LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.Best Political Blog Winner, 2007 Webby Awards, People's Voice and Jury.   Exclusive Truthdig Merchandise - Gore Vidal signed first editions - Signed Mr. Fish prints
 
July 25, 2008
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Reports
 * NEW! * Six Little Words

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
 * NEW! * Nikki Keddie on Iran

Digs
Inside the Data Mine

Truthdig Bazaar
Hollywood Book Cover

Hollywood

by Gore Vidal
Fine, Collector's Copy $200

more items

 
Reports

Sinking Into the Quagmire

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   
Posted on Apr 10, 2008
Petraeus
AP photo / Pablo Martinez Monsivais

On the stand:  Gen. David Petraeus checks in with Congress about Iraq on Wednesday.

By Bill Boyarsky

The latest congressional hearings on Iraq provided more gloomy evidence that we’ll be stuck in the quagmire for a long time, no matter who wins the presidency.

No doubt Sen. John McCain, unabashed believer in the “surge,” would keep us there much longer than either of his Democratic opponents. Asked in January how long we should remain in Iraq, he said, “Maybe a hundred [years]. ... We’ve been in Japan for 60 years. We’ve been in South Korea for 50 years. ... As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, then it’s fine with me. ...”

But Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama weren’t especially comforting when they discussed withdrawal as if it were a process that would take a while.

Clinton said at Wednesday’s Senate hearing she “thinks it’s time to begin an orderly process of withdrawing our troops, start rebuilding our military and focusing on the challenges posed by Afghanistan, the global terrorist groups and other problems that confront Americans.”

When it was his turn to speak, Obama called again for “a timetable for withdrawal.” He said that “[n]obody’s asking for a precipitous withdrawal” but there should be pressure on the Iraq government to strengthen itself militarily, politically and fiscally. And there should be “a diplomatic surge that includes Iran.”

They were cautious, seemingly wary of the calm and reasonable-sounding Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker as they tried to find out when the troops would leave. “At what point do we say enough?” asked Obama.

Neither the general nor the ambassador gave a satisfactory answer. Crocker vaguely said, “When Iraq gets to the point that it can forward its further development without a major commitment of U.S. forces ... without significant danger of having the whole thing slip away from them again, then ... our presence diminishes markedly. But that’s not where we are now.”

The demeanor of Petraeus and Crocker, each seeming to listen thoughtfully to the questions of Democratic war critics, didn’t give Obama and Clinton much of a target, if they wanted one. In fact, watching the hearings, I wondered if Petraeus or Crocker, particularly Petraeus, would emerge next year in a Clinton or an Obama administration.

That’s a scary thought. But we don’t know what Obama or Clinton, each with a phased withdrawal philosophy, would do on that famous “Day One” when meeting with the Washington insiders, including the joint chiefs and various intelligence and anti-terror experts. In similar circumstances, President John F. Kennedy authorized the Bay of Pigs invasion.

Certainly, whoever wins will be hard-pressed to figure out a way of pulling out. Professor Juan R.I. Cole of the University of Michigan laid out the situation on his Web site Informed Comment when he said of Petraeus:

“He has done the most responsible job yet seen by an American official in Iraq in trying to end the carnage. He has made bazaars no drive zones to stop the car bombings. He has surrounded city districts with blast walls to keep out insurgents. He has reached out to the Sunnis (though alas the Shiite government has not). He has done what he could, but it hasn’t been enough. There really is little sign of political reconciliation.”

Also gloomy was a report on “Iraq After the Surge: Options and Questions,” by Daniel Serwer and Sam Parker for the United States Institute of Peace, an independent nonpartisan organization established and funded by Congress.

They wrote that while security has improved to “roughly 2005 levels ... there is no visible end to the U.S. commitment required to prevent Iraq from spinning out of control and threatening a widening war in the region. ...

“The reduced level of violence, still far short of the needs of both Iraqis and Americans, leaves the situation fragile and dependent on the presence of U.S. forces. ... Without political progress, the U.S. risks getting bogged down in Iraq for a long time to come, with serious consequences for its interests in other parts of the world.”

Even “unconditional, near-total reduction of military commitment,” the report said, would have horrible consequences: “This policy risks a complete failure of the Iraqi state, massive chaos and even genocide.”

The nearly hopeless situation is escaping media attention. The Project for Excellence in Journalism index of news coverage for the week of March 31 to April 6 showed that events in Iraq were in third place, behind stories on the economy and the presidential campaign. The campaign was first, and the most popular issue was whether Clinton should drop out. That simple subject is perfect for 24-hour news channel pundits. But it is not relevant to what is happening in Iraq.

Such coverage on television, on the Internet and in print is perfect for the Bush administration. Without enough reporters on the ground and in Washington, the real story of Iraq won’t be told.

And given the present trend in the media business, it will get worse. Sam Zell, the billionaire owner of the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, Newsday and other properties, asked in February if it “really requires six people or nine people to cover the same Iraq story?” Yes, it does, and many more. The war is poisoning the country with its daily toll of dead and wounded, both Americans and Iraqis. Without coverage that puts pressure on the candidates, the United States will be trapped in the quagmire for many more years.

Email Newsletter

Get truth delivered to your inbox every week.

Previous item: Failing the Troops

Next item: Road to Nowhere

Jump to Comments

Advertisement


Elsewhere: .

