So much News So little time.
Pentagon Cancels Release of Report that finds Iraq had no link to Al Qaeda.
"An exhaustive Pentagon review of more than 600,000 Iraqi documents that were captured after the 2003 U.S. invasion has found no evidence that Saddam Hussein's regime had any operational links with Osama bin Laden's al Qaida terrorist network."
This is not news to me, Al Qaeda hated Saddam, they wanted to overthrow the bastard to have a chance at religious theocracy in Iraq. Bush wanted to link these two bad guys to have a justification to invade Iraq on a wave of post 911 blood-thirstiness. And it worked, when we invaded 70% of the country thought Saddam was "personally involved" in the 911 attacks,
even though there were no Iraqis on the planes, but Americans didn't get that either. Propaganda anyone? Stop taking what politicians say in a speach as the official fact. Especially when we're talking about war. *cough* Iran *cough*
If I knew there was no link, Why didn't Hillary Clinton? "(Saddam) has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001." - Clinton October 10, 2002
Anyway, the report, with the obvious conclusion, finally coming from the Pentagon, is not going to be quite as public anymore.
If they don't talk about it, maybe it will just go away right?
Put that together with the fact that almost 4,000 of our soldiers have died in Iraq alone, many more wounded. Fighting for our.. um.. what.. our right to tell other nations what to do? I'm not sure anymore.
And we've been there for 5 years on March 19,
And it's costing us 12 Billion per month
and over 3 trillion so far, 50 times more than the 60 billion predicted in 2003,
Add that to higher oil prices, stronger terrorist networks, and a less stable world, and a less safe USA, and you might want to... oh I don't know Impeach the President!
Deep Breath... next
The Iraq War is only 2% of media coverage.
No news is Good news... for the bush administration and McCain at least, if we don't hear about Iraq it must be going great. A perfect time to cancel the release of the Pentagon Report so Iraq doesn't become news again. The lack of media coverage is partly to blame for the fact that only 20% of Americans know we're about to hit 4,000 dead in Iraq
At least I'm talking about Iraq here right? I'm doing my part.
Admiral Fallon, the top US commander for the Middle East Abruptly Resigns.
Who is this guy? Probably the highest ranking officers in position of power trying to talk sense into a bush administration hell bent on World War III. You know telling Bush it would be a bad idea to bomb Iran.
What? We'll be greeted as liberators! More Kool-Aid Please.
Quoting Fallon
"This constant drumbeat of conflict ... is not helpful and not useful. I expect that there will be no war, and that is what we ought to be working for. We ought to try to do our utmost to create different conditions." What America needs, Fallon says, is a "combination of strength and willingness to engage."
Bush Quote Instead
"Like al Qaeda and the Sunni extremists, the Iranian regime has clear aims: They want to drive America out of the region, to destroy Israel, and to dominate the broader Middle East. To achieve these aims, they are funding and arming terrorist groups like Hezbollah, which allow them to attack Israel and America by proxy."
Talking trash and telling countries they are pert of the "Axis of Evil", and we might bomb their country if we feel like it, doesn't help anybody, every time bush gets on the TV and threatens Iran it makes us less safe.
Read more about Fallon resigning
.
Presidential Politics.
The math is against Clinton, she needs about 64% in all states to overtake Obama, not happening.
The only way she can win is if the super-delegates appoint her at the convention, against the will of the people. That sounds pretty terrible right, we have all kinds of young people voting for the first time, huge turnout, new grassroots networks, and millions of people believing that if they vote, they can take back the government. Protesting in the streets didn't work, but maybe voting will, that's how everyone tells us democracy works right?
But the Democratic party could just say, thanks for your opinion, I know you spent months of your life working for this candidate, but you can't have him. You don't know what the hell your doing, let us take care of the government, you're too stupid to be trusted with that kind of power.
The Democratic party has no desire to snub their voters at a time like this. I know it was supposed to be Clinton's turn to be president, sorry, I'd like to see a woman president too. But Barrack Obama is just a better candidate.
But Clinton is counting on the super-delegates appointing her in the end. Probably the reason her campaign keeps mentioning Obama as a splendid Vice President, but a terrible Commander in Chief, like that makes any sense. But maybe, she can convince us that really it was her turn, but she will let Obama be VP.
Hillary Clinton and her campaign had a private meeting in DC with her big donors today "the clear message emerging from the presentations was that Hillary's success depends on the campaign's ability to
persuade the super-delegates that they should be considering three "data points," as this fundraiser puts it, in considering whom to back: The pledged delegate count, the popular vote, and the specific states won by each candidate."
I have bad news for Clinton, she's not winning the popular vote or the delegate count, and she's right that those things do matter.
I'm starting to think The Clintons really want their power back so they can get revenge on the Republicans for impeaching Bill Clinton, and going after him for all those years. They were a royal pain in the ass, and still are. I think the Clintons have their pockets full of smear tactics and venom that they were intending to use on the Republicans, but Obama has been getting their dirty tricks cause he got in the way.
"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color), he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."
Sorry.. I know this is long already and I wanted to get straight to the point here. What the fuck is that? And this woman hung around for an entire week before voluntarily resigning her post as a fundraiser for the Clinton campaign?
Obama has gotten to this point because he's black... funny, cause that didn't work for Jessie Jackson, or Al Sharpton... We've had a black presidential candidate almost every election for the past 30 years. But Ms. Geraldine Ferraro can say that crap and pretend it's fair, it's objective, it's just the truth nobody wants to admit right? No, it's a smear tactic, meant to win points with other racists. Obama got this far because he's a good candidate. Because he's run a good campaign, and risen above petty attacks like this.
