![]() |
|
||
|
Marie Cocco: New Year, Same WarPosted on Jan 2, 2007By Marie Cocco WASHINGTON—The new year begins, as always, with a sense that something has ended—perhaps happily, perhaps with relief—and something new has begun. The usual markers point the way: abandoned evergreens at curbside, the return of school buses to the streets, the slog back toward the office cubicle. The personal markers give a certain comfort. They are so unlike the proliferation of public markers that point not with clarity to some resolution of old conflicts, but toward a confused year ahead that perhaps will be more bitter than the one just passed. The execution of Saddam Hussein is a fitting premonition, as it was a wholly unsatisfying symbol of the United States’ misadventure in Iraq. There is no way the hanging could be said to symbolize the end of a dark era and the dawn of some new epoch of democratic justice. The video, darkly medieval in its trappings and complete with spectators shouting taunts, reminds us that the U.S. toppling of a brutal dictator it once wholeheartedly supported has left Iraq awash in blood, and alienated much of the rest of the world. It has left our country politically distressed and our military limping. If Saddam’s execution is insufficient as a graphic reminder of our blunders, perhaps other markers will do: The United States now has lost more than 3,000 military men and women to this conflict. December, with 113 deaths, was the worst month for military casualties in 2006. Any hopeful uplift the public might have felt after the November elections that placed Democrats in charge of Capitol Hill—a rebuke to President Bush’s war policy—has dissipated in the face of presidential obstinacy. The president’s view of Iraq simply hasn’t changed with the facts on the ground. In his official New Year’s message, Bush said, “We will remain on the offensive against the enemies of freedom,’’ implying once again that offensive military action holds the answer to the insurgency that has been transformed into civil war. Bush continues to expect the conflict to be resolved with either victory or defeat, and pledges to defeat the enemy “without wavering.’‘ Advertisement The milestone in our own political response to Iraq was supposed to have been the ascension to power this week of congressional Democrats. But Bush, by most accounts, is poised to promote more of the same—a “surge’’ in U.S. troop strength of up to 40,000 additional personnel. This “doubling down on a bad hand,’’ as Lawrence Korb, a Reagan administration Defense Department official, has called it, hasn’t won support even among Republican lawmakers. Still, it may well be the commander in chief’s chosen course. This, more than anything else, is why the political year begins with more fear than hope. Bush wants no path out of Iraq that he cannot call “victory.’’ Almost everyone else sees no path to victory and prefers a route leading toward the eventual American withdrawal. We are poised not for a year of reconciliation but, I fear, another year of contention over Iraq. It will begin almost immediately, with the president’s expected announcement about the deployment of additional troops, followed by congressional hearings on why this is folly, and followed soon after by a battle over how to fund continued operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Bush administration has financed its wars through emergency appropriations outside the regular federal budget, a practice Democrats and even a majority in the Republican-controlled Congress vowed to stop. The White House will face demands, for the first time since 9/11, that it reduce its gargantuan appetite for military spending, and choose what programs to cut in order to finance higher priorities. Of course, we Americans can be downright delusional at the start of a new year. We love to believe that things will get better, or at least not worse. But the history of our entanglement in Iraq tells us that something worse always seems to lie ahead. Now the political war over this war opens a new front on Capitol Hill. There is no reason to believe there will be a quick or decisive end. Previous item: E.J. Dionne Jr.: Reformers Without Results Next item: Robert Scheer: A Monster of Our Creation Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
By TAO Walker, January 10, 2007 at 2:17 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
No shit, “dukie,” and it’s all rolling downhill.
Report thisBy dukie, January 6, 2007 at 1:32 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Where are the Weathermen when we need them? Extraordinary resistance is now needed within the US. The shit is on.
Report thisBy Wayne Gallant, January 6, 2007 at 12:42 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
In response to my question “exactly how many billions in oil have we stolen, and just how did we do it?” Sam replies:
“How much oil have we stolen?
Try a round number of 7 trillion dollars”
You note that he doesn’t say how it was done, nor does he cite any source of his ridiculous figure. I hesitate to think where he may have pulled that number from.
In case you haven’t been near a TV or a newspaper for the past three years, let me inform you that there is only a trickle of oil leaving Iraq. The insurgents regularly blow up the pipelines, set fire to the oil rigs, and assault the oilfields, killing oil workers by the score.
By what fantasy method do you claim that “we”, and I assume you mean “Daddy Warbucks” Cheney and his buddies, are able to get vast amounts of oil out a country controlled in the main by Sunnis, Al Queda, Jihadists of various stripes, and others intent on seeing that NO oil is allowed to leave the country.
