{"id":69089,"date":"2007-08-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-08-05T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2007\/08\/05\/obama-a-la-conscience-liberale-et-les-clinton-ne-sont-pas-en-reste\/"},"modified":"2007-08-05T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2007-08-05T00:00:00","slug":"obama-a-la-conscience-liberale-et-les-clinton-ne-sont-pas-en-reste","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2007\/08\/05\/obama-a-la-conscience-liberale-et-les-clinton-ne-sont-pas-en-reste\/","title":{"rendered":"Obama a la conscience lib\u00e9rale et les Clinton ne sont pas en reste"},"content":{"rendered":"

Depuis cinq jours, le candidat \u00e0 la d\u00e9signation d\u00e9mocrate Barack Obama se d\u00e9bat dans les suites de son intervention o\u00f9 il recommandait d’attaquer le Pakistan. Obama a m\u00eame r\u00e9ussi \u00e0 amener des protestations officielles de la direction pakistanaise, ainsi que quelques manifestations anti-US<\/a> \u00e9parses au Pakistan, comme un pr\u00e9sident vrai de vrai, un pr\u00e9sident en fonction.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPourtant, \u00e0 notre humble avis, le meilleur de ses interventions de ces derniers jours concerne ce qu’il a dit sur le nucl\u00e9aire. Obama n’a gu\u00e8re d’exp\u00e9rience en mati\u00e8re de politique ext\u00e9rieure. Alors, il s’en remet \u00e0 son instinct de lib\u00e9ral, de d\u00e9mocrate et d’homme de gauche dans le syst\u00e8me washingtonien. Le r\u00e9sultat est sa recommandation de ne pas employer le nucl\u00e9aire lors d’une attaque US contre le Pakistan, et d’ailleurs en aucune circonstance (on comprend: contre le Pakistan ou n’importe qui d’autre ?), si l’on risque de provoquer des pertes civiles. A tout hasard, disons que cela va de soi pour une belle \u00e2me mais, tout de m\u00eame, un petit mieux en le disant m\u00eame si la chose reste confuse et les civils pas rassur\u00e9s pour autant. Cela donne ceci (dans le Guardian<\/em> du 3 ao\u00fbt<\/a>):<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abMr Obama showed uncertainty yesterday<\/em> [2 August] in an interview with the Associated Press.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbHe appeared to be caught off guard when he was asked if he would use nuclear weapons against al-Qaida in Pakistan. Mr Obama replied: I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance. He added: …involving civilians.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbDemonstrating a degree of unpreparedness, he went on to say: Let me scratch that. There’s been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That’s not on the table.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCes diverses affirmations du s\u00e9nateur Obama ont aussit\u00f4t attir\u00e9 les foudres ironiques de Hillary Clinton, sa principale concurrente. Depuis une dizaine de jours, les deux principaux candidats \u00e0 la d\u00e9signation d\u00e9mocrate pour les pr\u00e9sidentielles ne se font plus de cadeau, particuli\u00e8rement Hillary pour Obama. Cela a conduit le camp Clinton \u00e0 sortir de la naphtaline quelques grandes voix, comme celle de Madeleine Albright, ancienne secr\u00e9taire d’Etat, rappelant le 1er ao\u00fbt \u00e0 propos de Bill Clinton et, par extension suppose-t-on, d’Hillary: \u00abClinton showed a nuanced and sophisticated understanding of how this process works.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCe qui nous am\u00e8ne enfin \u00e0 ces pr\u00e9cisions sur l’\u00e9volution des d\u00e9mocrates de ces vingt derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es, avec certains aspects in\u00e9dits sur la politique irakienne de Clinton. Ces pr\u00e9cisions sont extraites d’un article de Alan Nasser, professeur d’\u00e9conomie politique et collaborateur de The Nation<\/em> (article dans CommonDreams.org<\/em> du 2 ao\u00fbt<\/a>), comparant la situation de 1933-34 avec celle d’aujourd’hui, et, surtout, comparant le comportement des d\u00e9mocrates dont tant de bons esprits attendent des miracles en 2009, si leur candidat est \u00e9lu, avec celui des r\u00e9publicains et de GW ; effectivement, un rappel de la \u00abnuanced and sophisticated understanding<\/em>\u00bb exalt\u00e9e par Albright:<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abOne of the most powerful obstacles to appreciating the relevance of the 1934 planned coup to our times is the virtually ubiquitous misconception that the gross inequalities and anti-working-class policies now evident, and the reckless carnage that characterizes U.S. foreign policy, is the result of the neoconservative revolution ushered in by George W. Bush. But it was Clinton’s cynical jettisoning of his relatively progressive Economic Stimulus Plan, his abolition of welfare as we know it without providing a replacement, and his ruthless bombing of Yugoslavia and sanctions against Iraq that both foreshadowed and paved the way for Bush’s atrocities. The truism that the Democratic Party has moved ever closer to the Republicans since the Carter administration must not be forgotten. Indeed it is an understatement. To fully appreciate the reality of democratic capitulation as an alleged opposition party we need only reflect upon the consequences of Clinton’s sanctions against Iraq.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbClinton bombed Iraq several times weekly for eight years. Defense Information Agency documents, now available through the Freedom of Information Act, reveal that the strategy of the bombing was to extensively bomb water purification facilities and power generating facilities with the explicit intention to spread diseases that would affect children. The idea was to pressure ordinary Iraqis to overthrow Saddam, with the knowledge that if they did so, the pedicide would cease. But Iraqis blamed Washington for this catastrophe, not Saddam. When Saddam offered to accede to Clinton’s requirements for ending the bombing, Clinton abruptly replied that no possible concessions on Saddam’s part would lead him to end the bombing\/sanctions.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbExtensive investigations by widely respected sources, including the distinguished British medical journal The Lancet, determined that the number of Iraqi children who died as a direct result of the pedicidal bombardment was 467,000. And it added a fact unreported in the U.S. media, that the U.S. use of depleted uranium in the attacks had resulted in the first known cases of breast cancer afflicting four-year-old girls. When Clinton’s Secretary of state Madeline Albright was asked by Lesley Stahl in 1996 on 60 Minutes whether she thought that the removal of Saddam from power was worth killing a half million children, she replied that Yes, it was worth it.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbIs this qualitatively different from the death and destruction that Bush has wrought? Of course not. The British playwright Harold Pinter has characterized both Clinton and Bush as mass murderers, and the accusation sounds indeed brutal. But is it accurate? How can one deny that it is?<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 5 ao\u00fbt 2007 \u00e0 18H23<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Depuis cinq jours, le candidat \u00e0 la d\u00e9signation d\u00e9mocrate Barack Obama se d\u00e9bat dans les suites de son intervention o\u00f9 il recommandait d’attaquer le Pakistan. Obama a m\u00eame r\u00e9ussi \u00e0 amener des protestations officielles de la direction pakistanaise, ainsi que quelques manifestations anti-US \u00e9parses au Pakistan, comme un pr\u00e9sident vrai de vrai, un pr\u00e9sident en… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[1007,934,3009,857,4679,6208],"class_list":["post-69089","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-albright","tag-clinton","tag-democrates","tag-irak","tag-liberal","tag-obama"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69089","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=69089"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69089\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69089"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69089"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69089"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}