Still trying to figure out who he’s talking ’bout
Politicians are a brave bunch. Fearlessly tackling issues that hit home hardest and never succumbing to the whims of big business… in bizarro world that is. Closer to reality, the politician is a different animal.
Politicians are stubborn, afraid of looking weak, and fearful that any admission of error will be cast as flip-flopping and inconsistency.
And in that light, Slate Magazine has listed the four unspeakable truths about the war in Iraq.
The first unspeakable truth is simply that the war was a mistake.
A second truth universally unacknowledged is that American soldiers being killed, grotesquely maimed, and then treated like whining freeloaders at Walter Reed Hospital are victims as much as “heroes.”
Reality No. 3, closely related to No. 2 and following directly from No. 1, is that the American lives lost in Iraq have been lives wasted.
A fourth and final near-certainty, which is in some ways the hardest for politicians to admit, is that America is losing or has already lost the Iraq war.
Now, before you get all partisan on the article, note that both sides of the camp are complicit.
Reasons for refusing to admit that the war itself was a mistake are surprisingly similar across party lines. It is seldom easy to admit you were wrong—so let me repeat what I first acknowledged in Slate in January 2004, that I am sorry to have given even qualified support to the war. But what is awkward for columnists is nearly impossible for self-justifying politicians, who resist acknowledging error at a glandular level.
Amen!
reason 4: the war was a mistake. No, it wasn’t. It was quite intentional. It was painfully clear that Dubya wanted it from the get go. Various politicians, particularly from england, have already stated that the ostensible reasons were just for convenience, rather than explaining the real issues.
Does anybody know any details about the oil companies newly revised exploration contracts with the interim Iraqi government, or where I can find some reliable evidence on this? From what I have read on these so far (mainly tabloidal rubbish), the war may have already been a success from the investor standpoint…
3,
http://tinyurl.com/2mhbx4
No water, no electricity but a kick ass american supporting corporate loving oil law…
Oh, and no peace or stability either…
“America is losing or has already lost the Iraq war.”
It’s too early to say if anyone has ultimately lost. The attempt at democracy might flounder for years and years, but if it eventually takes hold, religious sects find common ground, and Iraq prospers because of it then the war as an instigator could be seen as successful. I don’t like the terms “win” and “lose” when related to war. You usually get some of both.
The ‘War’ was a success. If you are a shareholder or a Saudi King (wanna be King?). Gasoline is hitting the $3.00 mark (AGAIN?) and everyone thinks Oil is scarce. The reason Saddam was such a ‘Bad Guy’ was due to his wanting to sell oil outside of the OPEC boundaries. He wanted to sell Oil cheaper than the OPEC nations wanted him to (He just wanted to sell it….) and for that he was sanctioned, segregated, and finally killed. Iran wants to sell, Venezuela wants to sell….all outside of the OPEC regime. What does this mean? Well, with lower market prices, ExxonMobil (to name one of many) can’t tell its shareholders they made 39 Billion this Quarter. Other economies would profit besides the Oil Companies.
“He who controls the Spice Controls the World” in essence.
Watch what happens with Iran. Watch what happens in South America. Hell, they have already tried to kill Chavez.
This war was never about ‘Democracy” or ‘WMD’ or ‘Nuclear Power’.
It was all about who could fill the profit margins….how to make the most of the Market, and also how to control the flow of OIL.
This is also one of the major reasons Alternative Fuels are being ignored and abated. How do you make any profit when you can grow your supply?
We need a revolution. We need a New Order. We Need to WAKE UP AND SMELL THE GAS FIRES BURNING our lungs and future.
But it won’t be too big a deal in this country…because its too Inconvenient. No ONE WANTS TO SUFFER in anyway for something they should be willing to DIE FOR.
These sects haven’t found common ground for 1300 years, one botched war won’t bring them together.
The Bush presidency is the most successful administration ever. All of their major endeavors have been wildly successful. To wit:
Bush’s most important contituents, the oil companies, are more profitable than ever.
The administration has given billions of taxpayer dollars worth of profits to their cronies in Halliburton and other favored businesses.
The US president now has unprecedented powers and can pretty much ignore congress whenever he wants to.
Iraq’s oil is now under control of the major oil companies where it belongs.
And best of all, the extremely wealthy who have benefitted the most from the blessings of America pay far less in taxes than during previous administrations.
The Bush administration has been successful far beyond their expectations. And they have almost two more years to go. What kind of successes lie ahead?
5,
You don’t win democracy by importing it from a foreign nation.
Yet another shit thread. You’re trying your best to carry the liberal hack flag, however.
Mister Justin, good point. And too bad too. We may as well export our democracy overseas. We’re not using it.
No one has mentioned this one. I guess we’re up to at least 6 now, so:
6. We’re less safe than we were before the war, regardless of who wins.
10,
What the hell ARE you talking about James?
