hell bent on war
-
Andrew McGeever
- Posts: 905
- Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 10:02 pm
Dear All,
It's been some time that we had serious debate on this thread,and we should all be thankful for the weapons of mass democracy (i.e. the U.S.A. and its poodle....the U.K.....and nobody else...does no other country care?).
The more we hear , the more we knew in the first place, it's becoming clear as dawn on a Middle Eastern sky that the so-called forces of freedom have gained contracts, oil, myths about Private Lynch, yet are being sucked into a morass of corporate madness. Actually, it's not madness at all: the grand plan allowed for body-bags, heros, and other emblems to be displayed and honoured as the greatest imperial power in the world tramps its path of democracy across the the scorched earth.
"Weapons of Mass Destruction".......you'll find them in Leonard Cohen's livingroom , somewhere in Los Angeles. Or maybe not: when did Canadian soldiers fight and die for "freedom"? I know the answer to that question, and so does my father.
American and British soldiers have died in this so-called war. Can anyone explain to their families why they had to die? Please don't give them that "45 minutes " nonsense.
Some correspondents on this thread have supported the invasion of Iraq, and argued their case. My question is "Why go to war on the basis of intelligence?"
Andrew.
It's been some time that we had serious debate on this thread,and we should all be thankful for the weapons of mass democracy (i.e. the U.S.A. and its poodle....the U.K.....and nobody else...does no other country care?).
The more we hear , the more we knew in the first place, it's becoming clear as dawn on a Middle Eastern sky that the so-called forces of freedom have gained contracts, oil, myths about Private Lynch, yet are being sucked into a morass of corporate madness. Actually, it's not madness at all: the grand plan allowed for body-bags, heros, and other emblems to be displayed and honoured as the greatest imperial power in the world tramps its path of democracy across the the scorched earth.
"Weapons of Mass Destruction".......you'll find them in Leonard Cohen's livingroom , somewhere in Los Angeles. Or maybe not: when did Canadian soldiers fight and die for "freedom"? I know the answer to that question, and so does my father.
American and British soldiers have died in this so-called war. Can anyone explain to their families why they had to die? Please don't give them that "45 minutes " nonsense.
Some correspondents on this thread have supported the invasion of Iraq, and argued their case. My question is "Why go to war on the basis of intelligence?"
Andrew.
I found this an interesting, and worthwhile reading for most that were interested in this thread. Agree or disagreee.
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Winning the Real War
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Last Sunday was the most important day in Iraq since the start of the war, and maybe the most important day in its modern history. It was the first day that one could speak about the "liberation" of Iraq. It was the day that a multireligious, multiethnic Governing Council of Iraqi men and women began to assume some power and responsibility for their own country — the most representative leadership Iraq has ever had.
And what was their first act? It was to declare that April 9, the day Saddam Hussein's regime was toppled, would be a national holiday. President Bush, Gen. Tommy Franks and The Weekly Standard could all call April 9 Iraq's V-E Day, but it became real only when the first representative Council of Iraqis embraced that day as their liberation. It is way too early to know whether this appointed Iraqi Council will flourish and pave the way for constitutional government and elections in Iraq, which is its assignment. It will first have to prove itself to the Iraqi people — and prove that while most Iraqis may not want us or Saddam, they do want one another. But these are not quislings, and therefore the Council's formation is a hugely important first step. This is what we came for. There is hope.
Had you been watching most American news shows or cable TV last Sunday, though, you would not have gotten a sense of this. They were focused almost exclusively on who was responsible for hyping Saddam's nuclear arms potential. This is understandable. The notion that the president may have misled the nation into war, and then blamed it on the C.I.A., is a big story.
For me, though, it is a disturbing thought that the Bush team could get itself so tied up defending its phony reasons for going to war — the notion that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction that were undeterrable and could threaten us, or that he had links with Al Qaeda — that it could get distracted from fulfilling the real and valid reason for the war: to install a decent, tolerant, pluralistic, multireligious government in Iraq that would be the best answer and antidote to both Saddam and Osama.
