Vietiraq-Namiran

As far as I can tell, the Obama "War on Terror" isn't a whole lot different from Bush's "War on Terr," except that it's not characterized by overheated rhetoric, overt torture, daily threats, demonstrations of insecure masculinity, and other pinheaded cowboyisms.

But while the rhetoric has gone AWOL, the substance remains the same: just like Vietnam. Different decade, different place, same thing. We're treated to detailed discussions of strategies that will lead to success, all of which ignore the fundamental truth of the situation: we've deployed our war machine to invade somebody else's country, and they want us gone. And since they have to live there, and won't ever give up the fight, sooner or later we'll leave, having achieved nothing but a pointless expenditure of money and lives. The eventual outcome is not in any doubt whatsoever.

People who acknowledged these obvious realities under Bush were called "defeatists" and lots worse things. People who acknowledge them under Obama are told, "Ah, give the guy a chance, fa chrissake! He's only been in office for two -- okay, three months!"

Deja Vu all over again, as Yogi Berra said.

As with Vietnam, the war policy is fueled by fantasies so obstinate and obtuse you have to wonder what they're smoking at the highest levels of government. From an Associated Press story earlier this week we learned:

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told an international conference on Afghanistan on Tuesday that those members of the Taliban who abandoned extremism must be granted an "honorable form of reconciliation."

"This matter was also raised in the past," said Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid, referring to comments last month by Obama, who spoke of reaching out to moderate Taliban.

"They have to go and find the moderate Taliban, their leader and speak to them. This is a lunatic idea," Mujahid said by telephone from an unknown location.

Because the "moderate Taliban" is purely a fantastical invention of the Obama White House, the outcome of this phase of the "War on Terror" is a foregone conclusion. "If the U.S. plan fails to show results, analysts say, time is on the Taliban side." Ah, those un-named analysts again. I guess I'm an analyst too, since I know what comes next: Clinton dispatches CIA guys with dollars to Afghanistan to hire people to go on TV and play the part of "moderate Taliban," and some people in the U.S. are dumb enough to believe this ludicrous charade. So the "War on Terror" continues with our approval.

The Iranians have been busting our little bubble as well. After Obama recently invited the Iranians to tea, he had to throw in that he was hoping talks would convince them to stop being "a nuclear threat" and dissuade them from supporting terrorists.

The theocratic dictator of that country, much as we may dislike his mode of governing, responded intelligently to this idiocy by saying he had no interest in talking to someone who would openly and blatantly lie about his country's policies and intentions the way Obama did, adding, "We cannot see any change. What is the change in your policy? Did you remove the sanctions? Did you stop supporting the Zionist regime? Tell us what you have changed. We can't see change even in the words of the new American president."

Actually, it's a lot worse than that. There's been no change since 1965.

"A fool is incapable of learning," the Buddha said. "Knowledge only cleaves his head."

The only hope for us is to stop being fools. I would have thought 9/11 might shock us out of our foolishness, but it seems to have only made it worse.

Map schnorred from Jesus' General.