Comments

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

By bozhidar bob balkas, April 15 at 5:43 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

israel was, i deduce, important to both communist and capitaist lands. communist lands turned against israel ca. ‘50 for several reasons. capitalist lands and empires saw israel, i educe, as a first stepping stone to all of the ME. iraq now being second stepping stone to all of asia.
perhaps, it is jews that are being used/fooled? we can assert that jews will be always hated by at least 99% of world population; mostly because their religion; which is clearly separatist with many odious misteachings.

Report this

By sdemetri, April 14 at 7:32 pm #

I am personally very sorry.

Report this

By GrammaConcept, April 14 at 5:55 pm #

I do sincerely appreciate your efforts..

Report this

By A Khokar, April 14 at 4:23 pm #

In Middle East; it is more bondages and more slavery

With the end of World war II the Western Colonial powers were compelled to withdraw from foreign lands and some 40 countries of the Word, mainly around Middle East were liberated. But the power Brokers, the old subjugator and oppressors were able to do one thing; a clever demarcation of lands; to make sure that they were able to revisit the land of black gold and economic resources in the future.

The lands so demarcated were bestowed to the Monarch and kings of the area installed to be governed with one prime theme; “Monarch and Kings in the Middle East to act as the Bobbies on the beat, policing the streets of Middle East; with their police Head Quarters in Washington”. Since then these Monarch and kings are acting as stooges, a show pieces, where as people are fixed in slavery and bondages!

Where as the old master is again seen, bent upon revisiting the old trails; but here more than half a century has passed by but that very sun has yet to shine in the court yards of Middle east which may bring back the peace, dignity and prosperity in the lives of people.

The present day oppressors in the Middle East may change their flags or the faces; but one thing is certain that they are now there to stay for many more decades to come.

For Middle Eastern the matter to understand would be that miracles may not take place in slavery and bondage!

But a man; may he be from any age, century, trail or a creed!
When ever he has risen; he rose to the call of his inner self; of his Inner Conscious.
------------------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for None.

Report this

By dr wu, April 14 at 2:08 pm #

“What, me worry?”

(Petreaus sure looks like Mad’s Alfred E.)

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, April 13 at 6:07 pm #

Thank you Louise for posting the sad story of Ted Westhusing. Because this story was never reported in the mainstream media I occasionally read, I wouldn’t have ever heard about it if it was’nt for your post.

From reading the story, one thing is clear: A courageous man like Ted Westhusing would not commit suicide. He was murdered by those who stood to lose due to his whistle-blowing. And I am sure, in this sad long quagmire we call Iraq, many many more sad stories similar to that of Westhusing were repeated, but never reported; the secrets of which were buried with the victims’ bodies.

The most tragic part of evil wars is not in the stories of deaths and destruction we come to learn their details, but rather in the stories of death and destruction that remain a mystery. It’s the families of those last group that mostly need our sincerest sympathy.

Report this

By Leefeller, April 13 at 3:42 pm #

Any general who would have his troops die for opportunists is a sleaze bag, a puppet of the president he works for, no surprise here.  A sad story, under despicable circumstances, to be ignored by the mass media, for they are part of the same thing the Col found despicable, the opportunists.

No reason for him to commit suicide, seems his demise was relevant only to the money hungry.

Why the letter?

Report this

By Louise, April 13 at 2:34 pm #

And then there is the suicide.
Who keeps track of that?

And the corruption.
Who keeps track of that?

And the lies, endless lies contrived and delivered for personal gain. Lies that lead to corruption. Corruption that leads to more lies.

And the hidden casualties.

Moral men destroyed by the amoral men that command and lead them.

Who keeps track of that?

“Why serve when you cannot accomplish the mission, when you no longer believe in the cause, when your every effort and breath to succeed meets with lies, lack of support, and selfishness? No more. Reevaluate yourselves, cdrs [commanders]. You are not what you think you are and I know it.

COL Ted Westhusing”

http://www.texasobserver.org/article.php?aid=2440
http://www.unknownnews.org/0512021127Westhusing.html

In January 2005, Col. Ted Westhusing began work on what the Pentagon considered the most important mission in Iraq: training Iraqi forces to take over security duties from U.S. troops.

His formal title was director, counter terrorism/special operations, Civilian Police Assistance Training Team, Multi-National Security Transition Command-Iraq. He liked working with his Iraqi counterparts and seemed to get along well with the contractors from Virginia-based U.S. Investigations Services [USIS], a private security company with contracts worth $79 million to help train Iraqi police units that were conducting special operations.

A few weeks before he died, Westhusing received an anonymous complaint that USIS had cheated the U.S. government and committed human rights violations.
http://usis.com/default.aspx

Allegations in the complaint accused USIS of fraud and murder of Iraqi’s.

Westhusing confronted the contractor and reported the complaints to superiors Gen. Joseph Fil and Gen. David Petraeus, who launched an investigation.

In e-mails to his family, Westhusing seemed especially upset by one conclusion he had reached: that traditional military values such as duty, honor and country had been replaced by profit motives in Iraq, where the U.S. had come to rely heavily on contractors for jobs once done by the military.

U.S. officials investigated and found “no contractual violations,” an Army spokesman said.

Report this

By Louise, April 13 at 2:32 pm #

But the following circumstances lead one to wonder, did Westhusing uncover something Fil and Petraeus prefer to leave covered? And did his continued digging lead to his being put in danger?

One thing for sure. What he found out - and because of the contempt and disgust he felt from whatever he discovered - he was ready to throw away a lifetime career of success in the military, and a brilliant future!

Perhaps by ending his own life. Or perhaps by blowing the whistle when he returned home shortly.

We’ll never know, because his return home was aborted.

His wife recalled a phone conversation that chilled her two weeks before his death.

