Seven years ago today George W. Bush launched an illegal and immoral war against Iraq.
Today, we still have troops on the ground. People are still dying. And George W. Bush has not been charged with war crimes.
In prosecuting this war, Bush and the neocons ran up the national debt and now seek to blame Democrats for their irresponsible spending practices.
The notion of spreading democracy through warfare has turned out to be just as bankrupt as the domino theory that embroiled us in wars in southeast Asia forty years ago.
Osama bin Laden is still at large.
Seven years ago today Bush ignored morality and the law to launch this adventure. Today, and for years to come, we and the Iraqi people will pay the price. All the reasons for this war turned out to be false.
It is time to end this war. It is past time. It is seven years past time.
We say the world changed eight years ago. In a way, I suppose it did. We are more frightened. We are more suspicious. We are more willing to sacrifice our liberty, our principles, our children’s lives.
There is very little outrage that our government spied on its own citizens, without warrants. Or that the phone companies who aided and abetted these actions have been given immunity from punishment for their complicity.
People who argue that torture is acceptable are taken seriously. Cheney talks about disasters averted because of torture. Despite that there is no evidence for his claim – indeed, there is evidence contradicting him, from people who participated in the interrogations – people believe him. Newspaper editorial boards believe him. And in today’s America, supporting torture is a respectable position.
And we still have troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
When people wonder why I’m not more of an Obama supporter than I am, I only need to point to that last fact. We are still fighting wars we have no business fighting. We are upping our presence in Afghanistan. I cannot celebrate this president unequivocally when he lacks the moral courage to stand up for what is right in order to look strong on defense. I won’t deny he’s done some good, but until he stops following in the footsteps of his predecessor, I cannot feel good about our leadership.
I hate this day. I hate what was done to nearly 3000 citizens of my country, and what was done my wife’s home city. I hate that our government used it to commit so much wrong in the name of those people who died needlessly. And I hate that, even on that morning eight years ago, I knew they would.
It still goes on. And we are still waiting for justice. Before we can have it, our country needs to remember itself, remember what justice really means. We need to undo, as much as possible, the damage that has been done. We need to know what was done. And we need to stop doing it.
Until then, I will never stop speaking out about the wrongs done in the name of the victims of 9/11.
“Light Up Ya Lighter” by Michael Franti and Spearhead
So Mr engine, engine, number 9
Machine guns on a New York transit line
The war for oil is a war for the beast
the War on terror is a war on peace
Telling you they’re gonna protect you
Telling you that they support the troops and
Don’t let ‘em fool you with their milk and honey
No, they only want your money
One step forward and 2 step back
One step forward and 2 step back
Why do veterans get no respect
PTSD and a broken back
Take a look at where you money’s gone (seen)
Take a look at what they spent it on
No excuses, no illusions
Light up your lighter, bring ‘em home
So we keep it on, ’til you’re coming home
higher and higher
Fire, fire, fire, light up your lighter
Fire, fire, fire
Elections have consequences. I’ve heard that recently. Elections have consequences. The person who wins the election gets to move forward with his or her agenda. That’s the thrust of this observation. The consequences are that the people voted in favor of one agenda over a competing one.
So it was with some annoyance that I listened to Obama’s proposal for troop withdrawal from Iraq. Combat troops will be on the ground for three months longer than he promised in the campaign, and many of the troops left there until the next year, toward the end of the withdrawal time frame. And non-combat troops left in Iraq into 2011.
For me, the damning praise came from John McCain, who said he was pleased about Obama’s plan. McCain. Obama’s opponent in the election last year. The person who said Obama’s proposal for Iraq was wrong. Is there any need to go on? If McCain likes this plan, then is it really still what Obama promised during the campaign?
I have known, from the beginning, that Obama wasn’t perfect. I wouldn’t agree with everything he’s done. But we didn’t elect John McCain. The people spoke in the last election. And they clearly want this illegal and immoral war over. And it makes me very nervous to see Obama’s promises on ending this war slipping yet again.
Elections have consequences. And the person who was elected was so, in part, on ending this war. If he doesn’t end it, I cannot imagine that boding well for him in 2012.
