|
|
home / subscribe / donate / tower / books / archives / search / links / feedback / events / faq
|
America's First Terror War
|
|
Today's Stories May 5 / 6, 2007 Alexander Cockburn May 4, 2007 Patrick Cockburn Col. Dan Smith Norman Solomon Azmi Bishara Ron Jacobs Dave Lindorff Kevin Zeese Bob Fitrakis Janet Kauffman Website of
the Day
May 3, 2007 Jeff Halper Christopher
Brauchli Dave Zirin Corporate Crime
Reporter Robert Fisk Mike Ferner Mike Whitney Pham Binh Dave Lindorff Michael A.
Johnson Website of the Day
May 2, 2007 Saul Landau Dr. Susan Block Carla Blank Margaret Kimberly Kevin Zeese Carlos Villareal Michael Dickinson Tim Shorrock Alevtina Rea William S.
Lind Website of the Day
Andrew Cockburn Fred Gardner Chase Madar Ralph Nader John V. Walsh Joshua Frank Leslie Radford Shaun Harkin Dave Lindorff Peter Rost,
MD Peter Linebaugh Website of
the Day
April 30, 2007 Frank Menetrez Paul Craig
Roberts Ray McGovern Manuel Garcia,
Jr. Diana Johnstone Sherwood Ross Peter Rost, MD Robert Jensen Kevin Zeese Jane Stillwater Website of
the Day
April 28 / 29, 2007 Alexander Cockburn Jeffrey St.
Clair Fred Gardner David Orchard
Alan Maass Joe Bageant Robert Fantina Hanan Ashrawi Ron Jacobs Nicole Colson Ben Terrall Missy Beattie Harvey Wasserman Cindy Beringer Mike Roselle RAWA James McEnteer Poets' Basement Website of the Weekend
Eva Liddell Phyllis Bennis Mike Whitney Michael F.
Brown Jordan Flaherty Margaret Kimberly Christopher Brauchli Jacob Mundy Website of the Day
Andrew Cockburn Franklin Lamb Patrick Cockburn Roger Morris Henry Siegman Alevtina Rea Paris Nikolas Kozloff Alan Farago Matthew S. Miller Website of
the Day
Sharon Smith David Price Diana Johnstone Brendan Cooney Sonja Karkar Brian Concannon Lee Gaillard Leah Fishbein Dave Lindorff Neal Galloway Website of the Day
April 24, 2007 Ishmael Reed Lila Rajiva Paul Craig Roberts Patrick Cockburn Ralph Nader Mike Whitney Website of the Day
April 23, 2007 Saul Landau Patrick Cockburn Robert Fantina Sam Husseini Corporate Crime Reporter Elizabeth Lalasz Harvey Wasserman Dave Lindorff Gary Leupp Stephen Lendman Website of the Day
Alexander Cockburn Fred Gardner Kristoffer Larsson Barbara Rose
Johnston Manuel Garcia, Jr. John Scagliotti Marjorie Cohn Patrick Cockburn Diana Johnstone Ron Jacobs Evelyn Pringle BANCO Paul Richards Dan Bacher Ben Terrall Sherwood Ross Remi Kanazi Aseem Shrivastava Poets' Basement Website of
the Day
April 20, 2007 Doug Peacock Diane Farsetta Tom Clifford Amira Hass Nicole Colson Sonja Karkar Heather Gray Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban Agustin Velloso Matthew Koehler Website of
the Day
April 19, 2007 Emad Mekay
/ Patrick Cockburn Larry C. Johnson Norman Solomon Saul Williams Sunsara Taylor Harvey Wasserman Christopher
Brauchli Anthony Papa Dave Lindorff Website of the Day
April 18, 2007 Lila Rajiva Landau / Hassen Charles Fisher
/ Diane Christian Kevin Prosen China Hand Peter Rost,
MD Justin Akers Chacón Jerry Kroth Sherwood Ross Niranjan Ramakrishnan Alice Cherbonnier Website of
the Year?