“I heard something in his voice,” she told investigators. “In Ted’s voice, there was fear. He did not like the nighttime and being alone.”

“… on June 5, Westhusing had one meeting at Camp Dublin with the contractors and another with government personnel. At the second meeting he expressed his disgust with “money-grubbing contractors” and said he “had not come over to Iraq for this.” Westhusing was slated to leave Camp Dublin after lunch. When he did not show up for a meeting, one of the contractors went looking for him. At about 1:15 in the afternoon, Westhusing was discovered in trailer 602A. Near his body was a note addressed to his commanders, Petraeus and Fil. The first part of the four-page letter lashes out at Petraeus and Fil. Written in large, block letters, it read:

“Thanks for telling me it was a good day until I briefed you. [Redacted name]—You are only interested in your career and provide no support to your staff—no msn [mission] support and you don’t care. I cannot support a msn that leads to corruption, human right abuses and liars. I am sullied—no more. I didn’t volunteer to support corrupt, money grubbing contractors, nor work for commanders only interested in themselves. I came to serve honorably and feel dishonored. I trust no Iraqi. I cannot live this way. All my love to my family, my wife and my precious children. I love you and trust you only. Death before being dishonored any more. Trust is essential—I don’t know who trust anymore. [sic] Why serve when you cannot accomplish the mission, when you no longer believe in the cause, when your every effort and breath to succeed meets with lies, lack of support, and selfishness? No more. Reevaluate yourselves, cdrs [commanders]. You are not what you think you are and I know it.
COL Ted Westhusing

Life needs trust. Trust is no more for me here in Iraq.”

Report this

By Louise, April 13 at 2:25 pm #

“After Westhusing’s death, Some family members and friends began wondering if he had been murdered. Westhusing was supposed to leave for the U.S. on July 7. Yet he killed himself on June 5. Why, they asked, couldn’t he stick it out for just one more month?”

Westhusing’s family and friends are troubled that he died at Camp Dublin, where he was without a bodyguard, surrounded by the same contractors he suspected of wrongdoing. They wonder why the manager who discovered Westhusing’s body and picked up his weapon was not tested for gunpowder residue.

There were conflicting stories from the contractors about how they discovered Westhusing’s body. [o]ne of the first people to find Westhusing in his room, a military contractor, moved Westhusing’s pistol from its original position, claiming he had done so for safety reasons. That person was never checked for gunpowder residue.”

Mostly, they wonder how Col. Ted Westhusing—father, husband, son and expert on doing right—could have found himself in a place so dark that he saw no light.

“He’s the last person who would commit suicide,” said Fichtelberg, his graduate school colleague. “He couldn’t have done it. He’s just too damn stubborn.”

Westhusing’s body was flown back to Dover Air Force Base. Waiting were his family and a close friend from West Point, a lieutenant colonel.

In the military report, the unidentified colonel told investigators that he had turned to Michelle, Westhusing’s wife, and asked what happened.

She answered:  “Iraq.”

Fil is now the commanding general of the Multinational Division in Baghdad and of the 1st Cavalry Division. On February 12, Petraeus took command of all U.S. forces in Iraq. He now wears four stars. And as in 2005, Petraeus’s main job in Iraq will be building up beleaguered police and military. He made that point clear in a open letter to U.S. soldiers and civilians serving in Iraq, which he had distributed on the day he took command. His letter declared that, “Shoulder-to-shoulder with our Iraqi comrades, we will conduct a pivotal campaign to improve security for the Iraqi people. Together with our Iraqi partners, we must defeat those who oppose the new Iraq.”

In re-reading the “note” it can be viewed as a rough draft for a letter of resignation. Did a “contractor” confronting him see his resignation as a threat of exposure? And a convenient “suicide” note?

How many Iraq stories do we never hear?

Last week we saw Petraeus in action. Like the child building a castle out of blocks, he finds great personal satisfaction in his growing structure. But he does not know where it will end, or what it will look like, or even when he will be through. He’s just enjoying the praise heaped on him from other children in the group, who have all relinquished their blocks so the castle can continue growing. But make no mistake. Whatever the General says or does, the ultimate reward will be whatever is in it for him. And as long as he has a president who gives him carte blanche, he will say and do whatever feeds his personal machine. And hang the cost!

For a man like Bush, he is the perfect general. And for Bush and all the Bush-men, the cost, both in lives lost, or destroyed, and money lost or wasted is irrelevant. Just so long as they get THERE’S. And that is the real story behind Petraeus and Iraq.

http://www.texasobserver.org/article.php?aid=2440
http://www.unknownnews.org/0512021127Westhusing.html

Report this

By bozhidar bob balkas, April 13 at 1:57 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

as a member of StopWar.ca who was one of the organizers of our protests as early as jan. ‘03 and who asserts that no country has the right to attack any other, i am not in favor of immediate withdrawal. we need bring in UN peacekeepers as quicklly as possible and as US troops leave their place should be filled with UN troops. but having said this, i am saddened/maddened that US may never allow any peace-keepers or peace-makers in iraq unless they are put under US command.
what US may do is to break the evil (all empires are evil) empire into four states; three puppet ones and the fourth as a 53d US state somewhere in syrian desert away from sunnis, kurds, and shias.
the thre puppet states will be managed by US. if any of the three new states deviates from US commands. US can turn the other two states against it. US can keep this game for centuries with explcit or tacit approval of much of the world or the world that matters. thank you

Report this

By Alan, April 13 at 11:11 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

The US military cannot win. In fact they’re irrelevant to the situation in Iraq.  The people now know this. Like the British who saw the light and slunk into their Basra base, so the Americans will do the same. They will be bombed as they hide inside their fortresses, only the airforce will be free.  Free to bomb at will and create a daily queue of Iraqi revenge seekers.  Sure McCain says the US has bases still in Germany, Japan the Uk etc 60 years after the war.  But they’re not wanted there either. The only difference is the locals don’t use rockets and mortars to remind them of this.

