Category: Iraq

This should be heard/watched by Many!

Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitzand Harvard Economist Linda Bilmes on the True Cost of the US Invasion andOccupation of Iraq

read/watch/listen to more | digg story

[AUTHOR’S NOTE:  I retitled this and edited a bit to make it sexier (or should I say more alluring?) Hope that’s kosher.]

Maybe we shouldn’t complain about the news media’s lack of coverage of the antiwar movement. They don’t even cover the issue when it’s debated for two days in the US Senate.

Senate Democrats, failing to pass anything this week, promise to try again in April, when an appropriations bill comes up.  House Democrats are in a “wait til’ next year” mode.

All the more reason to turn up the heat in March.  And there are plenty of opportunities to take action — in Washington or in your hometown — as the 5th anniversary of the invasion approaches on March 19.  

The two proposals to change course in Iraq failed, predictably, this week, perhaps providing an excuse for the media’s lack of interest. (Depending, of course, on whether the chicken or the egg came first.) But what was taking place was nothing less than a matter of life and death, for US service members and Iraqi military and civilians alike.

The number of American service members who have given their lives in Iraq is nearing 4,000. Nearly 30,000 more have been wounded, and countless others have suffered permanent physical or psychological damage that will haunt them, their loved ones, and this country for decades to come. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died, and 4 million more have been displaced from their homes and become refugees.

Was the debate front page news? Hardly. It was hardly news at all. Here’s a brief CQ report, in case you missed the news entirely.

That’s all the more reason that the vast majority of Americans who want this senseless bloodshed to end must continue to speak out and act out, at every opportunity.

The sponsors of the two measures which were shelved again in the Senate, Sens. Russ Feingold and Harry Reid, say they will try again in April when appropriations for the war come up, even though House Democrats seem to have adopted a “wait til’ next year” strategy on Iraq.

Between now and then, let’s turn up the heat.

There are plenty of opportunities to do so in March.

Iraq Veterans Against the War will hold Winter Soldier hearings Mar. 13-16 in Washington, DC, modeled on the 1971 hearings held by Vietnam Veterans Against the War.  Here’s how IVAW describes the event:

The four-day event will bring together veterans from across the country to testify about their experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan – and present video and photographic evidence. In addition, there will be panels of scholars, veterans, journalists, and other specialists to give context to the testimony. These panels will cover everything from the history of the GI resistance movement to the fight for veterans’ health benefits and support.

You’ll be able to follow live audio and video links on the web, and some groups are now making plans to screen the hearings in public places across the country, too.

The next week, March 19, is the 5th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq.  Will we ever forget the shock and awe when we learned we had been duped about the reasons to invade?   United for Peace and Justice, the nation’s largest antiwar coalition, is planning to mark the day:

March 19th will mark the beginning of the 6th year of the U.S. occupation of Iraq. Enough is enough! We are organizing creative, nonviolent acts of civil disobedience in Washington DC to interrupt business as usual for those promoting and profiting from war and empire building. Focusing on the pillars of war, our actions will take place at multiple sites, demonstrating the real costs of war and offering visions for a more just and sustainable world, a world at peace.

Actions are bring planned in local communities as well to mark the anniversary.  

Friday, March 21, is Iraq Moratorium #7, a day to take individual or collective action to call for an end to the war and the occupation.  The Moratorium, a national grassroots movement, asks people to do something on the Third Friday of every month to disrupt their normal routine and call for an end to the war.

You’ll find lots of ideas for actions on the Moratorium website , along with a list of events on March 21 and reports, videos and photos of previous actions.  There have been more than 600 group actions under the Iraq Moratorium banner since September.

So, march in March.  Or do something, anything, besides waiting for the election.  Unless we keep the pressure on, a Democratic president and Congress may not make this a priority, either. If you doubt that, ask Nancy Pelosi what she’s doing to end the war.    

The British government admits to complicity in two cases of “extraordinary rendition”, but claims they are an isolated case and promises that it “never uses torture for any purpose, including obtaining information, neither would we instigate actions by others to do so.”

I’m not cynical enough to think that the United States invaded Iraq so we could gain a customer for our weapons, but…

In a move that could be the most enduring imprint of U.S. influence in the Arab world, American military officials in Baghdad have begun a crash program to outfit the entire Iraqi army with M-16 rifles.

The initiative marks a sharp break for a culture steeped in the traditions of the Soviet-era AK-47 Kalashnikov assault rifle, a symbol of revolutionary zeal and third-world simplicity that is ubiquitous among the militaries of the Middle East.