April 17, 2007 Jean Bricmont
/ Paul Craig
Roberts Frida Berrigan Alison Weir John Walsh Jason Hribal Evelyn Pringle Ben Terrall Stan Cox Soren Ambrose Website of the Day
April 16, 2007 John F. Sugg Ismael Hossein-Zadeh Carl G. Estabrook Paul Craig Roberts Uri Avnery Ralph Nader Eamon McCann Lee Sustar Mike Whitney Don Fitz Stephen Lendman Website of the Day
April 14 / 15, 2007 Alexander Cockburn Jorge Mariscal Jeffrey St. Clair Dave Marsh Dr. Trudy Bond Joe Bageant Fidel Castro Alfredo Molano Alan Farago Michael Neumann Fred Gardner Ron Jacobs Gail Dines Linda Ford Missy Beattie Dan La Botz Giuliana Sgrena Laura Carlsen Abu Spinoza Elizabeth Schulte Poets' Basement Website of
the Weekend
April 13, 2007 Patrick Cockburn Stephen Soldz George Ciccarriello-Maher Laith al-Saud Dave Zirin John Ross Ramzy Baroud Harvey Wasserman Lopez, Olivo and Garcia Dols, Fukumori,
Judd and Tillett-Saks Website of the Day
April 12, 2007 JoAnn Wypijewski Paul Craig
Roberts Marjorie Cohn Evelyn Pringle Ron Jacobs Norman Solomon Joe DeRaymond Nicola Nasser Nikolas Kozloff William S.
Lind Siegfried L. Sassoon Website of
the Day
R. T. Naylor Vijay Prashad Patrick Cockburn Winslow T. Wheeler Jack Balkwill Alan Farago Russell D.
Hoffman Peter Rost, MD Mike Whitney Dave Lindorff Susie Day Website of the Day
April 10, 2007 James G. Abourezk Earl Ofari
Hutchinson Joshua Frank Lee Sustar Joseph Grosso Nirmal Ghosh Robert Jensen Ramzy Baroud Paul Rockwell Mario Joseph
and Fred Wilhelms Website of
the Day
April 9, 2007 Saul Landau Uri Avnery Nicole Colson Gideon Levy Corporate Crime Reporter Evelyn Pringle Hill Kemp Martha Rosenberg Keith Rosenthal Jane Stillwater Website of the Day
Alexander Cockburn Sara Roy Arno J. Mayer Jeffrey St.
Clair Vicente Navarro Fidel Castro Fred Gardner Ralph Nader David N. Rahni Arthur Neslen Pratyush Chandra Missy Beattie Marc Levy Poets' Basement Website of the Weekend
April 6, 2007 Franklin Lamb Gloria La Riva Corporate Crime Reporter Ron Jacobs Felice Pace Walter Brasch David Swanson Sylvia Syracuse
Patrick Cockburn Tom Barry Richard W. Behan Nicola Nasser Bernadine Dohrn Laray Polk Helen Redmond
April 4, 2007 Col. Dan Smith Joshua Frank Margaret Kimberly Sharon Smith Jeff Cohen and Norman Solomon Martin Luther
King,Jr. Bill Quigley Dave Zirin Evelyn Pringle Peter Rost,
MD Website of the Day
April 3, 2007 Patrick Cockburn Marjorie Cohn Brian M. Downing Corporate Crime
Reporter Carol Norris Ralph Nader Dave Lindorff Scott Bontz Thomas Dolby Website of
the Day
Gary Leupp Uri Avnery James Petras Norman Solomon Robert Fisk Stanley Heller Sherwood Ross Monica Benderman Stephen Fleischman Anne McElroy
Dachel Website of the Day
Cockburn /
St. Clair Fred Gardner Greg Moses Gary Leupp Robert Fisk Roger Morris Conn Hallinan Kristin J.
