[Mb-civic] Bush in India: Just Not Welcome & poll of soldiers: "Get Us OUT"

[ean at sbcglobal.net]

Bush in India: Just Not Welcome

By Arundhati Roy

February 27, 2006, The Nation

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060313/roy

On his triumphalist tour of India and Pakistan, where he
hopes to wave imperiously at people he considers potential
subjects, President Bush has an itinerary that's getting
curiouser and curiouser.

For Bush's March 2 pit stop in New Delhi, the Indian
government tried very hard to have him address our
parliament. A not inconsequential number of MPs threatened to
heckle him, so Plan One was hastily shelved. Plan Two was to
have Bush address the masses from the ramparts of the
magnificent Red Fort, where the Indian prime minister
traditionally delivers his Independence Day address. But the
Red Fort, surrounded as it is by the predominantly Muslim
population of Old Delhi, was considered a security nightmare.
So now we're into Plan Three: President George Bush speaks
from Purana Qila, the Old Fort.

Ironic, isn't it, that the only safe public space for a man
who has recently been so enthusiastic about India's modernity
should be a crumbling medieval fort?

Since the Purana Qila also houses the Delhi zoo, George
Bush's audience will be a few hundred caged animals and an
approved list of caged human beings, who in India go under
the category of "eminent persons." They're mostly rich folk
who live in our poor country like captive animals,
incarcerated by their own wealth, locked and barred in their
gilded cages, protecting themselves from the threat of the
vulgar and unruly multitudes whom they have systematically
dispossessed over the centuries.

So what's going to happen to George W. Bush? Will the
gorillas cheer him on? Will the gibbons curl their lips? Will
the brow-antlered deer sneer? Will the chimps make rude
noises? Will the owls hoot? Will the lions yawn and the
giraffes bat their beautiful eyelashes? Will the crocs
recognize a kindred soul? Will the quails give thanks that
Bush isn't traveling with Dick Cheney, his hunting partner
with the notoriously bad aim? Will the CEOs agree?

Oh, and on March 2, Bush will be taken to visit Gandhi's
memorial in Rajghat. He's by no means the only war criminal
who has been invited by the Indian government to lay flowers
at Rajghat. (Only recently we had the Burmese dictator
General Than Shwe, no shrinking violet himself.) But when
Bush places flowers on that famous slab of highly polished
stone, millions of Indians will wince. It will be as though
he has poured a pint of blood on the memory of Gandhi.

We really would prefer that he didn't.

It is not in our power to stop Bush's visit. It is in our
power to protest it, and we will. The government, the police
and the corporate press will do everything they can to
minimize the extent of our outrage. Nothing the happy
newspapers say can change the fact that all over India, from
the biggest cities to the smallest villages, in public places
and private homes, George W. Bush, the President of the
United States of America, world nightmare incarnate, is just
not welcome.

[Arundhati Roy, the Booker Prize-winning author of 'The God of
Small Things' and 'The Ordinary Person's Guide to Empire',
lives in New Delhi, India.]

© 2006 The Nation

-------

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20060228/cm_huffpost/016497;_ylt=A86.I17t
fQRElUIBaxH9wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhd
A--

John Zogby: On a New Poll Of U.S. Soldiers During Their 
Service in Iraq

John Zogby

Tue Feb 28, 11:03 AM ET

In wars of America's century just past, we have sent our soldiers to
far-off fields of battle and were left to wonder about their opinions of
the life-and-death conflicts in which they were involved.

Letters home, and more recently telephone calls and emails, would give us
a peek into their states of mind. Some who returned would regale friends
and family with tales from the front lines.

Times have now changed. A first-ever survey of U.S. troops on the ground
fighting a war overseas has revealed surprising findings, not the least of
which is that an overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops in Iraq
think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year.

Further, a new Le Moyne College/Zogby International survey shows that more
than one in four (29%) thought the U.S. should pull its troops
immediately.

The poll, conducted in conjunction with Le Moyne College's Center for
Peace and Global Studies, also showed that another 22% of the respondents,
serving in various branches of the armed forces, said the U.S. should
leave Iraq in the next six months. One in every five troops - 21% - said
troops should be out between six and 12 months. Nearly a quarter - 23% -
said they should stay "as long as they are needed."