If the Bush team wants to win the real war, it must keep its eyes on the prize and that means the following:
First, U.S. forces need to finish the war. Sorry, Mr. President, but "major combat" is not over as you declared. Because major combat never happened in the core Sunni Muslim areas of Baghdad and the Sunni triangle to the west, where 80 percent of the attacks on U.S. forces now come from. What happened instead is that two divisions of Saddam's Republican Guards, which dominated these areas, simply melted away, and are now killing U.S. troops. These regions need to be reinvaded and then showered with reconstruction funds.
Second, we must provide massive support for the new Council in Iraq to enable it to assume more powers as quickly as possible. The more power it assumes, the more it speaks for Iraq and Iraqis to the Arab world, the more it will be clear that America is the midwife of Iraq's liberation, not its occupier, and those who shoot at us are shooting down Iraq's (and the Arab world's) future. Russia, France and Germany hold most of Iraq's $60 billion in foreign debt. Most of this needs to be forgiven. The Bush team needs to get off its high horse and challenge, and reach out to, Russia, France, Germany and the Arabs — to get those who were so ready to coddle Saddam's dictatorship to support a self-governing Iraq.
Third, according to Peter Bouckaert, senior researcher for emergencies at Human Rights Watch, over 20 mass graves have already been uncovered in Iraq, and there may be as many as 90. One grave alone in Hilla is estimated to contain 10,000 people murdered by Saddam's regime. Human Rights Watch estimates that there are 300,000 people missing in Iraq. President Bush is flailing around looking for Saddam's unused weapons of mass destruction, when evidence of his actual mass destruction is all over the place in Iraq. Yet the Pentagon has done almost nothing to help Iraqis properly exhume these graves, prepare evidence for a war crimes tribunal or expose this mass murder to the world.
Eyes on the prize, please. If we find W.M.D. in Iraq, but lose Iraq, Mr. Bush will not only go down as a failed president, but one who made the world even more dangerous for Americans. If we find no W.M.D., but build a better Iraq — one that proves that a multiethnic, multireligious Arab state can rule itself in a decent way — Mr. Bush will survive his hyping of the W.M.D. issue, and the world will be a more hospitable and safer place for all Americans.
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Winning the Real War
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Last Sunday was the most important day in Iraq since the start of the war, and maybe the most important day in its modern history. It was the first day that one could speak about the "liberation" of Iraq. It was the day that a multireligious, multiethnic Governing Council of Iraqi men and women began to assume some power and responsibility for their own country — the most representative leadership Iraq has ever had.
And what was their first act? It was to declare that April 9, the day Saddam Hussein's regime was toppled, would be a national holiday. President Bush, Gen. Tommy Franks and The Weekly Standard could all call April 9 Iraq's V-E Day, but it became real only when the first representative Council of Iraqis embraced that day as their liberation. It is way too early to know whether this appointed Iraqi Council will flourish and pave the way for constitutional government and elections in Iraq, which is its assignment. It will first have to prove itself to the Iraqi people — and prove that while most Iraqis may not want us or Saddam, they do want one another. But these are not quislings, and therefore the Council's formation is a hugely important first step. This is what we came for. There is hope.
Had you been watching most American news shows or cable TV last Sunday, though, you would not have gotten a sense of this. They were focused almost exclusively on who was responsible for hyping Saddam's nuclear arms potential. This is understandable. The notion that the president may have misled the nation into war, and then blamed it on the C.I.A., is a big story.
For me, though, it is a disturbing thought that the Bush team could get itself so tied up defending its phony reasons for going to war — the notion that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction that were undeterrable and could threaten us, or that he had links with Al Qaeda — that it could get distracted from fulfilling the real and valid reason for the war: to install a decent, tolerant, pluralistic, multireligious government in Iraq that would be the best answer and antidote to both Saddam and Osama.
If the Bush team wants to win the real war, it must keep its eyes on the prize and that means the following:
First, U.S. forces need to finish the war. Sorry, Mr. President, but "major combat" is not over as you declared. Because major combat never happened in the core Sunni Muslim areas of Baghdad and the Sunni triangle to the west, where 80 percent of the attacks on U.S. forces now come from. What happened instead is that two divisions of Saddam's Republican Guards, which dominated these areas, simply melted away, and are now killing U.S. troops. These regions need to be reinvaded and then showered with reconstruction funds.