Anderson Jason Hribal John Ross Christopher Brauchli David Underhill Elizabeth Schulte Ben Terrall Missy Beattie Sonja Karkar Daniel Wolff David Vest Ron Jacobs Poets' Basement Website of the Weekend
Subscribe Online
|
Weekend
Edition Hypocritical Words and ActionsBush's VetoBy ROBERT FANTINA On May 1, 2007, the anniversary of his infamous 'Mission Accomplished' speech, President George W. Bush received a spending bill from Congress that set limits on American involvement in Iraq's civil war. As promised, Mr. Bush promptly vetoed the bill. His resolution to do so is motivated partly by his belief that withdrawal from Iraq as mandated by the bill could turn that nation into a 'cauldron of chaos.' A simple definition of chaos, easily available on the web, is the following: 'a state of utter confusion or disorder; a total lack of organization or order.' Does Mr. Bush believe that order and stability now characterize Iraq, and that that nation will descend into chaos if U.S. soldiers depart? As early as January 22 of 2004 the CIA was predicting civil war in Iraq; today few people outside of Mr. Bush's rose-colored-glasses inner circle deny that Iraq is indeed in the midst of a bloody civil war. With the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds locked in centuries-old rivalries, and the so-called government of Iraq, with heavy U.S. backing, fighting everyone, Iraq can easily and accurately be described as chaotic. Perhaps Mr. Bush could look at the confusion surrounding the wall he wanted built around part of Iraq, to 'protect' some neighborhoods. The government of Iraq protested, and construction ceased, or at least it had the last time anyone looked. Walling up neighborhoods does not seem to be the most effective security measure available, and doing so without the consent of the government of the nation you are occupying also seems like a dubious course of action. Mr. Bush's fears of chaos would
seem to indicate a concern that, without the presence of American
soldiers, Iraq citizens from rival groups may demonstrate hostilities.
In the month of April, since Mr. Bush's Chaos in Iraq is further described by a State Department report showing a 30% increase in terrorist attacks around the world, with most of the increase attributable to violence in Iraq. An estimated 45% of all terrorist activities were centered around that beleaguered nation. Mr. Bush and the members of his administration continue to avoid reality, or even the most cursory look at the facts that are right in front of them. The view of events is not quite so obscure to other observers. When retired Marine Corps Gen. John (Jack) Sheehan turned down Mr. Bush's request that he take the thankless job of 'war czar' (whatever that is), he clearly described his reason for doing so. Said Mr. Sheehan: "The very fundamental issue is, they don't know where the hell they are going." He was one of five, four-star generals who said 'no thanks' to Mr. Bush when offered this dead-end job. Another reason for his veto was given by Mr. Bush: "Success in Iraq is critical to the security of free people everywhere." An interesting statement, for certain, but he did not bother to elaborate on how success in Iraq is so critical for the security of the rest of the world. Nor has he ever done so. The desire to prevent Iraq from descending into a 'cauldron of chaos' may be Mr. Bush's new mantra, but we must not forget his tired old standby, his accusation that not funding the war equates to not supporting the troops. On April 3, 2007, Mr. Bush derided Democrats for proposing a bill he would veto; he said that the money his request would authorize was needed for new equipment and equipment repair, among other things. Let us look back to December 9, 2004, when Mr. Bush's callous and incompetent Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, was speaking to soldiers in Kuwait on their way to Iraq. Army Spc. Thomas Wilson, a scout with the Tennessee National Guard, asked Mr. Rumsfeld the following question: "We've had troops in Iraq for coming up on three years and we've always staged here out of Kuwait. Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles?" Why indeed? Mr. Rumsfeld had no response except the highly disingenuous statement that "you have to go to war with the army you have, not the army you want." Since this was a war of choice, certainly its start could have been delayed until the soldiers had what they needed to protect themselves. Where, one wonders, does this fit in with Mr. Bush's self-righteous call to provide funding to 'support the troops?' A more recent example is also telling. The term 'Walter Reed Medical Center,' once associated with the military's best efforts to assist injured veterans, now only conjures up images of the medical and bureaucratic neglect of injured, suffering veterans against the backdrop of rodents, insects, black mold and rotting walls. When he visited that facility just a few months before conditions there were exposed to the world, Mr. Bush spoke fine but empty words about supporting the troops: "We owe them all we can give them. Not only for when they're in harm's way, but when they come home to help them adjust if they have wounds, or help them