I understand your need to have a scapegoat for the failure of Bush and Company’s ill-advised and ill-executed Iraq policy, but for God’s sake do look around for something plausible, something other than your idee fixe of “we’re stealing billions in oil.”
Report thisBy TAO Walker, January 5, 2007 at 6:20 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
“(Y)ours truly” (#45581) is obviously assuming that any “peaceful means” are even still available. Is s/he ready to bet his/her great-grandchildren’s lives on that belief? Because your tormentors are betting the farm they can sucker everyone into a ‘regime’ of “perpetual war for perpetual peace,” and right now the odds (maybe ‘the gods,’ as well) seem to be favoring THEM.
Sure, a lot of the scam-ees are starting to get cold feet. The neoCON gamers, though, have understood from the git-go that this time it’s for all “the big blue Marble,” and for them at least “failure” really isn’t an option. Failure is death…..and worse, disgrace.
Anyone still clinging to the delusion that the stakes are less than that is at a definite disadvantage, however they might think to go about bringing “a quick and decisive end” even to just the criminal-assault-on-Iraq phase of the overall grand plan. It’s already way too late for that anyhow.
As for the Congress, a substantial majority of its current members were present and counted themselves proud marchers in the “hit”-Saddam-parade, when the boys and girls in-uniform were sent off to “the cake-walk” in The Cradle of Civilization. The Senate voted 97-0 to “fund” the project’s armed component at least through the end of 2008…..putting an end to pipe-dreams of a post-cold-war “peace dividend” once and for all.
Actually, there might just be some “peaceful means” for putting the American empire out of its misery. It sure as hell won’t be painless, though. Does “yours truly,” or any real American, have the stomach for that?
HokaHey!
Report thisBy yours truly, January 4, 2007 at 6:06 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Contrariwise, there is reason to believe that there will be a quick and decisive end to the Iraq war. How? We’ll see to it that Congress does it for us, that’s how. Otherwise we’ll do it ourselves by whatever peaceful means are necessary.
Report thisBy TAO Walker, January 4, 2007 at 3:46 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Talk about “greasing the skids,” eh? (SamSnedegar, #45439) What the privateers know full-well but few of their victim/accomplices are even beginning to suspect, is that this “project” has long since sped past the-point-of-no-return. “Changing course” isn’t merely “unacceptable” now…...it is impossible.
All that really remains to be seen is how fast the bloody bandwagon will be going when it hits the wall. Welcome to CrashtestDummyworld.
HokaHey!
Report thisBy SamSnedegar, January 4, 2007 at 12:25 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
How much oil have we stolen?
Try a round number of 7 trillion dollars, but that isn’t the important part, darlings; the real value of it comes from propping up a worthless dollar which even now is losing ground to the euro in use for TRADING OIL, not just Iraq’s oil, but ALL oil.
Sorry sweetcakes, but the US foreign policy is not about any other item. As Vince Lombardi said in effect, oil isn’t everything, it is the ONLY thing.
Try the Israeli attack on Lebanon that we engineered: yes, Lebanon is the terminus of the Syria-Lebanon pipeline which not only gets oil from Iraq to the Med, but gets oil from Saudi Arabia to the Med . . . a big buck item to have a straight shot for tankers straight through the Med to New Orleans and Houston, rather than going the long way around via the Arabian and Red Seas.
And please don’t think our invasion of Afghanistan had diddly to do with bin Laden who was very likely not even alive when nine eleven was planned or executed; no babycakes, we wanted control of the pipeline from the Caspian oil reserves out through Afghanistan and Pakistan, and we have it.
If you think the USA does wars for Israel, you are sadly mistaken; not the Bushitter gang of thugs, anyway. Whenever they do a real war and not a police action like Panama, they do it for oil; nothing else matters.
Let me give you a small lesson in economics: you don’t have to quarry a single rock out of a gravel pit to use it for all the collateral you’d ever need to make millions and maybe billions of dollars building shopping malls. It’s done every day you breathe, and likewise you don’t have to produce a single barrel of oil to use a hundred ten billion barrel reserve to prop up an all but worthless American dollar.
If you think first, you might not show your ignorance so quickly.
Finally, what OTHER possible reason could there be for invading Iraq? Are you still looking for weapons of mass destruction? The only thing Iraq ever had or ever WILL have that would cause the USA to invade her is OIL . . . that’s oil, folks.