(a) They will never trust Americans again.
(b) Their government of fellow travellers will never
rule properly or for that matter even care about
them. They’re corrupt to the core.

There will be a real civil war eventually, that will decide the real politic in Iraq, look out for yet another Saddam. Or… the next Khomeni take your choice.

Report this

By Leefeller, April 13 at 7:27 am #

I Like your analogies, the only thing is none of the people I know are in support of the war and bigger bombs.  Now if we moved over to the Hillary Obama thread, most of them seem not to want to talk about the war, guess I am armed with an analogy and no-place to use it. 

Both candidates have sold us down the river on the war issue, being abandoned by our so called leaders is normal, but the blatant criminal practices by Bush and company being ignored is beyond reality.

Wave the flag watch fox the news and smile.

Report this

By Outraged, April 12 at 9:34 pm #

As many times as we say it and as many debates as are held some people just don’t GET IT!  I came upon this article as I was roaming around.  From the Scholars and Rogues site by Lee Camps:

“Recently I was arguing with one of my dumber friends about the Iraq war. He loves Bush and thinks bigger bombs is the answer in Iraq. I wasn’t gaining any ground in the argument until I used a simple analogy. I said, “Your solution is like shattering an expensive vase and then saying, ‘We need to keep smashing it until it’s fixed.’”

I stumped him. He was silent. So here’s a brief list of other analogies you can use on your dumb friends. And the truth is, I’ve seen similar ones work on some of the smartest political pundits.

1) The country of Iraq has essentially been demolished. The right-wingers keep saying the answer is continued large-scale military action. That’s like if someone got into a car accident, went into a coma, and the doctors believed the patient could be healed by more car accidents. So they just keep putting him into cars and sending him off cliffs.”

Full Article:  http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/04/10/how-to-win -the-iraq-war-debate-against-your-dumb-friends/#more-1908

Report this

By jackpine savage, April 12 at 3:24 pm #

Yeah, we’re not very good listeners most of the time.  Washington told us to be wary of political parties...and look how that turned out.

I read, not long ago, that the Highway program under Ike was actually him stealing money from the defense budget.  He rationalized it by claiming that the road network was necessary for defense.

Report this

By jackpine savage, April 12 at 3:21 pm #

They will not listen because they do not fear the American people.  Instead, the American people fear their leaders.

The founders of our nation would be disgusted with us.

Report this

By Pacrat, April 12 at 9:36 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Can you imagine what Petraeus and Crocker would sound like if they didn’t have to stick to the White House script? We’ll find out immediately after the inauguration of a new president - since they will both be dumped - rightly so.

Both are total flunkies - for now. Their books outlining their true opinions will be out by the end of 2009.

Report this

By Leefeller, April 12 at 6:53 am #

Read someplace the Ike said the Military complex needed to be watched and kept in check.  Well we watched but did not check. The only thing balancing is the Military check books.

Report this

By Paolo, April 12 at 6:48 am #

This is the dead end where “National Greatness” conservatism leaves us: mired in foreign entanglements from which there is no exit, our treasury being depleted for nothing, our freedoms at home eroded and discarded on the excuse of keeping us safe from “terrorists” (another word for “those who resist our foreign adventures").

Unfortunately, both Democrat and Republican leaders buy into this “National Greatness” claptrap. Almost all of them believe in one hundred percent, unquestioning loyalty to Israel. Almost all of them want to continue our 60-year presence in Germany and Japan, our 50-year presence in Korea, and a permanent presence everywhere else. Folks, it cannot be done if we value our freedom and our prosperity. These so-called “leaders” are psychotic megalomaniacs.

John McCain is the perfect embodiment of this megalomania: he is foul-mouthed, petulant, temperamental, delusional, and uninformed. This last is particularly critical: a man who keeps confusing Shi’ites, Sunnis, Al-Qaeda, and Sadrists claims to be competent to referee a civil war in Iraq, on the far side of the globe. What sheer imperial chutzpah! 

The American people, however, are not so sure about all this “National Greatness” stuff. They would, given the choice, prefer a foreign policy based on non-intervention, peace, and trade. Their “leaders” will not hear of it.

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, April 12 at 5:38 am #

Lefty, though you seem to come out strongly against Bush and gang, but in fact you’re the one closest to their thinking in your state of denial about Israel’s control of the politics of America. This is now a universal fact that the American congress and the White House are an Israeli-occupied territory.

It’s indeed your state of denial and lack of basic comprehension that should be called psychopathic.

Report this

By Leefeller, April 12 at 5:30 am #

They the naysayers, think and judge others as themselves and believe Iran will become more powerful in the region and Iran is bad, according to the moron axis of evil.

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, April 12 at 5:23 am #

Greg Bacon, thank you for posting this great informative piece. Many among us knew that Kristol was one of the main architects and promoters of war against Arab-Muslim lands on behalf of Israel. And despite of that you will find the blind, ignorant ones, like Lefty, who will rather continue to be in a state of denial about what are now clearly universal facts. Your piece helped in affirming and confirming these facts, therefore, all lovers of the truth should thank you for your efforts.

