Chomsky on Why are US Troops in Afghanistan

Excerpt from the Q&A session of Noam Chomsky's 3 Dec 2009 talk at Columbia University, titled "The Unipolar Moment and the Culture of Imperialism". For the talk itself, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIknLSsyhCo
For the whole Q&A, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3671omQ-XY

Yes, Chomsky in this excerpt does refer to Osama bin Laden as "Obama bin Laden" a couple times, but it's pretty clearly just a slip of the tongue and not intentional.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Noam
• Chomsky
• Obama
• Afghanistan
• war
• invasion
• occupation
• terrorism
• osama
• bin
• laden
• Al-Qaeda
• Taliban

[walterm85]

I noticed while watching the whole Q and A session after watching the lecture, that Chomsky uses the words "Obama bin Laden". he does it twice before going back to using "Osama bin Laden". I wonder if it was intentional...? I don't think it was, but perhaps.

As usual, though, he's right on in his assessment of our recent relationship with Afghanistan.

[yrrmom]

In my description of the video on the right, I noted the slip of the tongue you describe. And I agree, it wasn't intentional.

[wwjdCRABS]

"Obama bin Laden" was most certainly said unintentionally.

[SirFoggy2Doped]

And the ONLY reason it was at 88% is because the US people were blind idiots who fell for mass manipulation.

Plus, who says one can trust Gallup??

[TheFasfas123]

@mcshobe2008 ......hav u been to afghan

[Arkinight]

Nir Rosen is the third questioner in line from the microphone. Must have been flattering for Noam to quote him when he was answering the questioner after Nir.

[psbjr]

@Marly61 I think you are mistaken...our military is incredibly effective. Its purpose is to maintain US dominance of the world, and that's what it does, flawlessly. The nation-building stuff is just there as a palliative and a cloak. Americans hate imperialistic war, so it only makes sense that in order to continue global dominance, our government has to cloak it in the myths of security and stability, just as it has done for years.

[Gettinghitonattheban]

It's also a strategic position to make sure those opium farmers who do not pay a cut to the IMF World Bank have their crops burned.

[uhhh54321]

this guy is a piece of work

[woostopalypse]

I think you are missing a key part of polls: context.

[AndrewMann552]

Sure, that's why hundreds were in Kabul this week burning an Obama effigy and calling for his death and university students are threatening to join the armed resistance. Of course 88% backed it, everyone was scared shitless, like later with Iraq.

[poop121]

they may want support in some respect, but i really doubt they want military support. with a fraction of the money spent on bombs we could fund a lot more humanitarian aid.

[Marly61]

mchobe,

You didnt mention that the questions asked on those Gallup polls were asking as if the US achieved its goal of ending the islamist's power would you be in favor of it?

THe US's military is so ineffective that after experiencing their results when the question is asked now the results are overwhelming that the Afghanis would say no to the US military even if the goal was to end fundamentalism because the results of such military action