Report thisBy Wayne Gallant, January 3, 2007 at 5:47 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Sam wrote:
“we went there for the oil; surely there is no one stupid enough to think that the USA would mount a trillion dollar war against an Iraq which had NO OIL? No one can be that stupid; there would not be one single American boot on the ground of an oil-less Iraq, not one.”
Sam, wake up and smell the gunpowder.
Please tell us just how many billions of dollars of Iraqi oil we have “stolen”, and just how we did it. Hell, they haven’t even managed to ship out enough oil to buy a few bags of wheat for their starving population.
I doubt that you will rise to the challenge. But it is an incontrovertible fact that we have poured many billions of bux into the coffers of Halliburton et al.
You also wrote about “wanting a military industrial complex”, so I see that you just don’t get it. We don’t WANT a MIC, we HAVE one, and it is that group of thieves who are profitting from this ill-planned, ill-fought war.
I’d be real careful about calling anyone stupid if I were you.
“There is none so blind as he who will not see.”
Report thisBy DennisD, January 3, 2007 at 5:03 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Bu$h Inc. won’t leave Iraq for the same reason Gilligan never got off the island. They’re both money makers for someone.
Report thisBy mite, January 3, 2007 at 3:00 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Truth & Fact:
http://www.devvy.com/utt_20020410.html
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/secretoath.htm
http://www.infowars.com http://www.prisonplanet.com
http://www.gcnlive.com http://www.newswithviews.com
Read ‘Citizens Rule Book’ for Jurors:
Report thisBy SamSnedegar, January 3, 2007 at 12:04 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Dear sweet Marie . . .
how on earth would YOU plan to steal oil from Iraq if you were not IN Iraq to do so?
It is really very simple: we stay the course because we have to control the oil, and we have to control the oil to keep our shaky economy afloat for a while longer before it collapses in an Enron cloud of debt and subterfuge.
We used to have wealth with which to back our currency, but today we no longer have the corner on cars, planes, agriculture, chemicals, steel, copper, coal, oil, pharmaceuticals, appliances, cotton products, iron ore, and safety pins. We peg the dollar to oil and hope no one will notice that WE have no oil to sell, and therefore there is no reason to collect dollars any longer since the products one buys come from somewhere outside the USA anyhow.
But to the point: we went there for the oil; surely there is no one stupid enough to think that the USA would mount a trillion dollar war against an Iraq which had NO OIL? No one can be that stupid; there would not be one single American boot on the ground of an oil-less Iraq, not one.
And tell Scheer that if all we wanted was a military industrial complex, we could go to war with Iran or North Korea or Pakistan or Israel or some other proliferating idiots who want to use nukes for a threat, and who are likely to use them for retaliation against insult one day.
No one with a mind which is capable of cogency thinks we went to Iraq for anything BUT the oil, no matter how many LIES he tells about our motives, but you can’t steal oil from thousands of miles away, and so IF we are to put off our bankruptcy for a few more years, then we have to steal oil from someone somewhere on earth, and where better than Iraq? or the Emirates? or Kuwait? or Saudi Arabia? We may hit them all as time and waste destroy the earth’s oil reserves. And there is no safety for Chavez in Venezuela either . . .
We covet, we kill, we lie, and we steal. How about reporting on it sometime?
Report thisBy Wayne Gallant, January 3, 2007 at 6:14 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Bush just met in Crawford, TX to discuss the “new direction” for the Iraq war. Who did he meet with? VP Cheney, Secty. Rice, Secty. Gates, Gen. Pace.
Sure looks like same old, same old, to me.
And why did he postpone announcement of strategy changes until after Jan 6th? So he could blame any failures on the Democrats, would be my guess.
Report thisBy TAO Walker, January 3, 2007 at 5:35 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
George W. Bush’s “milestone” refrain may well be right-on-the-money. The thing is to determine now just how far down this lost highway America has driven its imperial wetdream-machine, what the road is actually paved with, and exactly where in HELL it’s taking you all.
From here high-atop Old Man mountain, us Indi’ns can see you guys are headed at break-neck speed for one big dead-end. Saddam Hussein is evidently well out of it now, but looks to be having the last laugh on the Bush crime family’s godfather, its profligate son, and its unholy sprite (Oh, you’ll figure that one out, eventually.).
Meanwhile, to find out where you really are in time, you might look rather to the Mayan than to the intentionally falsified “christian” calendar. There you can learn the actual Number of your Days, you who have for so long been so slap-happily numbering all your days, and so guaranteeing that your days are numbered.
As to where you’ve been all along, welcome to OUR world. Welcome to Turtle Island.
HokaHey!
Report this