A Painful Truth

I realize I wasn't voting for Noam Chomsky when casting a vote for Barack Obama. I can understand the strikes early in his administration that went wrong and give him a pass on those.

Five years ago, on January 23 2009, a CIA drone flattened a house in Pakistan’s tribal regions. It was the third day of Barack Obama’s presidency, and this was the new commander-in-chief’s first covert drone strike.

Initial reports said up to ten militants were killed, including foreign fighters and possibly a ‘high-value target’ – a successful first hit for the fledgling administration.

But reports of civilian casualties began to emerge. As later reports revealed, the strike was far from a success. At least nine civilians died, most of them from one family. There was one survivor, 14-year-old Fahim Qureshi, but with horrific injuries including shrapnel wounds in his stomach, a fractured skull and a lost eye, he was as much a victim as his dead relatives.

 Later that day, the CIA attacked again – and levelled another house. It proved another mistake, this time one that killed between five and ten people, all civilians.

And since it was three days earlier, he couldn't have foreseen this tragic start to the drone program under his control.

Three days earlier, in his inauguration address, Obama had told the world ‘that America is a friend of each nation, and every man, woman and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity.’

The fact that the number of drone strikes we've conducted since Obama took office has increased is really no surprise. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like al-Qaeda.

Across Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, the Obama administration has launched more than 390 drone strikes in the five years since the first attack that injured Qureshi – eight times as many as were launched in the entire Bush presidency. These strikes have killed more than 2,400 people, at least 273 of them reportedly civilians.

And I'm not sure this is as reassuring as it's meant to be.

Although drone strikes under Obama’s presidency have killed nearly six times as many people as were killed under Bush, the casualty rate – the number of people killed on average in each strike – has dropped from eight to six under Obama. The civilian casualty rate has fallen too. Strikes during the Bush years killed nearly more than three civilians in each strike on average. This has halved under Obama (1.43 civilians per strike on average). In fact reported civilian casualties in Pakistan have fallen sharply since 2010, with no confirmed reports of civilian casualties in 2013.

Among many painful truths is that Noam Chomsky (or his clone) are never going to be elected president of the United States. And of course, McCain or Romney "would have been worse." Still hurts, though.

Using American Exceptionalism as a Partisan Weapon

In reply to the Callista Gingrich video found at the following post: that blog: American Exceptionalism

(This reply is a revised and extended version of a comment originally posted at a blog that once was on January 23rd.)
---





Like too many Republicans, Mrs Newton #3 is trying to sell a meme about the left that is a lie. I agree with 99% of everything she says in the video. There is no "'great debate' about whether America is an exceptional nation, or just another country," except in a few folk's divisive, partisan, and seemingly fevered imaginations.


Whether one believes man was endowed with inalienable rights by a Christian God or by human nature, the end result--the form of government that makes America exceptional--is the same. It is our American ideals that make us unique in the world, and it is our desire and ability to sell our ideals to others--both immigrants who come here to seek a better life and become a part of this country, and to a lesser extent, those foreign nations who have incorporated some of our American ideals into their governments--that make we Americans unique.

Too often, however, there IS a certain degree of arrogance when talking about American exceptionalism. There are too many who believe that America was a nation chosen by God from among all (or most) others, and that we Americans are a chosen people above those of other nations. They are often nativists who don't want to share and expand American exceptionalism. Immigrants and other groups are demonized and deemed unworthy. "All men are created equal." Except Muslims (American or otherwise.) Except gay folks. Except liberals. That kind of American exceptionalism isn't worth the breath with which it's spoken...

I believe in American exceptionalism... But unlike too many on the right, I'm not particularly threatened if the citizens of some other country feel the same about their ideals and way of life (though I do think they're wrong.) I've no doubt that folks in Israel, England, Russia, and Egypt believe their country and way of life to be exceptional, that it in any way diminishes America or our exceptionalism because they do, or that there is any harm in recognizing that fact, either.

Ed Luce from the Financial Times.

Where's Ed? There he is.

U.S. Place in World Affairs

Q. Thank you, Mr. President. In the context of all the multilateral activity that's been going on this week--the G-20, here at NATO--and your evident enthusiasm for multilateral frameworks, to work through multilateral frameworks, could I ask you whether you subscribe, as many of your predecessors have, to the school of American exceptionalism that sees America as uniquely qualified to lead the world, or do you have a slightly different philosophy? And if so, would you be able to elaborate on it?

The President. I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism. I am enormously proud of my country and its role and history in the world. If you think about the site of this summit and what it means, I don't think America should be embarrassed to see evidence of the sacrifices of our troops, the enormous amount of resources that were put into Europe postwar, and our leadership in crafting an alliance that ultimately led to the unification of Europe. We should take great pride in that.

And if you think of our current situation, the United States remains the largest economy in the world. We have unmatched military capability. And I think that we have a core set of values that are enshrined in our Constitution, in our body of law, in our democratic practices, in our belief in free speech and equality that, though imperfect, are exceptional.
Now, the fact that I am very proud of my country and I think that we've got a whole lot to offer the world does not lessen my interest in recognizing the value and wonderful qualities of other countries, or recognizing that we're not always going to be right, or that other people may have good ideas, or that in order for us to work collectively, all parties have to compromise, and that includes us.

And so I see no contradiction between believing that America has a continued extraordinary role in leading the world towards peace and prosperity, and recognizing that that leadership is incumbent depends on our ability to create partnerships, because we create partnerships because we can't solve these problems alone.

-- Barack Obama: The President's News Conference in Strasbourg, April 4, 2009

Read more at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.edu

And then there's this, FWIW: "Only one sitting president in the last 82 years has publicly uttered the magical phrase “American exceptionalism”--care to guess who it is?" - Obama Has Mentioned 'American Exceptionalism' More Than Bush - Robert Schlesinger (usnews.com)