And Hillary had this to say "It's regrettable that any of our supporters _ on both sides, because we both have this experience _ say things that kind of veer off into the personal." yea, take that, I love Black people.
On the Obama Campaign, an Staffer named Samantha Powers called Hillary a "Monster" and was gone the next morning. Hillary still has not condemned Ferraro's remark. Not to mention the Muslim thing that came from her campaign chair in Iowa, and the Drug Dealer thing, and the Obama doesn't know the words to the Pledge of Allegiance thing... yea real cool. If the truth doesn't work, make something up.
Olberman did his homework and found at least 3 occasions where Ferraro said the same crap about Obama. But the media is taking it out of context... sure they are. Interesting, the first time we herd about Ms. Ferraro this campaign season, she was calling Obama, Edwards, the Media, and the entire nation sexist for confronting Hillary.
Ok she may be right about the nation, and about Chris Matthews. But now that someone is calling her statements Racist, she thinks that the Obama Campaign
owes her an apology for calling her racist. And she's not even close to being sorry for what she said.
Here's Olbermann
"Senator Clinton Isn't A Republican, As Far As I Know"
't-a-r_b_91187.html
Found that title while looking for some sources for this entry it cracked me up. The title is a play on Hillary's response to the muslim garbage "there is nothing to base that on. As far as I know," she said on 60 minutes.
Anyway, there's all the news that's fit to bother me, for now.
Another link, Quotes from the Iraq War Sales Pitch
:::link:::
Cost, Casualties, time, troops, cakewalk
Great New Documentary
Leading to War: See Where the Truth Lies :::link:::
Lots of video clips from the sales pitch for war.
One more thought. Right before the war, the UN Inspectors were in Iraq looking for weapons. The US kicked them out before they were done. Why not let them collect new evidence, and finish their work, before deciding if there was an imminent threat that justified invasion?
The Bush administration wanted to invade, and they knew there was no justification. They had private reasons for war, WMD and terrorism were only excuses that would never be proven, but they sounded good to a public terrified by 911.
To Clarify,
When this president went to war he trusted Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Condi Rice. These people are not qualified to predict anything about the Middle East, except where the oil is.
Before going to war you should get the opinion of people who have actually lived there (wow what a concept), Diplomats and ambassadors who have negotiated with leaders in the Middle East. Scholars who spend their lives studying a region, visiting, researching and analyzing trends.
The problem during the lead up to this war, the media, Congress and the Executive branch neglected the opinion of scholars, diplomats, ambassadors, experts, and generals. They didn't want to listen, because the vast majority of experts were saying Bush was full of shit, they were resigning in protest, publishing books and articles, and otherwise trying to speak out, but America didn't listen. We still haven't accepted our failure.
If I knew this was bullshit, and I was just some college student at a state school, why couldn't congress figure it out?
I think academics are useful as advisers but NEVER on actual policy making. Academics just aren't equipped for politics, nor can they make military decisions.
James you don't need to defend your humanities education! Without the humanities human culture would be a blank page.
Jason, experts on a region are very often professors, Humanities professors. An English professor has not helped the president make a decision on international affairs since Clinton deployed an armada of sestinas to Bosnia.
Just wanted to stick up for my useless humanities education.
As always, I appreciate the post. See the thing is for me, I absolutely MUST distinguish between what is real, not real, cold hard fact, or simply supposition. As Carl Sagan said, and I use this quote all the time, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. I take this attitude whether the claim is that Iran has a nuke, or whether the claim is that we were fooled on purpose.
Generals are the military equivalent of top corporate executives. Some of the motivations are the same. They also have different opinions about how a task can be accomplished. They are not monolithic. The biggest complaint I heard from Generals back in the beginning was that the politically motivated "light footprint" idea was nonsense, and that you needed a real force to get the job done right. Looking back it is hard to disagree.
Now, as far as scholars are concerned, I wonder what scholars you mean. If a sitting President were to take their cues on National Security, War and Peace from some random Humanities professor, or media studies professor, or English professor, I would say without a doubt they are a damned fool, and embarrassingly unfit to be our CIC. Now, if you were to ask an expert on the region for information on the pulse of the area, and what exactly their concerns are, what the cultural challenges are, if that's what you meant, then I would agree.
Of course, it is obvious to everyone that the aftermath has been handled abysmally, and was ill considered. All this money and blood and I can't say exactly what we've bought. One thing I can guarantee you is that the committed anti-war types who want an instant pullout, and impeachment, will never ever get what they want. That road leads only to a dead end. As I've said before, we are stuck eating our shit sandwich, and have to develop a smart plan to get the hell out without rendering useless everything we've done to this point. That is what you will get from a President Obama.
One last thing, I have to say this, I have an extremely cynical view of Liberal Elites like those at The Nation. They don't understand the military, they do not want to understand the military, other than as a humanitarian org, and a working class, Union, blue collar guy like my father would NEVER be allowed into their circles or little soirees. They think of people like my Dad as little people to be taken care of, to have things decided for them by the Elites. No, no, no. Fuck that. Sorry, just a little rantish side thought there.
Axis of Evil, one down two to go.
I don't know what you are talking about. I feel so much safer without Saddam's finger on the nuclear weapons, right?
They grow up so fast. One day you are participaiting in a 'die in' and then BAM it is five years later and you have run out of inconvenient spots to pretend you are dead.