The troops have drawn different conclusions about fellow citizens back
home. Asked why they think some Americans favor rapid U.S. troop
withdrawal from Iraq, 37% of troops serving there said those Americans are
unpatriotic, while 20% believe people back home don't believe a continued
occupation will work. Another 16% said they believe those favoring a quick
withdrawal do so because they oppose the use of the military in a
pre-emptive war, while 15% said they do not believe those Americans
understand the need for the U.S. troops in Iraq.

At 55%, reservists serving in Iraq were most likely to see those back home
as unpatriotic for wanting a rapid withdrawal, while 45% of Marines and
33% of members of the regular Army agreed.

The wide-ranging poll also shows that 58% of those serving in country say
the U.S. mission in Iraq is clear in their minds, while 42% said it is
either somewhat or very unclear to them, that they have no understanding
of it at all, or are unsure. Nearly nine of every 10 - 85% - said the U.S.
mission is "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9-11 attacks," while 77%
said they believe the main or a major reason for the war was "to stop
Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq."

Ninety-three percent said that removing weapons of mass destruction is not
a reason for U.S. troops being there. Instead, that initial rationale went
by the wayside and, in the minds of 68% of the troops, the real mission
became to remove Saddam Hussein.

Just 24% said that "establishing a democracy that can be a model for the
Arab World" was the main or a major reason for the war. Only small
percentages see the mission there as securing oil supplies (11%) or to
provide long-term bases for US troops in the region (6%).

More than 80% of the troops said they did not hold a negative view of
Iraqis because of continuing insurgent attacks against them. Only about
two in five see the insurgency as being comprised of discontented Sunnis
with very few non-Iraqi helpers.

On this question there appears to be some confusion among the troops, but
two in every three do not agree that if non-Iraqi terrorists could be
prevented from crossing the border into Iraq, the insurgency would end.

To control the insurgency, a majority of respondents (53%) said the U.S.
should double both the number of troops and bombing missions, an option
absolutely no one back in Washington is considering.

Reservists were most enthusiastic about using bombing runs and a doubling
of ground troops to counter the enemy, with 70% agreeing that would work
to control the insurgency. Among regular Army respondents, 48% favored
more troops and bombing, and 47% of Marines agreed. However, 36% of
Marines said they were uncertain that strategy would work, compared to
just 9% of regular Army, 6% of National Guard respondents, and 2% of
reservists who said they were not sure.

Those in Iraq on their first tour of duty were less optimistic that more
troops and bombing runs would work. While 38% of first-timers agreed, 62%
of those on their second tour and 53% in Iraq at least three times favored
more U.S. troops and firepower.

As new photos of prisoner abuse in Iraq surface, a majority of troops
serving there said they oppose harsh interrogation methods. A majority -
55% - said it is not appropriate or standard military conduct to use harsh
and threatening methods on possible insurgent prisoners to information of
military value.

Among all respondents, 26% said they were on their first tour of duty in
Iraq, while 45% said they were on their second tour, and 29% said they
were in Iraq for a third time, or more. Three of every four were male
respondents, with 63% under the age of 30.

The survey included 944 military respondents interviewed at several
undisclosed locations throughout Iraq. The names of the specific locations
and specific personnel who conducted the survey are being withheld for
security purposes. Surveys were conducted face-to-face using random
sampling techniques. The margin of error for the survey, conducted Jan. 18
through Feb. 14, 2006, is +/- 3.3 percentage points.

In other words, the poll is a sound, solid measurement of what is going
through the minds of our front-line warriors. It's no letter home, but
it's still good to hear from them.


-- 
You are currently on Mha Atma's Earth Action Network email list, option 
D (up to 3 emails/day).  To be removed, or to switch options (option A - 
1x/week, option B - 3/wk, option C - up to 1x/day, option D - up to 3x/day) 
please reply and let us know!  If someone forwarded you this email and 
you want to be on our list, send an email to ean at sbcglobal.net and tell 
us which option you'd like.


"A war of aggression is the supreme international crime." -- Robert Jackson,
 former U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice and Nuremberg prosecutor

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060228/e4002d3f/attachment-0001.htm