Second, we must provide massive support for the new Council in Iraq to enable it to assume more powers as quickly as possible. The more power it assumes, the more it speaks for Iraq and Iraqis to the Arab world, the more it will be clear that America is the midwife of Iraq's liberation, not its occupier, and those who shoot at us are shooting down Iraq's (and the Arab world's) future. Russia, France and Germany hold most of Iraq's $60 billion in foreign debt. Most of this needs to be forgiven. The Bush team needs to get off its high horse and challenge, and reach out to, Russia, France, Germany and the Arabs — to get those who were so ready to coddle Saddam's dictatorship to support a self-governing Iraq.
Third, according to Peter Bouckaert, senior researcher for emergencies at Human Rights Watch, over 20 mass graves have already been uncovered in Iraq, and there may be as many as 90. One grave alone in Hilla is estimated to contain 10,000 people murdered by Saddam's regime. Human Rights Watch estimates that there are 300,000 people missing in Iraq. President Bush is flailing around looking for Saddam's unused weapons of mass destruction, when evidence of his actual mass destruction is all over the place in Iraq. Yet the Pentagon has done almost nothing to help Iraqis properly exhume these graves, prepare evidence for a war crimes tribunal or expose this mass murder to the world.
Eyes on the prize, please. If we find W.M.D. in Iraq, but lose Iraq, Mr. Bush will not only go down as a failed president, but one who made the world even more dangerous for Americans. If we find no W.M.D., but build a better Iraq — one that proves that a multiethnic, multireligious Arab state can rule itself in a decent way — Mr. Bush will survive his hyping of the W.M.D. issue, and the world will be a more hospitable and safer place for all Americans.
Linda
-
Byron
- Posts: 3171
- Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:01 pm
- Location: Mad House, Eating Tablets, Cereals, Jam, Marmalade and HONEY, with Albert
I understand that the Governing Council Of Iraq has no teeth. The Bush representative has the ultimate say so and the power of veto on all and every decision the Council makes. It is a puppet and the ordinary Iraqi people have seen it as such. They have already murdered a pro American Mayor and his son. I have watched news footage of American soldiers patroling Iraqi townships and the American reporters have drawn our attention to the fact that there is no eye contact between the soldiers and the Iraqi citizens. This does not bode well for the future. We all had our say when the war was being planned and once it started, we all had to 'move on' from our previous views and opinions. We are now in a post-war situation, which is becoming very dangerous for the soldiers on the ground.
When the Germans over ran Norway in the Second World War, they created a governing council to run the country for them. One of the leaders of that group was the man whose name is now synonymous with collaboration with an occupying power. Quizzling.
The battle for a peaceful and properous emergence of an independant Iraq is going to be unbelievably difficult.
Just because someone creates a body of representatives, it does not mean that they represent the people from whom they are drawn.
It must have become clear to most people that the issues surrounding Iraq are not issues which can be looked at in a black and white way. Good and bad. Just and unjust. The whole picture is a mosaic of shades of grey and it will need some incredibly adaptive brain cells to achieve a lasting peace.
The one problem which has to be addressed before any true peace can emerge, is the situation in Israel and the Palestinian quest for their own autonomy.
We are in it for the long haul and nobody should expect a quick fix to sort out the Iraqi situation in isolation.
I'm sorry if this sounds pessimistic but I'm afraid that this is the way the world has always been. Every action causes a reaction. Every change causes consequences.
I am a feminist and have already pointed out in this forum that we only know half of all the world's history. We know nothing of the suffering and sacrifices which millions of women had suffered over thousands of years. Perhaps our governments should be run by women who are all expert chess players? I for one am p***ed off with the 'macho' posturing of political and military mouthpieces, who daily parade before us on out television screens.
Byron 'sends his regards'.
When the Germans over ran Norway in the Second World War, they created a governing council to run the country for them. One of the leaders of that group was the man whose name is now synonymous with collaboration with an occupying power. Quizzling.
The battle for a peaceful and properous emergence of an independant Iraq is going to be unbelievably difficult.
Just because someone creates a body of representatives, it does not mean that they represent the people from whom they are drawn.
It must have become clear to most people that the issues surrounding Iraq are not issues which can be looked at in a black and white way. Good and bad. Just and unjust. The whole picture is a mosaic of shades of grey and it will need some incredibly adaptive brain cells to achieve a lasting peace.