…

So far, the U.S. military has helped the Iraqi army purchase 43,000 rifles – a mix of full-stock M-16A2s and compact M-4 carbines. Another 50,000 rifles are currently on order, and the objective is to outfit the entire Iraqi army with 165,000 American rifles in a one-for-one replacement of the AK-47.

The American people overwhelmingly think invading Iraq was a mistake, want the war and occupation to end and our troops to come home, the polls say.

The Democratic presidential candidates, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, say they want to do that — not as quickly as we would like, but at least their goal is to get out.



John McCain, the Republican nominee, says it’s fine with him if US troops stay in Iraq for another 100 years, or, as he said once,10,000 years.

Yet people say they think McCain would be better than the Democrats in handling Iraq policy, according to a new Bloomberg-LA Times poll today.  The LA Times reports:

The findings underscore the difficulties ahead for Democrats as they hope to retake the White House during a time of war, with voters giving McCain far higher marks when it comes to experience, fighting terrorism and dealing with the situation in Iraq.

Both Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton have made ending America’s involvement in the war a centerpiece of their campaigns. And even though a clear majority of those polled said the war was not worth waging, about half of registered voters said McCain — a Vietnam vet who has supported the Bush administration’s military strategy — was better able to deal with Iraq.

What dimension are we living in, anyway?  Bizarro World.

We all remember the fanfare of the Bush administration declaring Iraq a sovereign country. Our war criminal king George stuck his thumbs into his arm pits and crowed.

“After decades of brutal rule by a terror regime, the Iraqi people have their country back,” Mr. Bush said in Istanbul at a gathering of NATO leaders, who agreed Monday to help rebuild Iraq’s security forces.

– Source

And who can forget the touching love note from Condi to Bush announcing that L. Paul Bremer had finished rewriting Iraqi laws and handed over the keys to Saddam’s palaces to the interim Iraqi government.

My question is what does Iraqi sovereignty mean? I have to ask because Iraqi airspace and territory have been repeatedly violated by Turkey, with the United States supplying the Turkish military with intelligence to conduct “incursions” into Iraq.  

Surprise.

Sen. Russ Feingold’s bill calling for US troop withdrawals from Iraq to begin within 120 days is being debated by the US Senate — thanks to the Republicans who want to kill the bill but think they have an advantage in talking about Iraq.

Plus, John McCain has just said that if he can’t persuade the American people that staying in Iraq is the right course, he will lose the election.

So, on a 70-24 vote, the Senate agreed to take up Feingold’s bill.  Only 26 Democrats voted to take it up.

Feingold’s bill won’t pass, of course.  No Republican has ever actually voted for it in the past.

But it will be debated, along with amendments, all day Wednesday, apparently, the Washington Post reports:

In five previous efforts during the past 20 months, Feingold has never received even 30 votes to bring his bill to the floor for debate. Not a single Republican had supported Feingold’s withdrawal bills, which have been considered the strictest offered in terms of requiring troop withdrawals from Iraq.

This Feingold bill would mandate troop redeployments out of Iraq within 120 days of being signed into law, while allowing funds to be spent for just a few reasons there: ongoing counter-terrorist operations, protecting the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, training Iraqi forces and on the actual redeployment of U.S. forces out of Iraq.

“Keeping our troops in Iraq will not solve Iraq’s problems,” Feingold said during the debate today. “And it won’t help us address the growing threat by al-Qaeda around the world.”

Most interesting is the list of Democrats who voted against taking up the bill.  Here they are:

Baucus (D-MT)

Bayh (D-IN)

Biden (D-DE)

Bingaman (D-NM)

Carper (D-DE)

Casey (D-PA)

Conrad (D-ND)

Dorgan (D-ND)

Johnson (D-SD)

Landrieu (D-LA)

Levin (D-MI)

Lieberman (ID-CT)

Lincoln (D-AR)

McCaskill (D-MO)

Nelson (D-FL)

Nelson (D-NE)

Pryor (D-AR)

Reed (D-RI)

Salazar (D-CO)

Tester (D-MT)

Webb (D-VA)

Dems not voting:

Byrd (D-WV)

Clinton (D-NY)

Obama (D-IL)

Remember this:

President Bush laid down the standard of success when he announced the surge more than a year ago: “If we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home.”

Than yesterday we get this:

The Pentagon is projecting that when the U.S. troop buildup in Iraq ends in July there will be about 8,000 more troops on the ground than when it began in January 2007, a senior general said Monday.

Two votes on bringing our troops home from Iraq are scheduled for Tuesday, and MoveOn wants me to call my U.S. Senator to urge him to vote for them.