Today, we’re heard more rhetoric about Iraq. Some people insist that we must stay the course in Iraq. John McCain went so far as to say, “I also believe that to promise a withdrawal of our forces, regardless of the consequences, would constitute a failure of political and moral leadership.”
I believe putting our forces in Iraq was a failure of moral leadership. I believe that continuing an immoral war is a failure of moral leadership. In short, I think John McCain, who proposes to continue the Bush policy of war in Iraq, will not be a moral leader.
I also heard the tired refrain that we cannot pull out of Iraq now because that would make the sacrifices of soldiers who have died meaningless.
I have some very bad news for the families of those soldiers. Their loved ones’ deaths are meaningless. I do not say that to be mean or spiteful. I hate that their loved ones died for no good reason. But it benefits no one to pretend it isn’t true.
Over 4,000 U.S. soldiers have died fighting an immoral war. Killing more Iraqis, and allowing more soldiers to be killed will not make the war less immoral. Nor will it make it more meaningful.
Iraq is a mess. We made it. It’s our fault. We need to own up to that. But at the same time, we need to recognize that whether Iraq gets fixed is not up to us. We cannot fix this mess. We can get out of the Iraqis’ way and let them fix it, or not. We can offer aid in the form of money and goods and even expertise. But we cannot fix the problem by sending more young people to kill and be killed.
We have sent our soldiers on a fools’ errand. We helped lay the groundwork for a civil war. And we cannot fix that with military might. We must give the Iraqis back their sovereignty and hope that they fare better with it than we managed. It may end bloody. And that blood, too, will be on our heads.
It’s no use pretending that this is moral. It’s no use pretending that we can fix the unfixable. No amount of reduction in violence (which seems to be unraveling) creates political stability. The reduction in violence is a temporary situation that we cannot sustain. We only prolong the Iraqis’ decision as to what to do with their own destiny by staying. At some point, they will have crucial decisions to make that we cannot settle for them.
The longer we stay, the more resentment we cause. The more dependent we make the Iraqi people. The more we lay the seeds for a longer and bloodier mess the follow us when we do eventually leave.
There is nothing meaningful to salvage from this moral cesspool. We must, finally, admit that to ourselves. Until we do, we postpone any healing that might take place here at home and in Iraq.
If this aphorism were true, George W. Bush is in for a doozy of a fall.
Despite all the evidence that Iraq had no Weapons of Mass Destruction, and that Iraq had no ties with the perpetrators of 9/11, he still maintains that he was right to launch the war in Iraq:
“The battle in Iraq is noble, it is necessary, and it is just. And with your courage, the battle in Iraq will end in victory.”*
Some argue that, whatever the justification for the war five years ago, we cannot now abandon the people of Iraq. We have, they argue, a moral obligation to help clean up the mess we created.
I don’t buy that argument. But I can respect it. I think it’s an honest argument. I think it’s wrong, but I think it’s a respectable position.
Bush’s position is to deny historical fact. He wants to maintain, not that we need to stay to clean up our mess or that things would be worse if we left now, but that we have always been in the right. He still believes, somehow, that we did the right thing five years ago. Maybe he needs to believe this so that he can still sleep at night.
Someone needs to tell him… In order to receive absolution, you first need to confess. I can have no respect for someone who cannot acknowledge his mistakes.
The answer, simply, is “no.” We’ve been in a quagmire for years. That fact that it’s been five just adds to the tragedy, it doesn’t make it a tragedy.
How many soldiers and civilians have to die for the lies, deceit, and fool-hardy bravado that led us to this war?
How many people have to die to “avenge” the deaths of 9/11? Deaths not caused by Saddam Hussein or any Iraqi?
How far must we fall from our moral high ground before we realize we’ve fallen?
Are we truly prepared to elect a man who is prepared to keep us in Iraq for a century?
How long can we, as a country, ignore our role in perpetuating and facilitating the horror of Saddam Hussein?
What will it take for humanity to realize that killing people is not a solution; it is the problem?
When we will seek peace?
These are the unanswered questions that occur to me today, as protestors gather to mark the fifth anniversary of the beginning of Bush’s immoral and illegal war.
