Get FREE BuzzFlash News Alerts

Email:  

On the Fifth Anniversary of the Iraq War, It's Mourning in America

BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG

Mark Karlin

Editor and Publisher

March 19, 2008

ir

I launched AOL Wednesday at 4:30 AM and was greeted with this bit of news on their "Welcome Screen": "Simon Shows His Soft Side: His Announcement to Oprah Has Us (Pleasantly) Surprised."

Such is the state of our long national slouch into anesthetic delusion that the fifth anniversary of a war in Iraq that is nearing 4,000 American dead is buried on America’s popular browser due to the "pressing" story on the more tender sensibilities of an "American Idol" judge.

It’s supposed to be the smart political thing to say that the surge is working, but only if you are the kind that thinks everything is hunky dory between the Israelis and Palestinians. The surge is nothing more than a political/police action/bribery of faction leaders Band-Aid to lower the death count until the Bush Administration ends and a new president has to deal with the disaster.

It’s widely known in urban areas with drug problems that if a particular neighborhood has a lot of shootings, the police send in tactical units and patrol it heavily for awhile. Of course, the carnage and narcotics activity subsides for awhile and the police departments announce the success of their effort. But all they have done is temporarily halted an endemic problem.

It is estimated that anywhere from 100,000 to one million Iraqis have died as a result of the Iraq War, and that three trillion American tax payer dollars will be spent on the NeoCon Bush-Cheney folly.

That didn’t stop happy-go-lucky George W. Bush from declaring that the Iraq War was well worth it on the occasion of its fifth anniversary:

Five years after launching the U.S. invasion of Iraq, President Bush is making some of his most expansive claims of success in the fighting there. Bush said last year's troop buildup has turned Iraq around and produced "the first large-scale Arab uprising against Osama bin Laden."

"The challenge in the period ahead is to consolidate the gains we have made and seal the extremists' defeat," he said in excerpts the White House released Tuesday night. "We have learned through hard experience what happens when we pull our forces back too fast — the terrorists and extremists step in, fill the vacuum, establish safe havens and use them to spread chaos and carnage."

Of course, Iraq didn’t have Al-Qaeda in its borders until Bush created the vacuum and chaos that allowed them to enter the country – and still they account, by Pentagon estimates, for less than 5% of the "insurgency" in Iraq (with most of that small percentage composed of volunteers from Bush’s good buddies, Saudi Arabia). At least 95% of the people killing our GIs in Iraq are – well – Iraqis. And in polls in the Washington Post last year, the vast majority of Iraqis wanted us to leave their nation, and a majority sympathized with the insurgency.

But Bush is as happy as a pig slopping around in the mud.

And Dick Cheney made a "surprise" visit to Baghdad to declare the war a "success," as nearly 50 people were blown up in a suicide bomb. Cheney also repeated yet again the repeatedly disproven, by his own military and intelligence services, claim that Saddam Hussein had a connection to Al-Qaeda:

''This long-term struggle became urgent on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001. That day we clearly saw that dangers can gather far from our own shores and find us right there at home,'' said Cheney, who was accompanied by his wife, Lynne, and their daughter, Elizabeth.

''So the United States made a decision: to hunt down the evil of terrorism and kill it where it grows, to hold the supporters of terror to account and to confront regimes that harbor terrorists and threaten the peace,'' Cheney said.

"Understanding all the dangers of this new era, we have no intention of abandoning our friends or allowing this country of 170,000 square miles to become a staging area for further attacks against Americans.''

Just last week the White House suppressed another Pentagon report that concluded there was no link between Saddam Hussein and the terrorists responsible for 9/11, but Cheney’s only real skill is in sustaining alternative realities.

Then there’s John "The Mad Hatter" McCain who was doing a sort of baton pass visit to Baghdad, only to twice confuse the Shiites with the Sunnis, which indicates that he is as ignorant as Bush, who apparently didn’t know the difference between the two groups at the time he invaded Iraq.

Oh, and Cheney told the troops that the Iraqis are learning to love us. What does he think, that they are masochists to his sadism? In fact a recent BBC Poll confirmed more or less what the WP polling found last year: most Iraqis don’t have confidence in the U.S. Military.

So, it’s the Fifth Anniversary of a grim milestone in American history: a war without end, run by incompetent leaders who reside in "Neverland."