Off-topic, do you know that Mcafee Siteadvisor gives your site a red warning like some stupid phishing site?
#10
James I’d be curious about what you feel is inaccurate about the Slate article?
And although the rhetoric in some of these posts is a bit over the top, the points made strike me as pretty accurate.
I simply don’t understand how you can be conservative and still support Bush and the war as well as the new “anti”-terror laws.
Is it because you think there’s implicit criticism of the troops? With notable exceptions, I don’t think anyone on this blog has ever done such a thing.
I have to admit I confused. If you want to take the time I’d appreciate any reasons you wish to put forth.
Just wait another six months.. it should be way better then
/sarcasm
I hate kick a friend when he’s down, but as a Canadian, thank goodness we had a LIBERAL prime minister with some backbone, who said NO to Bush & Cheney. Maybe if Bush & Cheney et al had served some time in Viet Nam (another war Canada took a pass on), America would have stayed out of Iraq. I just don’t understand how Bush got re-elected.
I swear to God, a monkey with a heads-tails coin could make better decisions than this president. The only people I am more disappointed with is the group of people that re-elected him.
Canucklehead: Please don’t be insulting. We didn’t elect him in 2,000 and the jury’s still out on whether we elected him in 2,004. Why we haven’t impeached him would be a better question.
#16 Don’t you have enough housework to do at your place? You don’t need to come to my house and dust it also. Actions like that got us into this shit storm in the first place. Have a nice day!
Hey Scott,
Like I said, I hate to kick a FRIEND when he’s down. I didn’t mean to insult the average American, for whom I have the utmost respect.
So how on earth do we stop warmongers like Bush in the future?
It would have been nice if Bush respected and supported our troops by not sending them into an ill planned war with no vision as to what a winning position would be like.
If you are going to send good men and women into a fight, you better have a very good reason, a well thought out plan and a vision as to what the winning outcome looks like.
We can only hope that the next president has much more respect for our troops.
I’m going with #2, janky-o. The war was deliberate. We were lied to to get us into the war and the lies continue right up the present.
My take on the Constitution does not put any time limit on impeachment.
America can never experience success in Iraq because America did not begin this war with pure and righteous intentions. In other words, America is fighting with the Law of Nature – good v bad. The David and Goliath story is a reality and very much in operation in this modern day. America is not fighting a smart war.
#10 hit it on the nose another liberal whiny thread and the President didnt really win in 2000 and stole it in 2004 just iced the cake
you used to be much more centered on your criticism but it seems lately your moderators are swinging full left. This and Digg are on my short list to delete from my regular visit site list , because it is not a fair shake any more, its just a liberal all bash any thing conservative as evil and Bush is SATAN incarnate. I have really enjoyed your site for a couple of years (twit turned me on to it ) but I as a conservative who is not afraid to argue his point civilly is finding it very difficult to stomach shrill ultra liberal leaning your site is taking and the group it is attracting
The Project for a New American Century advocated for war in Iraq in 1997, the signers of which are a virtual who’s who of the Bush administration.
There has never been any evidence linking Iraq and Al Qada, in fact they were bitter enemies.
Multiple experts on Iraq were saying there were no WMDs in Iraq nor do they have a nuclear program months before we even went to war.
Military experts know how many troops are needed to control a population the size of Iraq, The US has never had more than half of that number.
The second huge mistake (besides not invading at all) was the disbanding of the Iraqi army, most of whom now make up Sunni insurgent forces.
Paul Bremmer’s regime in Iraq was one of the most corrupt in history. Over 200 Billion dollars went to corporate contracts for innfrastructure contracts that never even got started because of security concerns, at least 8 billion is completely unaccounted for.
The third big mistake was the use of torture in AbuGhirab prison, which did not result in one piece of information, and has instead been a symbol to bolster Anti-American support worldwide.
How much more truth do you need?
…and Bush is SATAN incarnate.
yup, I’m convinced.
#18 – Clinton was a “hard” act to follow – set the impeachment bar pretty high. Maybe if Bush gets head from both an intern and Hillary he’ll get what you wish for.
Gee Dubya is soooooo much more moral and upstanding than Clinton was….. /sarcasm
24,
Wow. You’re angry. An article was posted with quotes. You might have missed this one…
Now, before you get all partisan on the article, note that both sides of the camp are complicit.
And then you tell us how your stomach is turning because of comments on the blog?
Geez, you really need to relax and read the article. And if you don’t agree with it, too frickin bad! I didn’t write it. John didn’t write it. It was posted because it was an INTERESTING read. Note. The person who wrote it SUPPORTED the war in 2004.
As the old adage go… READ THE F-ING ARTICLE.
#29 Do I notice a touch of bias there?
/quiet voice