Sunday, June 27, 2010

Tom Engelhardt: "In Washington getting out of Afghanistan is not an option"

Soon after Obama's victory at the presidential elections, I stumbled on an American woman on the Eurostar from London to Paris and couldn't avoid listening to a conversation she was having about US newly elected President.

"People love him," she announced with pride. "We have even cocktails named after him!"

"European citizens love him too," echoed another passenger, from London. "We put a great deal of trust on him."

"Well, maybe you do," I thought, preferring not to express my pessimism out loud.

Then, just in the middle of the discussion between the two Obama-lovers, a little revelation came along causing a moment of silence.

"Of course," the Londoner said, "we didn't appreciate much his announcement that he's going to send 15,000 more troops to Afghanistan, we actually hoped he would withdraw instead."

The American woman froze: all over the world (or at least Europe, as far as I know) people, media, academics were discussing about this shocking plan and this lady, Obama-supporter, who actively participated in the Democrats' campaign, had no clue. "He did what?" she babbled.

Soon after that, the world witnessed astonished the joke of Obama awarded of the Nobel Peace Prize, and the Afghanistan strategy fell in the scrap heap of recent history.

I read often good analyses coming from US researchers, so I wonder what kind of media US citizens stick to to be so unaware of what their government does around the world.

In the aftermath of the "Runaway General" McChrystal's revelations on the US strategy (or non-strategy) in Afghanistan, I've decided to publish this interview with Tom Engelhardt as he is always a careful observer and researcher of world geopolitical affairs.

More GRITtv

No comments:

Related Posts Widget for Blogs by LinkWithin