It’s an occasion for mourning in America, not celebration.

BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG

Technorati Tags:Technorati Tags:

Clinton joins Bush in his effort to rewrite history

Hillary Clinton has joined Bush in rewriting history to justify her vote to support Bush's illegal war and occupation of Iraq.

On January 13, 2008, Hillary tried to justify her vote to authorize Bush's insane war on Meet the Press, with one of her most outrageous whoppers ever. Knowing that the pumpkin-headed Tim Russert wouldn't dare challenge Bush's lie, she borrowed it to defend herself.

Watch this great video ad, which uses nothing but Hillary's own words to expose her audacious lie: Hillary rewrites history

"It's absolutely unfair to say that the vote was a vote for war. It was a vote to put inspectors back in [Iraq]."

Not that surprisingly, ol' Pumpkin Head let her get away with that whopper since he has dutifully ignored the same lie whenever Bush told it.

In March 2003, the month the Bush ordered the attack and invasion of Iraq, UN weapon inspectors were in the process of finishing their inspection and certification that Iraq had destroyed all remaining weapons of mass destruction (WMDs).

The UN inspectors were told to leave Iraq a few days before Bush launched his "shock and awe" air attacks. Had they been allowed to continue the inspection, they would have exposed Bush excuse for what it was, fabricated intelligence.

So now most of the news media are letting Bush rewrite history and and now claim that we were forced to go to war because Hussein would not let UN inspectors into Iraq, even though it was Bush who stopped the inspection and told the inspectors to leave Iraq. USA Today report

Here's how the Chimpanzee in Chief now tells it:

“We gave him [Saddam Hussein] a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn’t let them in. And, therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power.” White House news release

When it comes to telling bald-faced lies to justify corrupt and craven conduct, Hillary is a match for Bush. Watch her spin her lie and then imagine the amount of harm she could do as Bush's replacement:

"It's absolutely unfair to say that the vote was a vote for war. It was a vote to put inspectors back in [Iraq]."

Clinton is every bit as obsessively secretive, arrogant, and dishonest as Bush. She shares his stubborn refusal to ever admit an error or to apologize for anything, and she values loyalty above competence. The most frightening thing about Hillary is that she's a whole world smarter than the Commander in Chimp.

By the way, here's the actual title of the bill giving Bush authority to go to war:

"Authorization for Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq"
Joint House and Senate Resolution

Again, here is how Hillary describes the resolution she voted for:

"It's absolutely unfair to say that the vote was a vote for war. It was a vote to put inspectors back in [Iraq]."

Atonement

What we can do is end this war. Mourn today. Surge tomorrow and the next day for as long as it takes to stop this atrocity.

Fight Ignorance - facts re USUK attack

Yes olnick has the facts IMHO re 2 events and the illegality of the USUK's highest war crime, an act of aggression... and this is the opinion of the vast majority of experts in international law around the world, including in the US. The so called 'Ussled "coalition".. ( of the "coerced and bribed").. quite a few Poles.. 16 or so from Fiji... 26 from Mongolia etc., or something along those lines.. means that the war crimes charges are seemingly widespread. But when the actual killings are tallied, we see that the USUK "shock and awe" and use of WMD such as DU, Falluja massacres and similar genocides, the ongoing USUK air attacks etc., the burden of guilt lies where the deaths have occured..then the criminal charges can be more easily concentrated. A few Australian or other engineers trying to fix things are obviously less culpable. Thousands of writers, bloggers, citizens and journalists in national media from USUK have labelled both Bliar and Bush/Cheney as war criminals.. None have been sued for libel. Guess why not. The actual approximation of the numbers murdered by USUK forces are reliably given by the Lancet study and similar research and are over one million, mostly children under 13 years or so. Why does the editor here mention the 100,000 "estimate" and where does it come from?

