone". How many more years are we going to be the Taliban's sniper targets?
source
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
9 comments:
"Where's Westminster's Dennis Kucinich?"
Tam Dalyell?
I fear no matter who it might be, there would simply be laughter:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12689607
Dayell has a checkered history as far as I'm concerned Julia, although he did stand up to Blair about Iraq, he's done little for Scotland.
But an interesting choice from you. Thanks.
Aye Derek, isn't it highly amusing the EU referendum issue to those who sit on these benches. I'll say nothing more because I wish to keep this polite.
Out, out, out.
"Which label the Afghanistan conflict is given doesn't concern me ...."
disaster
calamity
tragedy
cataclysm
cock-up
mistake
woe
error-of-judgement
debacle
failure
fiasco
exigency
misadventure
Thank you Joe. It's a war. Any other label is an attempt to ignore the fact.
The neo Cons/ quasi republicans and the blood and thunder militarists have probably just declared war on Mr Kucinich.
So what will be their opening moves then?
If one wishes to discredit the message then one should first discredit the messenger,ah suppose.
I suppose they could use the fact that the UK government supports the continuation of the war wisnaeme. We use US facts often.
Post a Comment