|
|
May 21, 2013
|
|
Despite Celebration, the Iraq War ContinuesPosted on Sep 2, 2010
By David Sirota Something about 21st century warfare brings out Washington’s lust for historical comparison. The moment the combat starts, lawmakers and the national press corps inevitably portray every explosion, invasion, front-line dispatch, political machination and wartime icon as momentous replicas of the past’s big moments and Great Men. 9/11 was Pearl Harbor. Colin Powell’s Iraq presentation at the United Nations was Adlai Stevenson’s Cuban Missile Crisis confrontation. Embedded journalists in Afghanistan strutted around like the intrepid Walter Cronkite on a foreign battlefield. George Bush was a Rooseveltian “war president.” The Iraq invasion was D-Day. A byproduct of reporters’ narcissism, politicians’ vanity and the Beltway’s lockstep devotion to militarism, this present-tense hagiography ascribes the positive attributes of sanitized history to current events. And whether or not the analogies are appropriate, they inevitably help sell contemporary actions—no matter how ill-advised. As just one example: If 9/11 was Pearl Harbor, as television so often suggested, then American couch potatoes were bound to see “shock and awe” in Baghdad as a rational reprise of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima. Of course, after we were told seven years ago that “major combat operations in Iraq have ended,” and after an historically unique conflict that has lasted longer than almost any other, you might think the press would start questioning the government’s martial stagecraft. You might also think all the comparisons to the past would stop. Instead, D.C. journalists and lawmakers are now celebrating the supposed withdrawal from Iraq, implicitly presenting the White House’s August announcement as the second coming of V-J Day. The trouble is that the announcement is anything but, because the war isn’t even close to over. And we know that because the military is quietly acknowledging as much. Advertisement “American troops in Iraq will still go into harm’s way,” notes the Brookings Institution’s Kenneth Pollack. “American pilots will still fly combat missions in support of Iraqi ground forces, and American special forces will still face off against Iraqi terrorist groups in high-intensity operations. ... (The United States) will probably face casualties therein the years to come, regardless of how we label our mission there.” The truth, in short, is clear: Despite Washington portraying this month’s Iraq announcement as another big happy event created by Great Men, the only history that’s truly germane to this moment is the kind that may portend future misfortune. Notice that the White House has taken to saying that the remaining American troops are merely serving with the Iraqi army in an “advise-and-assist” role. Notice, too, that these same officials are now touting the Iraqification of that nation’s security. Considering this, if historical allegory must infuse America’s foreign policy discourse, shouldn’t reporters be pondering how our government deceptively employed the same “military adviser” moniker in the disastrous Vietnam buildup? And shouldn’t elected officials remember that “Vietnamization” was the seemingly pro-withdrawal panacea floated four blood-soaked years before U.S. forces finally left Southeast Asia? Sure they should—but they don’t because it’s easier to pretend this is just another gauzy snippet in a saccharine History Channel documentary. And it’s not just easier—as with most present-tense hagiography, pretending the Iraq conflict has concluded serves a deliberate purpose: to make America forget the altogether unglamorous consequences of permanent war. David Sirota is the author of the best-selling books “Hostile Takeover” and “The Uprising.” He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado and blogs at OpenLeft.com. E-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com or follow him on Twitter @davidsirota. © 2010 Creators.com, New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy. |
By surfnow, September 7, 2010 at 3:59 pm Link to this comment
The idiots who believe this “war” is actually over, are the very same idiots who believed that we invaded Iraq to bring democracy to the Iraqi people.
Report thisBy mrfreeze, September 6, 2010 at 11:10 pm Link to this comment
America LOVES to wage wars. Unfortunately, with only one quasi-exception, we never WIN them. In fact, anyone being honest about our history must admit that one of the most valuable welfare systems we run is the military.
So let’s cut the baloney and admit to ourselves that we are nothing more than a failed state with a big giant army. Wow, it sure is worth fighting and dying for!
Report thisBy last_boy_scout, September 6, 2010 at 12:23 am Link to this comment
That country may soon turn into the same trap,
Soviets once got in Afghanistan
(http://www.win.ru/en/school/3226.phtml).
Easy to get in, hard to get out. I know, that refers
Report thisto the question whether we had to get in there in the
first place, but for now, military command is to
decide whether there’d be sense in further supporting
Iraqi people with more than just investments and
arms. Just as the author of the article mentioned,
the war is yet not win, yet not lost and yet not
over.
By mdgr, September 5, 2010 at 9:58 pm Link to this comment
Both D’s and R’s voted for this war. I have just written several elected officials as follows. This is, as it were, dedicated to David Sirota. If it rings any bells with you, please substitute names and send out copies at will.
__________________________
To——:
I’m a progressive. After Obama (and many of your betrayals as well), I will never vote Democrat again.
