![](http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a279/H2O_Man/paul4.jpg)
Part 1: In 2002, I did the last of a four-part interview with Chief Paul Waterman. Paul sat on the Onondaga Council of Chiefs, and on the Haudenosaunee (Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy) Grand Council of Chiefs. Among traditional Native American people, he was recognized as what translates in English as a "Wisdom Keeper."
Over the years, Paul and other Haudenosaunee leaders have met with not only Indigenous People’s leaders around the globe, but also with those at the UN, the former Soviet Union, and Washington, DC. US Presidents, including President Bush1 and President Clinton, have invited Haudenosaunee leaders to meetings, and were interested in listening to industrial/ high-tech societies’ older siblings.
The current President Bush is incapable of listening to them. Even if his aides set up such a meeting, he would be unable to understand their words. The very idea that they might know something of value would make him uncomfortable, and he would only be able to see them as "the enemy" from an old John Wayne movie.
Below are two questions and answers from that last interview, which have to do with US policy after the 9-11 attacks. I think that most DUers will not only understand what Chief Waterman was saying, but will appreciate the message:
Q: The American people are divided on how to respond to terrorism. How would the Great Law of Peace apply to this situation?
CPW: Democracy and freedom were born at Onondaga. That is in the Hiawatha Belt. There should be peace for everyone. Peace requires democracy and freedom.
But listen: when you say people are divided, think about this. Your military is dropping bombs and food on Afghanistan. That’s a divided approach, isn’t it? What might have happened if they brought food in before? Why isn’t it just as important to fight starvation and suffering, as it is to fight for oil and money?
Q: President Bush has referred to the "evil doers." What do you think about this?
CPW: Well, he’s the same way. Those people in Afghanistan are so poor and miserable. They suffer when bombs kill their parents, and they hurt when bullets kill their children. So, even if Bush believes that what he is doing is right, he has to commit evil acts to achieve his goal.
But he can’t stop. The other guy won’t. And when they do kill bin Laden, someone else will take his place.
I feel bad for the soldiers, too. Most of them are young men. They are patriotic. Like those men who fought in Desert Storm, for your national interest. But I can’t remember the price of gas dropping much since then. So who’s interest was it in?
Part 2: In 2008, as we approach the November presidential elections, it s clear that the Bush- Cheney administration has created an international crisis that will confront the next administration. This is not to say that there were not serious problems involving the US policy as it relates to nations including Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan before 2001. But this administration has made things far worse, and no president will be able to resolve all of the damage done in a single term in office.
The progressive and liberal democratic community on DU clearly recognizes that an Obama administration offers a far greater potential to begin the changes in policy that are needed, than a McCain presidency, which would offer this country and the world a third Bush term. Yet many of us have some concerns about what course President Obama will take. Recent comments on American policy in Afghanistan are a case in point.
Last week, on a couple of threads, one DUer said that "democrats who support Obama" are faced with a stark choice: if they are unwilling to join the military to participate in the war in Afghanistan, they have to organize protests against Obama. Another DUer told me that my refusal to pick one of those two choices provided evidence that I was "uncomfortable" with this issue, which s/he identified as "a turnaround … which is fair play."
In fact, I am quite comfortable talking about the issues involving US policy with Afghanistan. It is an important topic, and one that I believe is very important for DUers to discuss and take a strong position on. But I refuse to allow anyone to try to place mental handcuffs on "democrats who support Obama."
It is important that we not think in limited terms. There are always more than two choices. I remember years ago, when a human being named Ed began attending some of our meetings. He had some curious ways. For example, he advocated disrupting the Columbus Day Parade in a local city, to show that we were opposed to the events from 1492. He said that if we weren’t willing to break the law during his planned protest, then it meant we supported the exploitation of Native Americans. I said no, this was not our way. (Any older DUers who were active in the 1960s and ‘70s will recognize Ed’s "ways.")
Barack Obama – and, indeed, his campaign staff – have shown a willingness to listen to his supporters. We have options for communication that extend beyond joining the military to fight in Afghanistan, or engaging in protests in an attempt to disrupt the Obama campaign.
I am "lobbying" with the Obama campaign, and saying that the focus of American policy in Afghanistan (and other nations around the world) should include what Chief Waterman said: bring food and clothes and blankets, not bombs and bullets and blankets poisoned with small pox.
In his effort to convince himself and the world that he was as tough as any fictional character in a John Wayne movie, George Bush said there were only two choices: "Either you are with us, or against us." Barack Obama has no desire to be a fictional tough guy, nor does he limit his thinking to foolish black-and-white choices.
I urge DUers to take time to think about the best options for the country in dealing with the problems relating to Afghanistan. Then communicate your thoughts to the Obama campaign. While I recognize that I alone do not have all the answers, I will share what I am doing: I am calling the Obama campaign; writing to the Obama campaign; and posting this essay, because I am confident that some members of the campaign read some of the messages on this forum. If you have thoughts that you wish to add, I would appreciate it ….because this is among the communications I will send to the Obama campaign.
Thank you.
H2O Man