Report this

By lodipete, April 12 at 4:56 am #

. Hiding behind Army Gen. David Petraeus’s medals and uniform, President Bush sent his proxy to Capitol Hill to repeat the administration’s threadbare mantras yet another time.

Just six days earlier, however, a different high-ranking U.S. military officer spoke to the senators – Lt. Gen. William E. Odom, now retired. “The surge is prolonging instability, not creating the conditions for unity as the president claims,” his testimony began.

“The decline in violence reflects a dispersion of power to dozens of local strong men who distrust the government and occasionally fight among themselves,” Odom explained. “Thus the basic military situation is far worse because of the proliferation of armed groups under local military chiefs who follow a proliferating number of political bosses.

“This can hardly be called greater military stability, much less progress toward political consolidation, and to call it fragility that needs more time to become success is to ignore its implications.”

Persuading the Sunnis not to shoot at U.S. troops comes at a high financial toll. “ . . . Our new Sunni friends insist on being paid for their loyalty,” Odom pointed out. “I have heard, for example, a rough estimate that the cost of in one area of about 100 square kilometers is $250,000 per day. And periodically they threaten to defect unless their fees are increased.”

In other words, the short-sighted tactic of paying one faction not to shoot at U.S. troops is setting Iraq up for long-term fighting between multiple factions by giving one side the funds needed to buy arms and pay militia members.

Odom also made hash of claims that Al Qaeda will have a staging area in Iraq for further attacks against the United States if we withdraw our entire military presence.

“The Sunnis will soon destroy Al Qaeda if we leave Iraq,” Odom said. “The Kurds do not allow them in their region, and the Shiites, like the Iranians, detest Al Qaeda. To understand why, one need only take note of the Al Qaeda public diplomacy campaign over the past year or so on Internet blogs. They implore the United States to bomb and invade Iran and destroy this apostate Shiite regime.

“As an aside, it gives me pause to learn that our vice president and some members of Congress are aligned with Al Qaeda on spreading the war to Iran.”

That should give all of us pause. Odom’s entire testimony is 180 degrees opposite of what we keep hearing from clueless pundits on all sides and nightly news broadcasts.

So what do we do now? As a first step, Odom urged withdrawal from Iraq of all U.S. troops rapidly but in good order. “Only that step can break the paralysis now gripping U.S. strategy in the region,” he said.

Next, he advised the senators, is to establish a new aim of regional stability, “not a meaningless victory in Iraq.” To make progress toward that stability, however, the United States must alter its approach to Iran.

“If the president merely renounced his threat of regime change by force, that could prompt Iran to lessen its support of Taliban groups in Afghanistan,” Odom pointed out. “Iran detests the Taliban and supports them only because they will kill more Americans in Afghanistan as retaliation in event of a U.S. attack on Iran.

“Iran’s policy toward Iraq would have to change radically as we withdraw,” Odom continued. “It cannot want instability there. Iraqi Shiites are Arabs and they know that Persians look down on them. Cooperation between them has its limits.”

Odom concluded: “Naysayers insist that our withdrawal will create regional instability. This confuses cause with effect. Our forces in Iraq and our threat to change Iran’s regime are making the region unstable. Those who link instability with a U.S. withdrawal have it exactly backwards. Our ostrich strategy of keeping our heads buried in the sands of Iraq has done nothing but advance our enemies’ interest.”

Report this

By Leefeller, April 12 at 4:30 am #

Lefty, You meant to say president and friends.

Report this

By Leefeller, April 12 at 4:23 am #

So like Goldilocks.

Firing how many generals and military leaders to find the perfect, “yes man cronie, oh, such exhausting work for the Bush, now we know why Bush finds it necessary to spend so much time relaxing on the Ranch. All this time I thought he was just counting his money.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, April 12 at 3:44 am #

Considering that Al Qaeada are ALREADY being paid indirectly by the USA, why wouldn’t thye help???? Osama bin Laden is long dead anyway...... Benazir Bhutto said so.... and was murdered for her trouble!

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, April 12 at 3:41 am #

....and they BOMB Christians in Lebanon!!!!! What, you though that Arabs weren’t Christians???

Weel, Russian and European Jews AREN’T Semites, either........

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, April 12 at 3:39 am #

Duh, Israel ISN’T Christian, bachu!!!!!!! They don’t give a fuck.....

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, April 12 at 3:36 am #

Who was it who started all this with the bombing of Belgrade ......and the bombing of the Chinese embassy there??? ....... oh, never mind, uhh!

Report this

By Expat, April 12 at 1:55 am #

^ good.  Everyone agrees in their own way to the dire straits that lay ahead.  I remain perplexed and depressed by our national state of somnolence.  But I see the real question as; what will it take to awaken the sleeper (us)?  My fear is there is no real answer to this question.  Petraeus and Crocker have been called a dog and pony show (rightfully so), but this has been going on for almost 8 years with all of the player (actors) of the last two administrations and we just sit and watch it.  If it was a TV show surely you would have switched channels by now.

Report this

By Kwagmyre, April 11 at 10:37 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

In previous posts I’ve made, I stated that it might require a coup d’etat launched by some of the highest members of the military to accomplish what others who’ve posted here would want(never mind the flight into fantasy that this appears to be).....you’ve got to grab the power source by the balls to get the kind of effective action that “politically correct” policy simply can’t.

Report this

By Lefty, April 11 at 9:54 pm #

Isn’t it amazing how Israel, (a country with little wealth, no natural resources and certainly not $12 trillion in proven oil reserves like Saudi Arabia), and Jews, can exercise so much power and influence over so many Christians who hate Jews!  It doesn’t make any sense!  In fact, the very idea appears to be downright psychopathic!