The debate over Iraq seems to be heating up. The Senate is going to consider a bill to cut off funding the Iraq war. The Republicans allowed debate to go forward in order to have a debate they now think they can win. The idea is that, with the military success in Iraq, the war is less unpopular, so they can use the debate to highlight the victories.
That’s their plan.
The administration, predictably, says it will veto any such bill: ‘This legislation would substitute the political judgment of legislators for the considered professional military judgment of our military commanders.’ 1
John McCain, in his role as George W. Bush lite, agrees: ‘It should be General Petraeus’ recommendation, not that of a politician running for higher office, as to when and how we withdraw.’2
But this is a bad sign. Who makes the decision to go to war? Politicians? Or the military? If it’s the military, then we are in a military dictatorship. But I believe we still have, nominally, a democratically elected government, and that means politicians make these decisions. The military is not authorized by the people to make decisions about when we go to war or when we end a war. This is a political, not a military, decision.
Do George Bush and John McCain understand this? If not, then they are not fit to be president. If they do understand it, then are they trying to intentionally subvert our democracy?
It is an abdication of the responsibility of the president to leave this up to military commanders. Until we get someone in the White House who understands that simple, basic fact, our democracy continues to be in jeopardy.
I can’t wait for the 2008 election to be over. Not just because it feels like it’s been going on for over a year already. But I want to complain about someone else saying stupid things. Since Bush has become a broken record, I feel as though all I can do is keep pointing out the same sort of idiotic comments. Here’s today’s gem…
‘The American people expect us to work together to support our troops. That’s what they want,’ Bush said Thursday after spending two hours meeting at the Pentagon with military leaders.
Let’s look at this, shall we?
First, the “American people expect” what now? If Bush is going to listen to polls, the American people want us out of Iraq. That’s what the American people expect. Otherwise, you’re just making up crap.
Second, he is once again equating funding his adventure in the Middle East with supporting the troops. If he really cared about supporting the troops, he’d bring them home, rather than leaving them in the middle of a civil war that he started by invading another country.
Third… Oh who cares. Bush is going to keep giving us the same claptrap. I’ll point it out whenever I can stand to think about it.
Come on, next President. There will be things complain about, but at least they are likely to be different things. *sigh*
What if George W. Bush held a press conference and actually answered questions?
I am having trouble imagining that. It seems so unlikely.
I’m not sure what the point of these exercises are. He goes in, makes a short statement, and then dodges as many questions as he can until he is allowed to leave? Why bother?
But he did say something that struck me as peculiar. While discussing the Israel-Palestinian issue, he said, “The United States can’t impose peace.”
Seriously. He said that. He really said it.
“The United States can’t impose peace.”
So why are we in Iraq, again? Saddam didn’t have WMD. He didn’t have ties to terrorist organizations. And we cannot impose peace. I’m just flummoxed, Mr. President. It almost seems like you understand the way the world works when you say things like that. But actions speak louder than words. And your actions suggest that you will keep trying to impose peace, despite the impossibility of doing so.
It’s too bad you don’t listen to yourself sometimes. Imagine how much better off we’d all be.
LONDON (Reuters) – Six years after the September 11 attacks in the United States, the ‘war on terror’ is failing and instead fueling an increase in support for extremist Islamist movements, a British think-tank said on Monday.
A report by the Oxford Research Group (ORG) said a ‘fundamental re-think is required’ if the global terrorist network is to be rendered ineffective.
Does anyone remember the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan? How did that work out? The Soviets finally had to withdraw, leading to the Taliban’s take over of the country. And that take over led to al Queda’s training camps.
Now, two decades later, our ill-advised and immoral war in Iraq seems destined to lead to the same sort of consequence. It seems that most people outside of Washington, D.C. understand this.
Combined with the other big news out of Iraq today…
LONDON – Britain will withdraw nearly half its troops in Iraq beginning next spring, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said Monday, leaving a contingent of 2,500 soldiers in the highly unpopular war.
One wonders how long Washington can keep up its “head-in-the-sand” stance on this issue?
Entries (RSS)