Winter Soldiers

This past weekend Iraq Veterans Against the War convened in Silver Springs, Maryland to present their testimonial evidence of War Crimes sanctioned by the US Military during the invasion and continuing occupation of Iraq. I am appalled but not surprized that no broadcast or major cable media have reported on this historic event (WaPo had a story buried in the local section of the paper). And coverage is glaringly missing here at Buzzflash. As to the "start" of the Iraq War, we could go back in time to the 80's when Iraq was "the enemy of my enemy" Iran, and Rumsfeld, at the behest of Reagan and HWBush, negotiated arms and chemical weapons deals to be used against the Iranians during the Iran-Iraq War. And don't forget the PNAC plan in 1998 and the Authorization for Regime Change in Iraq, signed by William Jefferson Clinton in '98, which nullified the "need" for an Authorization for the Use of Military Force in Iraq as demanded by GWBush in 2002. That was just the BushCo WHIGs (White House Iraq Group)'s way of having the Congress sign their political souls away, as Kerry, Biden, Edwards and Clinton have found out. No Senator who voted for that Authorization should be able to look an Iraq War vet in the eye, nor their family members or loved ones. They signed a death warrant for the American troops, and have the blood of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people on their hands, all for the sake of looking "Patriotic" in a time of fear. The number one issue that should unequivocally unite us all as Progressives is our opposition to this illegal and immoral occupation of Iraq. Over 70% of the Iraqi people want us out NOW. What is being labelled Al Qaida in Iraq for political purposes is actually the local peoples' insurgency. They want their country back, and if our Armed forces were not there, they would work out their differences among themselves and kick out the Saudi Jihadists who are undermining their struggle to reconstruct their society. Please Buzzers, go to Democracy Now's website and watch and Listen to the Iraq War vets tell the truth about why we must leave Iraq .

Numb to What Should Produce Outrage

We are so jaded. Dick and George continue to "catapult the propaganda," long after everyone has gotten bored and gone home.

The non-reaction is depressing.

They both belong in the Hague, standing in the dock.

"incompetent" is the least of it

Please let's not forget that the issue is not just the staggeringly incompetent prosecution of this war, but that the overriding disgrace is that the war itself is and always has been profoundly immoral, illegal and evil That would still be the case if the planners and executors of this catastrophe had been brilliant strategists and achieved their stated goals.

Agreed

Yep, Iraq is, was and always will be the wrong stinkin' country, period. The proof of that could not be more obvious: www.asecondlookatthesaudis.com

Liberal error, again

Please BuzzFlash, this is not "the fifth anniversary of the 'war' in Iraq". The war in Iraq began in 1991 and has continued unabated. Under Clinton, 500,000 Iraqi children died under sanctions. Adeline Albright called that "acceptable". March 19th is the fifth anniversary of the invasion and occupation, the "illegal" invasion and occupation. Let's call it what it is please.

Reality check

No Vtjozef, all historians and other authorities I know of classify the UN-authorized war against Iraq (known as "Desert Storm" in the U.S.) as beginning on Aug. 2, 1990 and ending Feb. 28, 1991.

That Gulf War was fought by a coalition force from 34 nations under authorization of the United Nations.

A decade later, the United States began the current illegal war and occupation, without U.N. authorization, over a set of lies and cooked intelligence that had nothing to do with purpose of the first Gulf War (to end Iraq's illegal occupation of Kuwait).

Indeed, Bush had to go to Congress to get a new war authorization.

In 1990, the United Nations authorized armed conflict to drive Iraq out of Kuwait. The goal of the war was quickly achieved and the war ended.

Twelve years later, the United States launched an illegal war of aggression and occupation against Iraq that had nothing to do with Iraq's long-ended occupation of Kuwait.

To classify these two wars as the same is historical revisionism and false justification for Bush's illegal war and occupation of Iraq.

History written by those in control

"These two wars" suggests a prejudice that leads to your conclusion. How can an illegal occupation be seen as a justification for it? History is, of course, written by the victor, and historians have no inherent claim to not being "revisionist". They are, in fact, the "visionists", the creators of the history in the first place. When you say, "In 1990, the United Nations authorized armed conflict to drive Iraq out of Kuwait. The goal of the war was quickly achieved and the war ended" that ignores the fact that Kuwait used to be an Iraq province, and that the G. Herbert Walker Bush gave Saddam an tacit approval to go ahead. And what of the lies that led to that action? How about the highway of death where our bulldozers covered up retreating troops many alive? Perhaps, the Iraqi people should tell us how long they have been under the death and destruction of U.S. war?

King of non-sequitors

It would be useless to answer all of vtjozef's non-sequitors. It's sufficient to point out that the U.S. illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq that began 5 years ago is not the same war that began and ended 17 years ago under U.N. authorization, as he claims.