Report this

By Lefty, April 11 at 9:41 pm #

How did such a pathetic, corrupt, maliable, weakling become a general?  What a disgrace!

Report this

By bachu, April 11 at 8:51 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

A war fought by American kids, for the greater glory of Israel. – but what is wrong with that? Isn’t America a so called Christian country?

Report this

By Tex, April 11 at 5:18 pm #

He can lead the way for the conservanazi failure in it’s War on Iraq. Let it drag on until the US military is crippled. Let it drag on until the US economy can’t support it. By that time, most Americans will realize that the lies from the conservanazi republicants has brought on all the misery this country has suffered. When the US Army is in tatters for lack of new war machines or material, remind them that they backed the bu$h regime. When officers and other supporters of bu$h whine about long, hard repeated combat tours in Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan, remind them they had a choice and that was to believe the bu$hit or not. They chose to believe it and thought the greatest politicians were the conservanazis.

THAT IS THE ONLY WAY OUT OF THE IRAQ QUAGMIRE. CATASTROPHIC FAILURE AND COLLAPSE OF THE US ARMY. MILITARY OFFICERS SHOULD BE REMINDED THAT THEY SHOULD BE APOLITICAL. THEY LOVE bu$h. THEY DESERVE EACH OTHER.

Obviously, the truth hasn’t helped at all.

Then, the conservanazis will think it was a long dry spell of power since the Great Depression. They will be relegated to the trash heap of great conservanazi ideas like THE PNAC crowd of chickenhawks.
BUCK FUSH!

Report this

By jackpine savage, April 11 at 3:34 pm #

got it...sorry for making you chase

Report this

By jackpine savage, April 11 at 2:27 pm #

Indeed, we could leave almost immediately (as immediately as logistics allow).  But there really are serious issues with just pulling the plug.

As bad and stupid as it was to go barreling into Iraq, leaving it broken would be just as bad...or maybe worse.  On the other hand, we - singlehandedly - can no longer fix it...though i don’t think that establishing “democracy” or fixing it is of any concern to the neocon imperialists.

I agree that nothing’s going to change with a new president.  At least not without a very clear ultimatum from the American people that it must end.

Report this

By Dale Headley, April 11 at 1:42 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Why is there never any discussion, either by Republicans or Democrats about what is REALLY going on?  It has absolutely nothing to do with terrorism; nothing to do with freedom and democracy; nothing to do with protecting America.  This war is about greed, and no matter who is president, no matter how many Americans or innocent Iraqis are killed, no matter how damaged our prestige around the world deteriorates, NO MATTER WHAT, the U.S. will remain there, dictating to the Iraqi “government” until Americans’ gluttony for oil abates; and it will continue as long as American companies rake in enormous profits, often fraudulently, on the exploitation of the war.  The fact that Dick Cheney’s stock in Halliburton continues to skyrocket is NO coincidence.  Like everything else in American life today, the arc of the war is controlled by U.S. corporations.  And if they want the U.S. military to build permanent bases to protect their burgeoning profits; if they want to construct the largest embassy in history from which to rule this tiny country; if they want to use our awesome military firepower to eradicate another million helpless Iraqi men, women, and children who might interfere with their profits; that’s the way it will be - Obama or no Obama.

Report this

By GrammaConcept, April 11 at 10:54 am #

Thank You very much, Purple Girl......and to your eloquence I add:

peace |pēs|
noun
freedom from, or the cessation of, war or violence..

nonviolence |nänˈvīələns|
noun
the use of peaceful means, not force, to bring about political or social change..

I am thinking now of Gandhi....
“What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless,” he asked, “whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?”

When asked what he thought of Western civilization, Gandhi responded, “I think it would be a good idea.”

Without high Ideals toward which we daily work, we humans remain tragically bereft of true meaning in life....We, ourselves, must tame our own wildness through striving mightily, conscientiously, and enthusiastically toward our Ideals.....

Strive On.

Report this

By Greg Bacon, April 11 at 10:43 am #

That son?  William Kristol, preeminent chickenhawk, war monger and one of the forces behind the “Project for the New American Century"(PNAC), the REAL roadmap being used in the ME, not for peace, but used to wage endless wars against Israel’s “existential” enemies.

A war fought by American kids, for the greater glory of Israel.

PNAC stated that American’s would not get behind endless wars, unless, there was some kind of event, like a new Pearl Harbor.

From Wikipedia, here’s that statement:

“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor” (51)

And that new Pearl Harbor came on September 11, 2001, giving chickenhawks and war mongers like Kristol the excuse they’d been dreaming of--if not planning for--to help shove the U.S. into fighting endless wars in the ME.

Kristol and his fellow travelers saw 9/11 not as a tragedy, but as an opportunity to push America into Israel’s conflicts.

Kristol and his fellow neoCONs hijacked 9/11 and used it to help Israel fight its wars.

An Israel that would eventually include all of Occupied Palestine and Lebanon, and large chunks of Egypt, Syria and Jordan.
Plus, parts of Turkey and Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

That’s our war on terror.  A war in which Israel uses the armed might of the U.S. to terrorize those nations into becoming part and parcel of Israel.

Kristol and his deranged band of war mongers now want the U.S. to bomb and or invade another of Israel’s enemies, Iran.

This morning, there are news stories from London, to New York, to Tel Aviv, showing a purported Iranian launch site for long range ICBM’s. A site that was just recently found.