I may do that, but both votes seem pre-destined to fail.  The one that really matters is guaranteed to lose.

Both are described as “test votes,” meaning they are intended to get a reading on whether there are 60 votes, enough to prevent a filibuster.  If not, the bills go back into the drawer in some committee.

CQ Today describes the situation this way:

Democrats are not likely to muster the 60 votes needed to call up the tougher of the two, which would bar funding for Iraq deployments 120 days after enactment, with some exceptions for anti-terrorism missions, training Iraqi security forces and protecting American forces.

Four similar measures failed last year. The most recent, a Feingold amendment to an omnibus spending measure, fell by a 24-71 vote Dec. 18.

According to a Senate Democratic aide, Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., “had made a prior commitment to Sen. Feingold to bring these bills up,” and agreed to do so now so Feingold would not block Senate consideration of several other measures.

A memo circulated by a Senate Republican leadership aide said the Feingold bill would mean “U.S. troops can no longer perform most of the missions that have made the surge so successful, and allowed for the political progress Iraqis have made in recent months.”

A second test vote is scheduled on the motion to proceed to another Feingold bill that would require a report within 60 days “setting forth the global strategy of the United States to combat and defeat al Qaeda and its affiliates.”

While the GOP leadership aide called that bill a politically motivated “messaging” measure, Republicans have not publicly indicated how they will vote.  

One provision in the bill would require the report to include recommendations to ensure the global deployment of U.S. troops is aimed at defeating al Qaeda and does not undermine homeland security or require frequent redeployments or extensions of deployments.

Wanna bet how those Republicans will vote?

This brings me to a strategic question that is often asked but goes unanswered:

Instead of test votes, why not schedule bills and force the Republicans to filibuster if they want to prevent them from passing?

Let the country see who’s blocking the efforts to bring our troops home and extricate this country from the bloody mess in Iraq.

Let them tie up the Senate’s business for a week, or two weeks, or however long, telling us why we need to stay in Iraq.

The present strategy allows both parties to share the blame for inaction on Iraq, while two-thirds of the voters want action.

That’s why “Congress” gets an dismal, unfavorable rating — because it’s not doing anything.  And the Democrats, by being afraid to take a strong stand, have been complicit in allowing the war and occupation to grind on.

Harry Reid, the majority “leader,” even made Feingold agree not to hold up or filibuster some other unspecified bills in return for getting a couple of “test votes.”

Meanwhile, there are reports that House Democrats don’t plan to take any action to try to end the war this year, because it “makes them look weak” when they fail.

There’s a reason for that:  They are weak.  And they are weak in the worst possible place — their backbone.

John and Elizabeth Edwards may not be on the 2008 presidential campaign anymore, but they are on a different campaign: making connections between the costs of the Iraq war and our weak economy.  

Elizabeth Edwards, who is good about making constructive criticism of the media, observed that reporters

“certainly don’t cover the connection between the issues,” she said the American people see there is “undoubtedly a connection between oil, the costs of transportation in this country, and this war.”

(source: Will Thomas, HuffPo)

Thus, a new cause to spotlight, and the Edwardses are back fighting for the American people.

More under the fold…

Instead of “Where the Boys Are,” the old-time spring breaks that used to bring waves of partying college students to Florida beaches, the theme for some students this spring will be “Bring the Boys Home.”  (It’s not just boys at war any more, of course; that just fit better.) Our Spring Break invites students and young people to Washington DC for a wide range of antiwar actions in March.

Meanwhile, Campus Progress, a project of the Center for American Progress, is sponsoring Iraq Action Camp, three days of education, training and action for students March 15-17 in Washington. It’s free for college students, but they should register now.

Says Robin Markle of Drew University SDS in New Jersey:

“I don’t think we can rely on the government to stop the war, despite what politicians may say when they’re on the campaign trail. I’m really excited about the Iraq Moratorium campaign, which invites anti-war activists to hold actions the third Friday of every month in their communities. I think that locally-based grassroots actions like these, with people talking to their friends, co-workers and neighbors, is our best strategy for steadily growing the movement until it’s something that politicians can’t simply pay lip service to.”

Is antiwar action and energy being transferred to the presidential campaign?

Says Kati Kesh of UNC-Asheville:

From my perspective … it seems that although some students are very much swept up in the election process most students remember what happened in 2006 when they put their faith in the Democrats–the Democrats failed to do anything about the war. Because it’s an election year it seems that the student body is becoming more politicized and wanting to be more active about issues such as the war in Iraq.

More on what students are thinking and doing in this CounterPunch article.