Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Iraq Veteran: Why I'm Against Obama's Afghanistan

By Benjamin Lewis, AlterNet. Posted April 8, 2009.


As a veteran facing and refusing recall orders, I'm appalled that many refer to the war in Afghanistan as the 'good war' -- as if any war is good.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

I am a veteran of Iraq who served two tours in the U.S. occupation of that country. I experienced firsthand the horrors of that war, and like many others, came to see it as nothing more than a chance for a very few to make vast profits in a short amount of time. Now, because of those selfish and irresponsible actions, the citizens of not only the U.S., but of the entire world, are asked to pay for the fallout of war in blood, sacrifice and currency.

But this is old news. 

Yet, even as we deplore the war in Iraq and the unconstitutional actions of the former administration, we are sucked back into the propaganda of the ‘first war,’ the ‘good war,’ as if the Bush administration was so unpatriotic that it had no interest in Afghanistan. Even as we acknowledge that Iraq is a war for oil and profit, we ignore the history of Afghanistan and the oil resources of the Caspian Sea that would be opened up through this conquest. Even as we sit on the brink of a depression we are willing to pour our money and resources into a so-called ‘ten year plan’ that will cost unknown sums of money that we will not get back. Exactly as it is happening in the Iraq war, the fruits of our labor will be siphoned off into the banks of contractors and industrialists, and for whose benefit? Certainly not ours, for we have only some false hope of revenge to attain.

If it was not evident before, it should be apparent by now that Obama is not our savior. He does not bring us hope of no war and he certainly is either not able or not willing to bring about real change. He is, above all, one thing: a politician, and as such he is bound by the rules of his trade. That is his livelihood, so his career rests not on the energized citizens who, inflated with the jingoism of his campaign, rushed to the phones and then to the ballot box in support of his campaign, but by his financial backers, who are already reaping the benefit of ‘bailouts’ and a newly resurrected war. And if anything is transparent it is that Obama’s administration plans to use the same bully tactics that the Bush administration used in order to subvert the will of the electorate and secure the interests of a very few while the rest of us struggle in a recession.

Yet he was elected on a ‘no war’ ticket and in this, if we know our history, he is no different than Woodrow Wilson who pulled America into World War I against the wishes of his constituency and later admitted that it was only for the benefit of capitalists. Obama stood shamelessly behind podiums and promised an end to the Iraq War, all the while planning to launch us into the good and just war against Afghanistan -- a nation that is really not one nation at all, but a heterogeneous population of many languages, tribes and cultures.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: iraq, afghanistan, barack obama, u.s. military, marine corps

Marine Benjamin "Benji" Lewis served two tours in Iraq and was honorably discharged in 2007. Recently, he received notification that he was a candidate to be recalled to active duty. A few weeks ago at a Winter Soldier event in Portland, Oregon, Lewis publicly announced his intention to refuse reactivation from the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from World! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
If America paid attention to Canada & other NATO membership
Posted by: BlueBerry PickN on Apr 10, 2009 11:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
serving in Afghanistan...

they might have known this was coming...

& it makes Iraq look like a picnic.



perspective, people.


Perspective.

The Jeff Farias Show: streams FREE & LIVE Mon-Fri, 6-9pmEST

FREE podcast

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

For All of It
Posted by: Sparks56 on Apr 10, 2009 2:45 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So true, so eloquently written, with the bone-deep credibility of one who has lived the life. Thank you, Brother Ben, for all of it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This young man is A real hero
Posted by: Pop on Apr 10, 2009 8:44 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our government sends our you folks to battle to kill and die while they reap the vast treasures of oil and dominate countries and remove our own Constitutional protections against their tyranny here in the US. In my younger days I too was sucked into the US tyranny in Vietnam, only to be shamed in the after math of the millions of Vietmanese that we wrongly killed. Our corporate owned government knows no shame. I certainly did in the later years teach my children of the war profit ways of the US of A. Not one of my children will join in any of the future wars of greed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There's some irony here...
Posted by: Deathbunny on Apr 19, 2009 11:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find it ironic every time someone decries some action--military or not--as being wrong because it's about money. Were the action exclusively about the money, they could have a point, but I doubt many people see money (or oil) as what it really is.

Think back to when you were ten and you had no real way of getting money on your own. What was money then?

It was the option to make a decision of your own. You could spend your money on ice cream or a book or something. It usually wasn't something you needed, but it was important to you because it let you fit what you wanted into what you had.

Of course, it usually wasn't what you needed because mom and dad (or variations there-of) provided those.

Fast forward to now.

Money--and oil by extension--are the current currency of self-determination in the world. Having enough money and the sources of money allows people to decide on what they want to do with their lives and what rules they may choose to set and follow. Those without are forced into situations where they have to prostitute themselves or fight for resources.

This becomes an even greater issue in a highly stratified and interdependent society like ours that depends on money and trust in money to provide for all of our needs instead of only our wants. Most of us--even if the destruction of this interdependence was "neutrally" inflicted--lack the means or knowledge to even provide our own immediate food needs without cooperation across a wide array of people.

The alternative at the interpersonal level is--of course--violence in order to have some level of control over our own situation.

This is where the anti-war way of thinking falls apart. It assumes that everyone else either lacks the power to force others into a course of action by violence, that everyone else will never be in a situation where they would need to use force, or that everyone else (except unusual, pathological people) so highly values non-violence over a potentially advantageous violent solution diplomacy will always result if you just stop the "sick people".

Which--of course--is balderdash because people as a group are nothing if opportunistic and almost always default to a separation of "us vs. them" and a preference for US vs. THEM.

(That's why we are still alive as a species, by the way.)

It's not shocking that the naive Obama-that-was who sold many on "no war" has become the Obama-that-is who is now responsible for continuing and expanding war. He's starting to realize the intricate interconnection between money, oil, violence, and being able to make decisions and set conditions for our own lives.

Likewise, his (temporary?) retreat on legislation like the Assault Weapons Ban shows an understanding that the consequences of pushing ideals in an interdependent society can easily result in enough conflict to make it impossible to make meaningful contributions to decisions about our own destiny. In this case, he's facing lack of cooperation from Congress because they know that passing it will likely--at the very least--cost many of them their jobs.

Assuming, of course, that enough people don't get pissed off enough to start something violent in order to protect their ability to make their own decisions...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement