StartCounter

Sunday, 26 October 2008

The sinister plans of Barack Obama

I think Orwellian covers his planned private army - the "civilian national security" organisation to be as well funded as the US Army and the Department of Peace and Non-Violence which will
"analyze existing policies, employ successful, field-tested programs, and develop new approaches for dealing with the implements of violence, including gun-related violence and the overwhelming presence of handguns."
and incorporate the creation of a Peace Academy which will

"(A) be modeled after the military service academies;
(B) provide a 4-year course of instruction in peace education, after which graduates will be required to serve 5 years in public service in programs dedicated to domestic or international nonviolent conflict resolution."


Also there will be an "Assistant Secretary for International Peace Activities" who shall

"(1) provide for the training and deployment of all Peace Academy graduates and other nonmilitary conflict prevention and peacemaking personnel;

(3) advocate the creation of a multinational nonviolent peace force."

I sense expense and CONTROL.

1 comment:

dberrian said...

Dear N. A. S.,

Thank you for bringing to my attention that Barack Obama intends to “advocate the creation of a multinational nonviolent peace force”. However, I don’t see it in the same “sinister” way that you do. In fact, nonviolent peacekeeping has been going on for a number of years through organizations such as the Nonviolent Peaceforce and Peace Brigades International with general approval of both sides of the conflicts where they have been deployed. The Nonviolent Peaceforce (NP), for example, is currently working at the community level in Sri Lanka and in the southern Philippines (Mindanao). Very violent civil wars are going on in each of these areas and the Nonviolent Peaceforce is able to provide unarmed protection to civilians, to safely guide people out of war zones when their villages come under fire, and to facilitate communication between different sides and factions to reduce conflict. The NP peaceworkers do not support one side or the other, but rather act to provide security and reduced violence for everyone.

I’ve talked with career officers in the U.S. military about this. I thought they would be skeptical or hostile to the idea of nonviolent peacekeeping, but I was wrong. People who know combat intimately have few illusions about its glory. They think it should be avoided whenever possible and that’s why they liked the idea of the Nonviolent Peaceforce. They told me, “Military action should only be used when it’s truly necessary. Having well trained civilians working at the community level to reduce violence and provide protection is a great idea. By and large the military is not trained for that. Use the right tool for the right job. If peaceworkers’ efforts don’t do what’s needed, then the military is still here to step in.”

This should not be a partisan issue. Conservatives want peace as much as anyone, but they want it to come through direct positive action, not wishful thinking. Positive action in the most difficult circumstances is what the Nonviolent Peaceforce is doing. NP field team members are literally putting their lives on the line, just like our military men and women, to promote security through nonviolence. They are strong, courageous, dedicated men and women. Like yourself, they are not sheep.

Cost? Of course there is cost, but in comparison to military deployments on a per person in the field basis the cost is pennies to the dollar.

For more information on the Nonviolent Peaceforce, see their website at www.nonviolentpeaceforce.org.