adjust after their time in service." As evidenced by Mr. Wilson's questions to Mr. Rumsfeld, and the recently-exposed conditions at Walter Reed, the U.S. government clearly does not give its soldiers 'all we can give them' either when they are in harm's way, or when they come home. And now Mr. Bush is saying that Congress, which has blithely funded every war appropriations bill he's asked for since the start of his Iraq catastrophe, is not 'supporting the troops,' or providing them with what they need to do their jobs. This raises more puzzling questions. Mr. Bush, in his speech of April 16, surrounded by families of soldiers, said this: "The families gathered here understand that our troops want to finish the job." One asks: what is 'the job,' and what will constitute its finish? Also, do the troops really want to finish this undefined job? The Military Times published a poll on December 29, 2006. Active-duty service members were asked a variety of questions. In response to the question, 'Should the U.S. have gone to war with Iraq,' 41% said yes, 37% no, 9% had no opinion and 11 % refused to answer. In response to the question, 'Regardless of whether you think the U.S. should have gone to war, how likely is the U.S. to succeed,' 13% said very likely, 37 % said somewhat likely, 31% responded not very likely, 10% not at all likely. Eight percent had no opinion or did not answer. With only half seeing any possibility of success, it is unlikely that all the troops want to 'finish the job' as Mr. Bush falsely claims. One of the provisions Congress insisted upon in the now-vetoed bill is that there be consequences tied to Iraq's failure to reach certain milestones. Mr. Bush has said that Iraq has been informed that America's commitment to that nation is not open-ended, but he has failed to say what circumstances would bring that commitment to a close.Further, he has said he will veto any bill that contains a timetable for withdrawal. However, on June 5 of 1999, Mr. Bush, then governor of Texas, said this about U.S. military involvement in Kosovo: "I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn." Perhaps the most hypocritical statement that Mr. Bush made in vetoing this bill was the following: "It didn't make any sense to impose the will of politicians over the recommendations of our military commanders in the field." It must be remembered that in December of 2006, the month after the elections in which the Republican Party lost control of both the House and Senate, and when Mr. Bush first began making noises about a 'new way forward' in Iraq, General John. P. Abizaid, commander of the U.S. forces in Iraq, announced plans to retire. Mr. Abizaid was a strong opponent of increasing the number of American soldiers in Iraq, saying that such a course would only increase that nation's dependence on American support. It appears that Mr. Bush, by nominating Lt. Gen. David Petraeus as the new commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, has imposed his will (that of a politician) on the military commanders in the field (good-by Mr. Abizaid; you should not have disagreed with Mr. Bush if you wanted to keep your job). And so Mr. Bush's political spin continues. If the military commanders in the field do not agree with Mr. Bush's assessment of the situation, and with his opinion of how it should be handled, simply change the commanders to those who will. Instead of Mr. Abizaid arguing against a troop 'surge' we now have Lt. Gen. Petraeus talking about an 'enormous commitment' to the Iraqi imperial disaster. One can only wonder where it will all end. Mr. Bush's speechwriters create clever phases like 'mission accomplished' or 'cauldron of chaos' and expect Congress and the American public to accept them at face value. This is not surprising, since for the first several years of the war Congress and the public did so. There is, sadly, no realization on the part of Mr. Bush and those riding his war train over the cliff that the public has seen through much of his deadly façade, and in doing so changed the Congress to one more reflective of its will. As Howard Dean expressed it, "this veto ignores the will of the American people, military experts, the Iraq Study Group and Congress." It is now the responsibility of Congress to continue its efforts to defund Mr. Bush's disastrous military misadventure, bring all U.S. soldiers home and leave the Iraqis to form a government of their own choosing. This will happen ultimately; the U.S. government will determine how much innocent blood will flow before it does. Robert Fantina is author of 'Desertion and the American Soldier: 1776--2006.'
|
The Gang's All Here: Judy Miller, Bob Woodward, Jeffrey Goldberg, Rupert Murdoch, Bill O'Reilly...End Times Leaves No Reputation Unstained!  Buy End Times Now! CounterPunch Books! Saul Landau's Bush and Botox World with a Foreword by Gore Vidal  Click Here to Order!  Michael Neumann's Devastating Rebuttal of Alan Dershowitz Grand Theft Pentagon: Tales of Greed and Profiteering in the War on Terror by Jeffrey St. Clair           The Occupation by Patrick Cockburn           CITY BEAUTIFUL By Tennessee Reed        Bruce Springsteen On Tour By Dave Marsh                   |