The one problem which has to be addressed before any true peace can emerge, is the situation in Israel and the Palestinian quest for their own autonomy.
We are in it for the long haul and nobody should expect a quick fix to sort out the Iraqi situation in isolation.
I'm sorry if this sounds pessimistic but I'm afraid that this is the way the world has always been. Every action causes a reaction. Every change causes consequences.
I am a feminist and have already pointed out in this forum that we only know half of all the world's history. We know nothing of the suffering and sacrifices which millions of women had suffered over thousands of years. Perhaps our governments should be run by women who are all expert chess players? I for one am p***ed off with the 'macho' posturing of political and military mouthpieces, who daily parade before us on out television screens.
Byron 'sends his regards'.
"Bipolar is a roller-coaster ride without a seat belt. One day you're flying with the fireworks; for the next month you're being scraped off the trolley" I said that.
-
Aavalanche
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 4:48 pm
- Location: beneath the golden hill
-
Byron
- Posts: 3171
- Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:01 pm
- Location: Mad House, Eating Tablets, Cereals, Jam, Marmalade and HONEY, with Albert
I should like to extend a welcome to someone who is visiting the head of my country's church. I hope that the food and accomodation will be up to the exemplary standard of the 'household.'
I also hope that a few moments will be given in thought and prayer for 19 wooden coffins in Rome this evening.
They have now joined all of our other young men and women.
I have nothing more to say. There is nothing more I can say.
I also hope that a few moments will be given in thought and prayer for 19 wooden coffins in Rome this evening.
They have now joined all of our other young men and women.
I have nothing more to say. There is nothing more I can say.
Last edited by Byron on Wed Nov 19, 2003 1:44 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
Byron
- Posts: 3171
- Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:01 pm
- Location: Mad House, Eating Tablets, Cereals, Jam, Marmalade and HONEY, with Albert
Elizabeth, I have added an extra sentence to my previous posting, because I need to show how much distress I feel for any young men and women, from whatever nation they hail. We are ALL losing the flowers of our youth. There is no monopoly on grief.
I said there was nothing more I could say and I was correct. I can only emphasise the pain and sense of loss which my words were intended to convey.
I said there was nothing more I could say and I was correct. I can only emphasise the pain and sense of loss which my words were intended to convey.
"Bipolar is a roller-coaster ride without a seat belt. One day you're flying with the fireworks; for the next month you're being scraped off the trolley" I said that.
Remembrance
In the piece regarding the losses, through death, of famous/infamous people [i.e. Idi Amin] this year, on MSNBC, the final paragraph was by Newsweek. I appreciate the way they approached the loss of many more.
"IN A TIME OF WAR
As we went to press, 460 American troops had died in Iraq this past year, along with 85 soldiers from other nations, 53 of them from the United Kingdom and 17 from Italy. The civilian death toll in Iraq may have approached 10,000; in Baghdad alone, more than 2,000 occupation-related deaths have been reported since May 1, the official end of hostilities. These are the numbers—and we know they don't quite register. How could they possibly? But each one had a name, though some may never be known. Each one had a story, of incalculable worth, though some may never be told.
© 2003 Newsweek, Inc."
"IN A TIME OF WAR
As we went to press, 460 American troops had died in Iraq this past year, along with 85 soldiers from other nations, 53 of them from the United Kingdom and 17 from Italy. The civilian death toll in Iraq may have approached 10,000; in Baghdad alone, more than 2,000 occupation-related deaths have been reported since May 1, the official end of hostilities. These are the numbers—and we know they don't quite register. How could they possibly? But each one had a name, though some may never be known. Each one had a story, of incalculable worth, though some may never be told.
© 2003 Newsweek, Inc."
Having mentioned Nicholas Berg elsewhere, I just read this short article and found it interesting. Nan, I can't argue with what you've said regarding abortion, and the incalculable worth of those who never made it here.
Berg Beheading Caps U.S. Failure in Iraq Media Wars
Pacific News Service
Updated on 2004-05-14 14:02:48
PACIFIC NEWS EDITOR's NOTE: For a country that has the most advanced media industry in the world, the United States is a consistent loser in the image wars in the Middle East, writes PNS contributor William O. Beeman, a professor of anthropology and director of Middle East Studies at Brown University. Beeman is also author of the forthcoming book, "Iraq: State in Search of a Nation."