I’m hoping that the remaining Democratic elected officials who are also progressives will publicly resign from that party after the debacle in November, subsequently creating a third party of their own.
At issue is the potential transfer of nuclear access codes to Sarah Palin or someone very much like her in 2012. Think nuclear access codes. Nuclear access codes. We cannot afford to lose.
By then, the economy will be in tatters, and Obama’s “audacity of taupe” policies won’t save us. Think Weimar. The Democrats, who will be thoroughly discredited by then, cannot prevent that transfer of power.
You yourself are a corporately-owned Democrat and so is Senator Patty Murray in Washington State, where I live.
I cannot vote against you, but in hopes doing my part in creating a tactical crisis that may help bring forth a truly viable progressive/independent third party, I will consider holding my nose and voting against Senator Murray next November. At the very least, I won’t vote for her.
It’s way past time closing time for the Dems. It’s time to trot out the garlic and the wooden stake. “It’s over,” as Leonard Cohen sang, “and it ain’t going any further.”
Report thisBy LocalHero, September 5, 2010 at 1:19 pm Link to this comment
Of course the war continues. It’s the only thing the US is the least bit good at!
Report thisBy Tesla, September 5, 2010 at 10:39 am Link to this comment
Our country was born in war, forged in the furnace of
manifest destiny, and teethed on genocide and unending
imperial expansion for the benefit of the power
brokers.
Like all empires we eventually reach a point beyond sustainability and the system collapses. My hunch is
Report thisthis collapse will become painfully obvious and
undeniable to even the most recalcitrant observers
very, very soon.
By PatrickHenry, September 5, 2010 at 7:33 am Link to this comment
What can you expect of a war based on B.S.?
Good viewing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVGgcu_NE0w&feature=player_embedded
Report thisBy Dr. O. P. Sudrania, September 4, 2010 at 10:10 pm Link to this comment
MeHere,
Report thisThat is the news of the century. May be for creating a mini USA???
God bless
By MeHere, September 4, 2010 at 8:34 pm Link to this comment
The largest and most expensive US embassy built in Baghdad is a 104-acre, 27
Report thisbuilding compound. It has 619 apartments for staffers as well as restaurants,
indoor and outdoor basketball courts, volleyball court, and indoor Olympic-size
swimming pool. Was that built with the idea of leaving it all behind for Iraqis to
use as an educational or medical facility?
By RayLan, September 4, 2010 at 3:44 am Link to this comment
Obama is part of the problem, trying to fake being part of the solution. He is in true gutless puppet form with the ‘withdrawal’ - trying to not anger the right (heaven forbid) and appease the left ( who are fast realizing he isn’t one of them despite the tea party whining about his socialism) But then how can Obama resist the traditional tide of American imperialism, which characteristically continues to occupy almost every country it has attacked?
Report thisBy Dr. O. P. Sudrania, September 4, 2010 at 1:15 am Link to this comment
Now the 50,000 restive troops will ensure “Americanisation” of “Iraqinisation” of the Iraq. Rex non potest peccare.
God bless
Report thisDr. O. P. Sudrania
By gerard, September 3, 2010 at 2:51 pm Link to this comment
And to remind us again of just how deeply we each are personally involved (until we change our entire war-dependent economic system): The war-dependent economic system does more than a little to preserve
Report thisour own relatively high standard of living (compared to most places in the world). We are still having our cake and eating it, too. And in case anyone really wants to know, that’s why “they” hate us.
By berniem, September 3, 2010 at 1:05 pm Link to this comment
Cmon! Really! Can anyone truly identify any significant stretch of time when this peace loving democracy of ours has NOT been at war to one degree or another?
Report thisBy Peetawonkus, September 3, 2010 at 7:17 am Link to this comment
I remember when all the bases were being created in Iraq after the Invasion. We were told these were merely temporary bases. After about a year, it was noticed that these “temporary” bases had a very permanent look to them. Now, the remaining 50,000 troops will, among other things, be guarding “our” bases. A few terms get swapped around, a few fancy speeches get made—and the policy remains the same: American global military dominance. Let’s face it. Obama is not some progressive savior of the American Dream. He’s not even a Liberal for Christ’s sake. We need to leave Iraq. There was no reason for us to be there in the first place. Our continued presence, no matter how Obama tries to relabel it, is to assign noble reasons to a lie.
Report thisBy balkas, September 3, 2010 at 6:50 am Link to this comment
Conflict between US and, pashtuns, japanese, and iraqis cannot ever end unless US withdraws every last ‘private’-regular militant from these lands and pays for damages inflicted on these peoples.
But, US, above all else, wants more land for tiny impoverished israel and large, but-getting-poorer, US.
Report thisSirota just cannot afford to say this truth! tnx