Recently found?

If you believe that, i’ve got some yellow cake to sell you.

That Kristol is a fifth columnist for a foreign power is evident in the way he spews his foreign intrigues and agitprop all over the media.

Listen to what this Brainiac had to say about invading Iraq on February 20, 2003, Mr. Kristol incredibly gushed:

“If we free the people of Iraq, we will be respected in the Arab world.”

WTF?

Here, i’ll leave you with an exchange Billy boy had with Stephen Colbert of the “Colbert Report” about PNAC:

Colbert shakes up Bill Kristol over PNAC ties

Crooks and Liars | April 29 2006

Bill Kristol, who is one of the major players in the group called PNAC, joined the set of the “Colbert Report,” and I think was taken off guard right at the outset of the show because he had to answer questions that our media never asks. PNAC envisioned America attacking the Middle East since the middle ‘90’s and for some inexplicable reason (that was a joke) the media never questions him or his members which have lined the walls of Bush’s cabinet about PNAC and how it influenced our foreign policy, which led us to attack Iraq.

Colbert immediately called him on it and Kristol was quite embarrassed talking about it.

Colbert: Speaking of thinking alike, you were a member, or are a member of the New Project for the American Century, correct?

Kristol: I am.

Colbert: Were or am, am?

Kristol: Were and am.

Colbert: How’s that project coming?

Kristol: well. it’s..(stammering)

Colbert: How’s the New American Century, looks good to me?

Kristol: Ahh--I think...hehe yea--I’m speechless..

Colbert: Really?

Kristol: Yea...we’ve sort of...the Project for the New American Century is just a few people..

Colbert: Come on, it’s a terrific New American Century, right?

Kristol: Well I think we do OK.

Colbert: You Rummy Wolfowitz, Cheney, Pearle, Feith, all you guys right?

Kristol (responds timidly): Well, we fought back after 9/11..

Report this

By SamSnedegar, April 11 at 10:32 am #

if it were not for that damned oil, we’d leave Iraq in a trice, or maybe even a twice (two thirds of a trice).

If we could take the oil with us, we’d be gone in a heartbeat or a Noo Yawk minute.

Still . . . we MIGHT JUST GET MAD at the Iraqis for behaving so badly, and go steal our oil someplace else like Saudi Arabia or Kuwait and the Emirates or all of the above . . .

I wouldn’t like that to happen to nice people like the Iraqis, I mean the USA burning and destroying their oil wells and blowing up their oilfields and taking its sojers out to some other country who has oil to steal.

Report this

By samosamo, April 11 at 8:52 am #

As I have said elsewhere, this guy is on cloud 9 being the corporate whore that he is, which defines his reason for cooperating with the undefeatable w,dick & neocons prime time show. The match made in heaven. Can anyone believe that even with a change of parties in November election that the new occupiers of the white house and houses of congress will bring oversight and accountability to these criminals?  I would say ‘don’t hold your breath’.

Report this

By Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD, April 11 at 7:22 am #

I bet a million bucks that, if there were any interest in getting out of Iraq within a few months, we’d be out of there, with the Iraqis and al Qaida helping to load the trucks, planes and ships.

Who the hell do they think they’re kidding, yet again?

The neocons don’t want to get out; that’s why we’re being told that we can’t leave.  I’m on to those bastards.

It’s a fucking military/Bush pride thing.  How do you explain to the maimed and the families of killed that we’re turning tail?  You don’t.  You say, “Our best estimate is, if all goes according to well thought-out planning and barring any unforeseen hostilities over the next several months, provided we have the support of blah, blah, yada yada...” And then you stay there forever and get on with your imperialistic agenda. 

Does anyone think for one second that a new president is going to change the way America does business in the rest of the world? 

Even if Nader got elected, he’d be powerless.

Report this

By DennisD, April 11 at 7:13 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Impossible to get out of Iraq, I don’t think so.

Staying indefinitely presumes a never ending supply of money, manpower and equipment. Just where are those resources supposed to be coming from.

We’re bankrupt. That fact should become clearer to even the dumbest of us as we watch our economy start to collapse under the debt load.

When will we start holding people accountable for the American quagmire should be the real question.

Report this

By Ethan Boger, April 11 at 6:34 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

The biggest takeaway from Gen. Petraeus’s testimony is that the occupation of Iraq will last for a generation. Don’t you all get it??? It is going to take many more years to change a culture of violence and corruption. The generals, the politicians and the pundits will not tell us this but the message is clear. Neither a Republican nor a Democrat will be able to extricate us from there for one simple reason: we would be leaving Iraq’s fate to the militias and to Iran. No President will be willing to take that gamble, regardless of campaign promises.

So, where is the outrage? We were promised a short war that would be paid for with Iraqi oil. Instead we have been conned into a 30-year occupation that will cost thousands of American lives and trillions of dollars, not to mention the horrors we will have inflicted on the Iraqis. Yet the American people stare balefully at their TV screens unwilling to think about this reality. Maybe they will when gas hits $10 and stagflation finally erodes our standard of living, but by then Bush, Cheney, Rice and Co. will be living comfortably off of honoraria and the Neocons who masterminded this misadventure will have vanished into the cracks and rat holes of Academia.

So, who is to blame?

First of all, the Bush Administration, led by an idiot who couldn’t successfully run a lemonade stand and a VP who is still fighting the Cold War.

Second, a Congress which was either colluding with Bush or so pitifully spineless and clueless it must remind us of the Reichstag and 1933.

Third, the mindless media led by the nose by politicians on the right and the left.

Fourthly, the American public, ignorant, clueless, arrogant, docile, who voted for the idiot once and then voted for him again.

How will it end?

We are fooling ourselves if we think we can sustain a trillion dollar defense budget year over year. A trillion dollars is what the President is proposing, when the CIA, the DHS, the Energy Department, supplemental Iraq funding, etc, etc are included.

Something has to give. Will it be the big ticket items the Pentagon loves so much? Will it be the investments in infrastructure, education, R&D;, healthcare, so vital to future growth and global competitiveness? Will it be our commitments to caring for the elderly?

Or, will it all come from Iraqi oil? Remember Cheney’s Energy Task Force? They had it right from the start. Iraq, sitting on possibly 400 billion barrels of crude - that’s $40 trillion dollars at a measly $100/barrel. We knocked out Saddam and brought them democracy, right? Don’t they owe it to us? That’s a rationalization truly fit for an empire.

In summary, Bush’s legacy is either stagflation, an erosion of our standard of living and our ability to compete against a rising China and a resurgent Russia, or an unavoidable lurch down the road to militarism and empire, which will undoubtedly exacerbate tension with a rising China and a resurgent Russia! What a mess!

Report this

By John Miller, April 11 at 5:56 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

They say that if we withdraw there would be a bloodbath.
1. There already is.
2. After a few days, somebody would come out on top.
Then there would be peace.
3. What would the U.S. lose?  The oil.
I say, let’s go for that!

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, April 11 at 5:41 am #

The most significant issue in Asia currently is NOT eithr Iraq or Tibet but the price of FOOD!!! Rice, an Asia-wide staple, has more thn doubled in price recently. Wheat is the same and other foods are becoming expensive.........

World bank president Robet Zoellick and British PM Gordon Brown.... VIDEO

Report this

By bozhidar bob balkas, April 11 at 5:20 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

i aggre with you. to me, US has one party system. the ruling class, about 5 million richest amers control with an iron grip armed forces, cia, fbi, city police, both houses. 16o wars/skirmishes. nagasaki, hiroshima proves your and my conclusion. thanx.

Report this

By Leefeller, April 11 at 4:52 am #

Lack of logic, or evan a little taste of reality, the whole Iraq shambles is nothing but bad decisions given strokes instead of a boot.  Now that withdrawal is off the table, the Democrats and the Republicans both should be booted out of office, at least the ones who voted to go to war.  Handing over the presidency to someone who voted to go to war makes about as much sense as presenting awards to Cronies on the Bush pay roll for doing a great job.

Even given the far fetched idea that Bush and Cheney did not know they were lying, The whole Iraq war or the so called War on Terror was so poorly planed and mishandled even some misanthropic company like Enron would fire them.  Given all the water that has gone under the bridge, the fact that we are still jacking around in this war of simple simon says, is beyond common sense.  Failures seem to be ignored and even rewarded in the palaces of the elite, we have seen this over and over again, it will not change.

Now the question why the mass media has turned a blind eye to the war, one only has to look at who owns the mass media, it is not the people. “so”

Report this

By Expat, April 11 at 4:18 am #

^ over this site.  I’ve PM’d you; check your private messages.  My rant thread disappeared very quickly and I had also responded there as well.

Report this

By jackpine savage, April 11 at 3:53 am #

The Dem candidates are preparing the ground for telling the people who voted for them, “Well, actually...and i’m, um, sorry...we can’t withdraw from Iraq.”

And unfortunately, we can’t.  Our only hope is to use amounts of diplomacy that we haven’t seen since WW II, in order to get a large, and truly international, peacekeeping force on the ground.  In that case we could withdraw...and such a scenario may now be our only option for political stabilization.

I don’t see that happening…

This is why the initial authorization vote was so much more important than voting for continued funding.  Once you put yourself in a situation that is almost impossible to get out of, it’s, well, almost impossible to get out.  This very scenario should have been debated in the Senate at length; we invaded/occupied based on nothing but best case scenarios...that’s trouble in love and war.

Report this

By Purple Girl, April 11 at 3:38 am #

Those of US who never wanted Boots on the Ground in Afghanistan want Immediate withdrawl. those of US who knew our Presence in the Region was the REASON for 9/11 want an Immediate Withdrawl. Those of US who realize our Nations guiding Doctrines and Principles have been Seized want our Military back immediately to help Protect & defend US against ‘Domestic Enemies’. Those of US who Demanded that we find alternative energy Sources in the ‘70’s want an immediate withdrawl.Thsoe of US who KNOW that this War is about Oil and the Profits it generates for the Elites of this Country and the oppressive Regimes in the ME want an immediate Withdrawl.Those of US who Know there are numerous better ways to handle ‘terroism’ want an immmediate withdrawl. those of US who know more harm has come to the poeple of those Countries since the invasion want an immediate withdrawl.Those of US who’ve been conscious (conscience) Want an immediate Withdrawl!

Report this

By TDoff, April 11 at 1:51 am #

No surprise that the media supports the war, the same folks own the media that own the politicians, lobbyists, and ‘think tank experts’ that instigated the war.

Report this

Add Your Comment

Posts by unregistered readers are moderated. Posts by members
are published immediately. Why wait? Register today!






Notify you when others comment on this article?


Are you a human?
Retype the word you see here.


Please read and abide by our comment policy.
By submitting this comment, you agree to this site's terms and conditions.

Newsletter

Get Truthdig in your inbox

Privacy Policy

 
Click here to advertise with Truthdig
 

 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2008 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.