BY WILLIAM O. BEEMAN, PACIFIC NEWS SERVICE
The widely disseminated video of the gruesome beheading of Nicholas Berg demonstrates the degree to which the current conflict in Iraq has become a hollow war of media-driven symbolism and images, rather than one of substance-one, moreover, that the United States is losing.
Berg's decapitation was shocking, but its main purpose was to create the occasion for a cynically and brilliantly, calculated show. It was literally a "snuff film," designed to horrify and titillate. Eventually, Berg's murderers knew that if they remained significantly anonymous, the United States itself would eventually be blamed for the crime; and indeed, these diabolically clever, media-savvy operators have proved correct. With no one specific to point to, it is President Bush and his administration to whom the blame for Berg's death is slowly being attached.
The war has proceeded to the point that all current imagery is polarized and polarizing. It is polarized because it is designed to play to extremists rather than the moderate core of the citizenry in both the United States and the Arab world. It is polarizing because it creates monolithic, monstrous enemies, utterly undifferentiated in the eyes of those doing the attacking, whether they be American or Iraqi.
The result is that nothing is ever taken at face value, and nothing is proportionate. All actions are elevated to become mythic, dramatic enactments of the struggle between absolute good and absolute evil at every turn. An accidental weapon discharge from Iraqi forces? Evil attacking freedom. A stray shell from an American soldier? An oppressor of the Iraqi people.
In this strange, media-dominated world, every action is set up in advance, played for the media and designed to have maximal rhetorical impact. President Bush mouths empty platitudes about fighting the "enemies of freedom" for the benefit of his extremist Republican core constituency. The heinous thugs carrying out acts such as the Berg beheading do so to indicate their willingness to exact a crowd-pleasing revenge on Americans recast as colonists, crusaders and captors.
Both positions are dishonorable, for they bypass completely the welfare both of the combatants and the innocent citizens who are slaughtered in the fray.
In the never-never land of reified images and rhetoric, all Iraqis who oppose the American occupation are labeled by President Bush as terrorists. Little wonder that the American military, taking their cue from the commander in chief, rounds up innocent farmers and urbanites wholesale, and tortures them at random just to see whether some crumb of information might fall about those who are planting bombs and shooting soldiers.
When all Americans become colonist, Crusader captors, then anyone can be killed at random by the resistance, since to kill one American is to attack them all. Beheading a hapless innocent like Berg is equivalent to beheading President Bush, and if Americans are revolted at the sight, so much the better.
Trouble arises when the images are no longer in the control of those who want to manage them. Then the media war spins out of balance. Such is the case with the photographs of humiliated and tortured prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison. It was clear that White House officials were not nearly so upset at the actions of the American soldiers in the prison as they were at the fact that they were not able to control the images. Administration flaks such as Fox News Host Bill O'Reilly went so far as to declare CBS "unpatriotic" for airing the photographs.
Because the Bush White House lost media control over these horrific images, the climate for the Berg beheading was created. What would have been an international outcry against the Iraqi perpetrators of this barbarism was muted significantly by the Abu Ghraib barbarism.
What will both sides do next to capture the media limelight? The United States is in an almost unredeemable symbolic position at this point. The Abu Ghraib pictures were ruinously damaging both for America's reputation in the Arab world, but more importantly, for the administration's reputation before the American electorate.
For a nation that has the most sophisticated media industry in the world, America has been incompetent in the Middle East -- largely because Washington officials have never tried to understand the discourse that drives the cultures of the region. In an earlier age, Americans didn't understand the rhetoric of powerful Middle Eastern leaders. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini was able to banish the United States into the outer darkness of the Middle East's moral universe by equating America with the Great Satan.
Today, Americans fail at understanding the power of visual media imagery wielded by the Iraqi opposition. By besting Washington in the media game, the Iraqi oppositionists have been able to once again cast America into the void. The video image of Berg's decapitation was the seal on American crimes. It will be preserved in horror, fascination and triumph as another nail in the coffin of the abortive American Iraqi adventure.
(05132004) ****END**** (c) COPYRIGHT PNS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED