Two related topics: (1) how to withdraw from Iraq with at least a smidgeon of honor; and (2) how to develop a realistic view of radical Islamic aims and objectives.

(1) Regarding the withdrawal: On November 29th the Washington Post printed an opinion by Nawaf Obaid re the recent trip of the Vice President to Saudi Arabia. While the President was barnstorming around the middle east, the really important guy went to the one really important place and talked with foreign minister Prince Saudi al-Faisal, who expressed concern about the likelihood of ethnic cleansing of Sunnis in Iraq should the U.S. suddenly leave. The three Iraqi groups need to reach an equity in armaments and military power in order to avert a bloodbath. The Curds seem quite able to defend themselves. The Shii are being armed by Iran, in some cases through the agency of Hezbella. The Sunnis are in the minority and rely on the US presence to protect them.

Obaid put forward two scenarios that are so interesting that I wonder why no one in the media or in political life has commented on it. He suggests that Saudi Arabia be pressured to arm the Sunni's and perhaps to even provide air cover for them as the Iraqi political process works toward an equilibrium. Obviously, the Saudi's won't want to do that. But they also won't want to see a Sunni bloodbath. So, as an alternative to military intervention, Obaid suggests pressuring the Saudis to lower the price of oil by as much as fifty percent for the duration of the conflict. The Saudi's can afford to do this at their current level of spending. But the Iranians cannot. They are more or less living on the edge, fiscally, even at current elevated prices. And they would have to respond in some positive way or suffer fiscal bankruptcy.

Why is no one talking about this? Is there a bug here that I do no see?

(2) Regarding our view of the intentions of Islam toward the West in general. I am an ordained minister and truly hate to say this, but I believe that Islam, if taken literally, consists of a radical fringe with no center. Islam is designed to be taken literally. The terrorism we are determined to end is motivated by religious beliefs, not by economic or cultural envy. When a mother rejoices at the death of her child who has become a human bomb, you can be sure that the motivation goes beyond some "humiliation" or frustration that the Islamic cultures are falling behind economically.

If one reads the Koran and the supporting Haddith writings (which are even more important) it becomes clear that Islam has as it's goal the domination of the entire world, and will stop at nothing in order to achieve that goal which, they believe, has been ordained by Allah himself. You might argue that Christianity and Judaism have similar objectives, but fortunately Christianity and Judaism exist within secular cultures that have the power to temper religious fanaticism, at least for now.

What I'm getting at is this: As much as I disagree with the policies and decisions of President Bush and his Administration, I worry that we "progressives" aren't being realistic about the risk of Islam as it's presently constituted within theocratic countries where there is absolutely no separation of church and state.

Food for thought.

Rev Ron

For a different perspective try . . .

America only entered WWII after the Japanese bombed Pearl harbour. Britain immediately declared war on Japan. What was America to do?

America only started fighting terrorists after they were hurt. Many had previously supported terrorists in N Ireland which caused as many deaths as 9/11

US politicians and generals never learned from 20th century history (including Vietnam) that mighty fire-power cannot win a guerilla war or defeat insurgency.

I love Americans (not Bush and Co.) - but lots of others around the world do not.

Ask yourselves why not - and be brutally honest with your answers.

I think that is arguable, under the best of circumstances?

but under the current administration, I would say _it is doubtful_j

electoral fraud does not a president make, under any circumstances...

it simply verifies the criminality o this particular specimen of vermin/fecal material...

get it?

go back to copying his memos for your other staffers twit...

For the most part this subject is stupid, because our president is our president, theres nothing you can say or do to change his mind in Iraq... He sees success in Iraq and until the success overcomes the bad, the war WILL NOT stop, so quit being stupid and writing dumb crap when ultimately it does NOTHING!

Neither Mike nor Archmides will care for this comment I am sure, however,

................The real comparison should be made between the behavior of WWII Germany and the United States of America (from the end of WWII until today); most earthlings have noted the obvious comparisons between the two hegemons...

Consider the same phrase that Mr. Arkin used, substituting a few words of course in order to make my point.

It strikes me first as a failure of official Washington, a place and a culture that assumes that America can shape and bend the world from its isolated enclaves, whether that is inside the Beltway or inside the Green Zone

It strikes me first as a failure of [former] official Germany, a place and a culture that assumes that Germany cab shape and bend the world from its isolated enclaves, whether that is inside...!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I cannot see any difference in the behavior of Germany, leading up to an including WWII and the United States of America's behavior now. Of course people like Archimedes, and others who have apparently been under attack by those maniacal Eastern Fundamentalists, and are in the process of saving themselves from further attack by those radical fundamentalists who want to sit up a Caliphate and rule the world, won't agree with my assessment.

However, isn't it interesting that the same individuals do not have a problem with the United States, having over the past half-decade set itself up as the moral arbitrageur of the Universe, in an effort to force its will upon the entire planet? And just ask Iraq what happens when a nation does not comply? Folks, the only GWOT (Global War of Terrorism) that is going on right now is being carried on by the United States of America. Our latest venture, Iraq!

When will Americans stop lying to themselves? The M-E is under attack by the United States and Israel, it is not the other way around! And most nations of the world and the U.N. know that the world has more reason to fear the United States of America, than any other nation, coalition, religious or political federation on this entire planet, just ask the people of Iraq which nation, without provocation, willfully came in and destroyed their nation?

For some reason, Archimedes believes that somehow they should thank us for doing so!

If it will take the 'truth to make us free', some Americans like their President, will never be free, because they will never admit to or tell the truth!

attacked another country under false pretenses in order to gain control of OIL in that country.

They are busy die ing and fighting amongst themselves as that goes on.

They have not so much as farted in the United States...

Iraq is under attack from enemy invaders...

If you were going to compare it to WWII, we would be Hitler invading POLAND, or something like that....

_That_ would be an accurate portrayal....especially given the use of Israel as a Mussolini-led-state, and the trying to paint the Iranians as aggressors...when the US supplied the Iranians with plans for NUCLEAR DEVICES...so they could accuse them of building them...sorta like giving the Indians guns and barrels of whiskey so that the calvary could accuse them of being drunk dangerous Indians and kill them women, children, all of them....

It is so sad to be an American writing such an obvious truth, waiting for the police, fbi, secret service or some branch of enforcement to drag these vermin from the WhiteHouse.... and nothing happens. It is like overnight, the American Dream has become stale baloney, and truth justice and the American Way! exists only in comic books... how sad....how sick, how pathetic, and there are even writers here Archimedes and a few others who try to spray parfume on the corpse of liberty and say she lives in their fetid lines.... Phew the stench is deafening...

I'm a combat Vietnam veteran and trained Arab troops for ten (10) years in the Middle East. All of us trainers were combat veterans. One thing that became unmsitakable,there are two (2) sects of the muslim religion. Both of which want to eliminate the other. That is to say, to kill every man, women, and child of the other side. The question is: Why the Executive Branch, Congress,and the Department of Defense know of this? We should not got involved knowing this. The only reason that I can think of after thinking about the Vietnam War for over thirty (30)years is war profeteering.The Blogs and videos sent home by our military don't lie Mr. Bush.

Comparisons with WW2 are valid but the two conflicts need to be compared in stages. As another poster noted it took combined armies of the world to defeat Germany and that defeat took a total of 7 years. Japan's defeat took 3.5 years and was mainly an American effort. The Iraq defeat took about 9 weeks. The methods used in that 9 week war I am sure are being studied by all militaries around the world and should rightfully be considered a major success, especially when you consider the lopsided casualties. So if you are going to compare the fighting between WW2 with Iraq, we did a much better job in Iraq at defeating that nation's army.

However Iraq was not spread all over the world, entrenched in multiple countries as Germany and Japan were. And both of these countries were world powers. Iraq may have had a large army, but it had been decimated just 12 years earlier and its decimation maintained through UN sanctions. So if any comparison is to be made it is that Iraq was woefully weaker and smaller that our foes in WW2 and the US much stronger. But that only supports the length of the two wars being so different.

What is so very different when comparing WW2 and Iraq is not the length of the war since that can be explained. What cannot be easily compared is the occupation. That is what is so different here. So, what are the differences in the occupations? Iraq has a resistence movement, actually multiple resistent movements. Germany and Japan had none. Here is a great article outlining the differences:
http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/03.18/13-democratization.html
One thing that it notes that should be considered is that both populations in Germany and Japan had suffered for years and even in defeat were glad it was over and were eager to begin reconstruction and live in peace. Iraq's short war may have reduced the casualties and suffering of Iraqis to the point where an insurgency was possible. Add to that the deep differences in the Iraq population, which is not seen in Germany or Japan, and you have a formula for an insurgency. Its an interesting thought and one that needs more study. But the biggest point made was that planning for the reconstruction on both Germany and Japan began in 1942. We had years to plan what to do when the wars ended. In Iraq, not only did we have a much shorter war and thus less time to plan, the Bush administration did not even use that little time to do any planning.

And that should be the focus on any comparisons between WW2 and Iraq. We planned the occupation for the first, we did not plan an occupation for the second. We succeeded in occupying the first. We have failed miserably to occupy the second. And it was not for lack of money. So far we have spent on Iraq's reconstruction the equivalent amount of money spent on Germany's reconstruction, and twice that spent on Japan's reconstruction. So, in a nutshell, if any comparisons should be made so that we learn from the mess we have made in Iraq it should be the lack of post war planning. It is the single biggest difference between the two eras. You can have the best trained army of the richest nation occupying a country, but without a plan even the smartest generals will fail. And I have not heard anyone talking about why there was no planning but it seems evident from reading articles written by the neocons leading up to the war that the thought in the administration was that it would be a cakewalk, that Iraq would reconstruct itself, and we'd have our troops home within 6 months. Any serious planning would have found that analysis flawed. So did we not plan out of neglect or because we did not want to know what would happen in post-war Iraq. That is what needs to be researched.

couldnt read doesnt it? .

the same thing as ?excuse? this reason o f Archimedes?

try reasoning your way through this...

I received this in October of 2004, and I wondered at the validity of it...it's about Afghanistan and GITMO

Begin INCLUSION:
From Karl W. B. SchwarzPresident, Chief Executive Officer
Patmos Nanotechnologies, LLC
10-13-2004

By Email, By Facsimile to White House

Mr. President,

I am a Conservative Christian Republican that has no intentions of
voting for you in this year's election and many other Conservative
Republicans are following me.

America demands the TRUTH and not after the elections; this nation demands the truth from you RIGHT NOW! This letter and an identical email will be going out to hundreds of thousands by me, millions by others. The
following content was sent to the White House by facsimile earlier today from Ground Zero in New York City.

1. I demand as an American citizen that you lift the "gag order" on Sibel D. Edmonds and let Americans know what foreign names and what AMERICAN NAMES she uncovered in her FBI translations that were involved in drug trafficking, money laundering and the financing of 9-11.Her facts and your "official story" lies do not add up. Americans demand the truth on that matter before the election.

2. I demand to know what energy companies were in that Cheney Energy Task Force meeting and what discussions there were as to the steps that would be taken to remove the Taliban and Bridas Corporation as the last remaining obstacle to the United States controlling the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline. I met that company in 1999 and have known since then about the Bridas v Unocal, $15 billion interference of contract lawsuit in US District Court, Southern District of Texas. I also know about the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision on September 9, 2003 that upheld the Bridas $500 million arbitration settlement and the March 22, 2004 denial of Writ of Certiorari at the United States Supreme Court, Case 03-1018, Turkmenneft v Bridas.

3. I demand to know how many prisoners are being held at GITMO and other places that are either BRIDAS EMPLOYEES or are persons that know all about Bridas Corporation and what your administration did to get control of that Trans-Afghanistan pipeline.

4. I demand to know how many board meetings Condoleezza Rice and Thomas Kean sat in on at Chevron and Amerada Hess where it was discussed how they were going to deal with making the billions in "Big Oil"
investments into a land locked Caspian Basin and how to get rid of the Taliban and Bridas so they could turn those investments into cash flow. How many times did Big Oil ask for military force to complete a commercial transaction
they could not get under their control, and on what exact date did you agree to provide such military force - prior to 9-11? Isn't it true Mr. Bush that the Cheney Energy Task Force discussed that attack on Afghanistan and removal of the Taliban / Bridas obstacle once and for all - and did so well in advance of 9-11?

5. I demand to know why you appointed 10 persons to the 9-11 Commission, 8 of which are directly benefiting by the Taliban / Bridas "contract" obstacle being removed - breached with military force, and the big Caspian Oil deals that are now coming to market. No, America does not 'thank you' for that nor do we hold such despicable conduct up high.

6. I demand to know what US Oil Company stepped up as the sponsor of that OPIC and Asia Development Bank funded Trans-Afghanistan pipeline and what US company is constructing that pipeline right now, and what US firms are supplying the key components and their relationship to your administration.

7. I demand that you identify the company and persons who were going around Bridas to be "natural gas suppliers" to the US owned natural gas electrical generation plants in Pakistan (Dynegy - Illinova /Tenaska, El Paso (2 OPIC financed transactions) and others.

8. I demand to know why you have not been truthful with the American public that your GWOT and military policy are protecting the Caspian Basin Oil and Gas deals for many of your Bush Pioneers, some $9.6 trillion in oil and about $3 trillion in natural gas, now mostly in the hands of your elite wealthy contributors and some elite Liberals to keep this all quiet.

9. I demand to know what role the post-bankruptcy ENRON (Prisma Energy International, Cayman Islands) is playing in the Caspian Basin area, the same Enron that uses the law firm of Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw [Richard Ben Veniste, 9-11 Commission] that established the offshore SPE's for assets that were never under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court.

10. I demand to know why you appointed Richard Ben Veniste to the 9-11 Commission when it was his law firm that was stalling Bridas Corporation at the Fifth Circuit US Court of Appeals in the matter of Bridas Corporation v.Turkmenneft and his law firm is directly involved in Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan and your administration.

11. I demand to know the exact date of the order that had our military practicing in early 2001 the invasion of Afghanistan to take out the Taliban and Bridas Corporation and make that pipeline under control of US interests, many of your Bush Pioneers, and the exact date that our military started practicing and preparing for that invasion.

12. I demand to know who Remington Holdings Ltd is, and Western Acquisitions, Inc, both Baker & Botts clients and the lucky recipients of OPIC financing to acquire oil and gas deposits in Pakistan.

Who are the parties involved in those entities by name and benefited from such governmental magnanimity? Is this transaction a payoff? Since American taxpayers are footing the bill, we have the right to know - right now.

13. I demand to know why you could not find 10 people to sit on the 9-11 Commission that are not directly benefiting from the actions you have taken and the lives you have cost or otherwise ruined. Why would you select people not motivated to find the truth for that would impact "their bottomline"?

14. I demand a full disclosure from your administration as to the Citibank / IFTRIC / OPIC / Export-Import Bank financing of American /Israeli based deals in Islamic nations on behalf of your major campaign contributors. "IFTRIC and Citibank have an agreement allowing Citibank to finance approved IFTRIC-backed transactions. Citibank Israel CEO Nandan Mar said: 'The Citibank branch, and the Structured Trade Finance Group, view IFTRIC's program as a basic product for the bank's domestic activities.' " I see distinct differences between "terrorism" and "outrage"
(Shurtan II) at your policies.

15. I demand to know why you wanted an entire new division of the CIA for Argentina. As an American citizen I take umbrage to your belligerence towards a nation that is not an enemy of the United States by any stretch of the imagination, except possibly yours. It is abundantly clear that your intentions were solely to intimidate Argentina and Argentina based Bridas Corporation into silence and that is NOT AMERICA. That has every appearance of the United States acting as the terrorist and a state sponsor of terrorism. Yes, you are wrapped in a flag but I clearly see that it is not the one you purport it to be.

16. I demand to know why your administration has never disclosedthat DynPort Vaccine, LLC, owned by DynCorp and now owned by Computer Sciences Corporation, a Bush Pioneer, is a possible source for where the weaponized Ames Strain of anthrax came from that was used against this nation. How did your administration manage to miss one of your campaigncontributors and a company doing large volumes of business with your administration and even being known euphemistically (DynCorp) as The Mercenary Company? Who put that Contract on America?

17. I demand to know how you can claim a pretense of being a Christian while sponsoring and condoning the torture of prisoners, including sodomizing children, at Abu Ghraib prison.

18. I demand to know how your administration can send firms overseas as "representatives of this nation" that were convicted of running a flesh trade in little girls in Bosnia, specifically one DynCorp. Convicted in Texas and the United Kingdom according to reports I have seen and apparently detested in Afghanistan. You do recall that DynCorp is the company providing security to protect your puppet Karzai in Afghanistan and your other puppet Zalmay Khalilzad is deterring anyone from running for President in that bogus "free" democracy?

19. I demand to know why your administration keeps running the name and photos of Adnan G. El Shukrijumah as the"dirty bomb boogeyman" and on March 25, 2003 the FBI knew exactly where to find him and did not go after him.
That telephone call was made from my telephone by a Canadian friend that was in Little Rock on that date, Mr. Bush, so do not pretend "national security" with me.
I am "first person" on this matter and all of America deserves to know the extent that your administration has been and is lying to us all - and someone that is not Al Qaeda is probably "dropping a suspect name" as they set up a dirty bomb attack. Sure have pushed up the oil and gas prices with your strategy though, guess we can consider that another "Mission Accomplished".

20. I demand to know why your administration keeps referring to Adnan G. El Shukrijumah as a "Saudi" when the FBI knows full well he is not Saudi. His family is from Guyana in South America and they have lived in Florida since 1986 without incident. His grandparents were from Yemen, moved long ago to South America and his mother is from Trinidad & Tobago.

21. I demand to know why you alerted India, Pakistan and "Axis of Evil" member Iran of your intentions to attack the Taliban / Bridas well before 9-11, and not notify the citizens of this nation. That matter was reported on June 26, 2001 in India newspapers.
22. I demand to know the exact date that the first meeting, first page of the Patriot Act was started by your administration.
23. I demand to know why it is you, your backers, certain Democrats that apparently "hate our freedoms" more than these purported GWOT Islamic fundamentalists, hence the Patriot Act that treats all Americans with the same degree of contempt and disdain you treat all non-wealthy Americans.

24. I demand to know why Homeland Security is protecting this government and not protecting this nation.

25. I demand to know why any dissent or objections to your Orwellian, imperialistic, pro-corporate agenda is referred to the Homeland Security Counter-Terrorism Division.

26. I demand to know why you defile everything you touch and try to twist it into something that is pro-Bush Backers and anti-American citizens and then try to alter our rights as Americans via Patriot Act measures
that are designed to force America into submission and does nothing to protect this nation, only this government.

27. I demand to know why your administration is planning a "pro-Bush Pioneers pharmaceutical program" derived from TMAP (Texas Medical Algorithm Project) and PENNMAP (Tom Ridge, Pennsylvania) to have Americans tested under guidelines prepared by your Bush Pioneers and force psychotropic drugs on Americans.

28. I demand to know why your administration keeps injecting our troops with an anthrax vaccine known to be deadly and harmful to the health of our soldiers and now apparently wish to inject that into all Americans under Project BioShield and martial law. Is that why you have no concern whatsoever for the 3 million jobs lost, for between your TMAP lunacy and Project BioShield lunacy, well over 3 million Americans could perish if the same statistical rates hit the general population as has hit our military? Can you explain away Holocaust with "brilliant strategy policy" driven by unmitigated greed?

29. I demand to know why Li Ka-shing was denied Global Crossing on national security grounds (very public) yet allow him in the back door in Savi Technology (not disclosed), the RFID technology company that is purportedly protecting our ports from insertion of a nuclear bomb into this nation via "ocean going containers". How many doors are left wide open by your administration in this GWOT Fable?

30. I demand to know why you search the world for mythical terrorists and cannot find robber barons and financial terrorist right under your nose. That many of them are Bush Pioneers and even backers of the Democratic Party, and have plundered the investors, workers and citizens of this nation, is very apparent to Americans and not very pro-family on your part.

Christians do not lie, Mr. Bush, for that is an affront to God. A Christian would not willfully mislead this nation, nor send our troops into Harm's Way for a lie while your wealthy contributors take over a $9.6 trillion oil, $3.0 trillion natural gas deal and already maneuvering for Africa. You are proving to the world that you are terrified of the truth and have impeded every investigation into the truth.

Your actions prove that you are not an upstanding Christian, nor are you a Conservative Republican worthy of that designation.

Your position as President does not make you unaccountable to the citizens of this nation, nor does it entitle you to act as a tyrant, an emperor, or serving only those Americans that dole out money for your political ambitions and agendas. I see no "stewardship" in your conduct whatsoever.

You have "Mission Accomplished" three times - the removal of Taliban / Bridas to control that pipeline, radically escalated the price of oil and gas for some of your major backers, and the death and maiming of many due
to your lies. Your "Iraq Strategery" makes perfect sense to me, since all of you needed a diversion away from Afghanistan, the Caspian Basin and what you did to Bridas Corporation to get control of that $9.6 trillion in oil, $3
trillion in natural gas.

Go back home and wrap yourself in the flag of Texas and the shame you alone are responsible for creating. Your resume is your doing and yours alone.
If you were running against me this year, you would not have the guts to stay on the stage in a debate with me.

Shame on all of you, both sides of the aisle that have lied to America and gotten so many killed and maimed for a lie, and no, I am not an antiwar person. Just adamantly opposed to what you stand for, for that is lower than Clinton on his worst day.

Sincerely,

Karl W. B. Schwarz
President, Chief Executive Officer
Patmos Nanotechnologies, LLC

END TRANSMISSION:

just curious. Wondering if you could shed some light shed on the subject...the validity of it...

you know complicit congress and all, murder for oil, that kind of thing, thanks.

==It will not come when, or if, Iraq ever stabilizes itself. It will come when the Muslim community no longer tolerates Islamist ideology, when the Muslim community no longer harbors and sympathisizes with the Islamists and instead rejects them openly and forcefully.==

And both of those things WILL NOT happen while the US is occupying Iraq. By the way, Islamist is a broad category, ostensibly an Islamic relgious beleiver. You must have meant "suicider" or "deadender" or, better yet, "islamofascist".

==In order to defeat these barbaric maniacs, they should have said, we need to do two things, first, support wholeheartedly the current governments in the ME and bring pressure on them to reform, as quickly as they can. Second, we must fight these Islamists where they live and are supported, in their own backyard. To do this we must open up a major front in the heart of the ME with the purpose of defeating the Islamists not only militarily, but politically as well by drawing them into a fight they can't win and fostering and protecting a new, hopefully democratic, pro-American government.==

Supporting current ME governments, while opening up a major front in the heart of the ME, heh? In the middle of the Red Sea or the Persian Gulf, perhaps? Trust always in logic?

Why do I even bother...

you believe the propaganda o fsoundbites that has the combined words Iraqi/terrorists/andWTC in the same sentence? sort ofa bayby psyop.

even though there is no connection.

Though there is a connection between the Saudi, UAE, Lebanese and the WTC...

and a connection between the CIA and Al Queargys.... As well as a congressional connection....we trained and paid them.

Trans Afghanistan Pipeline DEAL, 13 trillion dollars Taliban/Argentina/Bridas Corporation/Unlocal

maybe that is why the Taliban is angwy... lost 13 TRILLION DOLLARS... maybe thats it.

attack on a country incapable of defending itself against that aggression,

isn't a war. It _is_ an occupation. What are you, stupid?

The comparison of the durations of World War II and the Iraq war seems inapt for more reasons than the few that have already been mentioned here. Arkin cites the lower level of commitment in Iraq, and Mike points out the omission of the post-WWII occupation period from the comparison. There is also the omission of the 'world' from this 'World War.' Arkin and nearly everyone else apparently summarizes the history of our victory in WWII as though we went it alone. Nevermind that it took the combined might of Britain, USSR, and our other allies to subdue Germany, or that WWII started 2 years before our involvement, or that its turning point, the Battle of Stalingrad, can be attributed solely to the Soviet people's unfathomable perseverance.

There is also a fundamental difference in the conduct of the two wars. WWII was total war, in which the intention was to inflict mass causualties. Our enemies surrendered out of fear of annihilation, and that fear of--yes--genocide led to a conclusive and absolute termination of the war. There is no such threat in Iraq, at least not from us, so it should not be surprising that the conflict seems endless.

As Mike put it, WWII and Iraq is really an apples and oranges comparison. This administration may try to compare the two, and Iraq may be a mess from here to eternity, but these are not excuses for shoddy analysis. If you're going to criticize the war, as I do, do so with the right reasoning and arguments. And Arkin, I appreciate your blog, and your critiques of military culture and institution seem on the money. But if in the future you are going to reference the trendy foreign policy fluff story of the week, please do so only to utterly debunk it.

there is no comparison.

we invaded another country to control a scarce resource with a fabricated response to a fabricated attack.

got some understanding to arrive at the next few weeks...aggressive understanding.

wow. therev has a LOT of time on his hands.

Mike,

Saving lives is what I do in my 9 to 5, and a lot of innocent lives are being destroyed because as a result of U.S. Policy, not Al Qeada!

Rchimees,

The GWOT that the whole world needs to be fighting against started right here in the USofA!

The Rev

Good column. But the military has to have done some things right in Iraq. I think a column from Mr. Arkin illuminating what the military has done right -- in Iraq, here at home or elsewhere -- would be most welcome.

Arkin is right to point out that the Iraq-WWII comparison is, at best, only marginally appropriate, given the myriad of differences existent not only on our side but on theirs as well. The fact that we (USA) are fighting an enemy that isn't limited to any one country but is spread globally seems to me to be the foremost difference. I wonder though whether Arkin's critique about lack of national sacrifice and mobilization is at all relevant. He and many others have said that the GWOT, especially Iraq, can't be won by brute force alone. But that is just what this country mobilized to produce and finance in WWII, brute force. Our boys weren't lining up to learn German and become intel analysts, nor were we buying bonds to finance pro-democracy initiatives and other means of "soft power". That aside, I wholeheartedly agree that it has been Washington's, not simply Dubya's, greatest failure to pretend that a war of this magnitude can be waged without inconveniencing the public. As an aside, I do find it strange though that many of this administration's critics who make this same critique also oppose the Patriot Act, either we should sacrifice or we shouldn't, you can't have it both ways. In WWII we had to sacrifice nylon, rubber, and copper. In this war we have to sacrifice library records, phone records and some of our expectation of privacy. I wonder whether we, and not the government, are really willing to sacrifice in order to win this war. Most polls suggest that when given a choice a large majority of Americans pick security over privacy, yet it seems that a vocal few would rather we sacrifice something else, although they can't ever bring themselves to say what.

Having said that though, I do think that this administration has utterly failed in two main regards, to define the enemy and to define victory. Without stating a clear goal, judging strategy, especially the effectiveness thereof, becomes a purely subjective guessing exercise. Without defining an enemy that goal becomes almost impossible to even articulate. They Bush Admin. seems torn between candor and diplomatic double-speak. They take great pains not to portray this war as being a war on Islam, so as not to provoke Musims. Yet they also have been very eager to use words like Islamofacist and Islamic extremist. It is this bipolarity, I think, that has caused them a good many problems. They should have, on Sept. 12, said that we were facing the problem of violent Islamist fundamentalism, an ideology that seeks to reestablish the Islamic Caliphate throughout the "Muslim World" and in so doing destroy the infidel Zionist powers that stand in their way(USA, Europe, and Israel). This means that they seek to impose on millions the draconian Islamic law system known as Shari'a as well as Dimmitude, a kind of religious apartheid proscribed in the Quran. In order to defeat these barbaric maniacs, they should have said, we need to do two things, first, support wholeheartedly the current governments in the ME and bring pressure on them to reform, as quickly as they can. Second, we must fight these Islamists where they live and are supported, in their own backyard. To do this we must open up a major front in the heart of the ME with the purpose of defeating the Islamists not only militarily, but politically as well by drawing them into a fight they can't win and fostering and protecting a new, hopefully democratic, pro-American government. Democracy in Iraq, or WMD, or enforcing international "law", is not the goal, defeat of Islamic fundamentalists is. The American public is not stupid and can easily comprehend this strategy and there is no reason why it shouldn't have been explained from day one. Instead the Bush Admin's cynically incoherent rhetoric has seriously damaged the GWOT. They also should have admitted that victory will not come when Al-Qaeda signs a peace treaty with the US. It will not come when, or if, Iraq ever stabilizes itself. It will come when the Muslim community no longer tolerates Islamist ideology, when the Muslim community no longer harbors and sympathisizes with the Islamists and instead rejects them openly and forcefully. In this then victory is not something an American President or General can achieve. What we can achieve is our own security until that day arrives. In that regard, the GWOT is entirely necessary and should be a bipartisan goal whose prosecution shouldn't be used by either side for political advantage.

Trust always in Reason

Archimedes

For uncensored news please bookmark:

otherside123.blogspot.com
www.wsws.org
www.onlinejournal.com
www.takingaim.info

A Socialist in the Millionaires' Club: An Interview with Bernie Sanders

Washington Dispatch: Vermont's junior senator-elect has a modest proposal for Ted Kennedy's committee: Investigate "power and wealth in America."

Money in America -- who owns and controls wealth -- has been a dead issue in Congress since the New Deal petered out in the 1960s. But the growing gap between rich and poor has put the topic back on the agenda for the new Democratic majority, and Vermont Senator-elect Bernie Sanders says he will propose an investigation of money and power when he joins Ted Kennedy's Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee in January.

Though technically an independent, Sanders will caucus with the Democrats in the Senate, as he has in the House since he was first elected as Vermont's single representative in 1990. The Dems' one-vote margin should give him considerable leverage: Nobody seriously thinks he would routinely vote with the GOP, as fellow independent Joe Lieberman might well do on some issues, but Sanders is also not a party-line man and in the past has joined Republicans on votes against NAFTA, trade with China, and other issues.

When I stopped by his office last week -- still his old digs in the Rayburn House Office Building -- Sanders, in his standard sport coat and slacks, first excused himself to make a quick phone call: "Hello," he said, "this is Senator-elect Bernie Sanders. Would Senator Kennedy have a little time this afternoon?" He was still getting adjusted, he confessed, to being part of what he calls the "House of Lords." He demurred on my questions about Robert Gates, Bush's nominee for secretary of defense ("I don't know anything about him") and the Murtha-Hoyer leadership fight among his former colleagues in the House. Instead, he insisted on talking about wealth.

Mother Jones: What's your first-100-days agenda?

Bernie Sanders: The first thing I want to do is to force reality onto the floor of the Senate so that we can end this stupid discussion about how great the American economy is. The economy is not great. The economy is a disaster for the middle class.

Second, I want to focus on an issue that is almost never talked about on the floor -- that is the power of big money. What are the moral implications? What do these people do when they have tremendous amounts of money? They use that money to perpetuate their own wealth and their own power. Every day, Congress works on behalf of big-money interests.

Third, I want to take a look at some of the good things that are being done around the rest of the world that are almost never discussed in the United States. How often is it discussed that the American people work the longest hours of any industrialized country in the world? The two-week paid vacation is almost a thing of the past; meanwhile in Europe you get four to six weeks vacation, and maternity leave with pay. We don't know about these things. I want to take a look around the world and see what workers are receiving, and compare that to the United States -- from an educational point of view.

MJ: How would you force these discussions? Through committee hearings?

BS: Yes -- I was very fortunate in that [Senate Majority Leader] Harry Reid gave me the committees I wanted. I am on Kennedy's Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. I am going to be on the environmental committee, with Barbara Boxer, which is what I wanted. Also the veterans committee, the budget committee, and the energy committee; Harry gave me what I wanted.

MJ: You talk about big money. But nobody has seriously looked at this since Wright Patman, the old Texas populist and antitrust crusader who chaired the House Banking Committee for, what, 40 years?

BS: That's right. Patman produced a book on concentration of bank ownership. We can do things like that--take a hard look at who owns America.

MJ: You'd do it through Kennedy's committee?

BS: Yes. We would demand studies, raise questions, get the word out.

MJ: Do you think that Americans are getting nostalgic for a sort of FDR Democratic Party?

BS: No. I think that what this election was about was a rejection of the disastrous policies of Bush, Cheney, and the Republican leadership. It was the war in Iraq. It was incompetence. It was Katrina. It was bad public policy, but it certainly was not an embracing of an alternative philosophy, because in fairness the Democrats are all over the place, and what I have said to the Democratic leadership and will say publicly every chance I get, if the Democrats -- having this opportunity no one thought they would have -- if they do not move boldly and decisively and make a difference in the lives of ordinary Americans, they're going to be in a lot of trouble.

MJ: Are you a Democrat, an independent, or a socialist?

BS: You can call me anything you want. I won with the label "Independent" next to my name. If you ask me, "Are you an independent democratic socialist?" -- yes, I am. But then we have to talk about what that means.

James Ridgeway is the Washington Correspondent for Mother Jones.

Mr. Arkin has hit every nail square on the head.

From the perspective of someone who has recently retired, I also believe that our military has significant problems, and in particular, with field grade officers.

Prior to the invasion of Iraq, only a very small handful of generals spoke out about the problems we would face by invading Iraq (e.g.; changing the 1300 year history of animosity and hatred between the Shiites and the Sunnis), or about the need for significantly more Soldiers and Marines than Bush's neo-con administration buddies said we'd need to maintain law and order after the Iraqi army was defeated.

Why didn't other generals speak out when GEN Eric Shinseki was sacked for speaking out? The answer clearly seems to be that tactfully speaking out isn't conducive to future promotions.

Concerning the amenities our service members now enjoy in Iraq and Afghanistan (Burger King, high speed internet, AC in their billets, etc.), can anyone imagine this happening for our fathers and grandfathers who served in WWII? And would we have even won WWII if we had sent service members home after completion of a one-year tour? We would have run out of manpower long before victory had been achieved against Germany and Japan.

We who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan go there knowing we will go home after a certain length of time, rather than staying there until we have attained a "victory" as our forefathers did in WWII, the Civil War, or the Revolutionary War. How can these limited tours of duty not affect the outcome of this war?

Aside from the war and on a more simple level, how can it be that after several decades of females attending service academies, they are still being sexually harassed or worse? The answer, in my view, is field grade officers are not doing their jobs. Go along with the "program" and get promoted; speak out and put the binders on your career.

Take it another step further. Our hide-bound Pentagon generals want to keep gays and lesbians out of the military, even though all of our allies welcome them and have little or no problems in doing so. Lift the ban against gays and lesbians openly serving, and recruiters would suddenly find gays and lesbians knocking at their doors, recruits which they desperately need.

Some ask if we need to bring back the draft, and having served in both the draft army (I was one) and the volunteer army, my answer is yes. Those same hide-bound Pentagon generals will say "no", but so far they haven't been right on a heck of a lot. The draft would cause all citizens to have a personal interest in the wars we get involved in.

Nevertheless, we can and should be extremely proud of the great majority of those serving in our military; they are making great sacrifices that the great majority of their civilian peers haven't got the guts or physical ability to do (or had the guts to do - as in the case of Dick Cheney, Dennis Hastert, Tom DeLay, Bill Frist, Rick Santorum, Roy Blunt, Mitch McConnell, George Allen, Trent Lott, etc.).

wow. therev has a LOT of time on his hands.

My own point is that if occupation is included in the length of a war, than WW2 extended far beyond 1945.

Let's compare apples to apples at least.

Everyone in the thinking world knows what us-democracy is-is,

Hebrew Man,

Great thread, and I always say that anyone who believes it, is Demo-crazy!

Keep speaking the truth!

Everyone in the thinking world knows what us-democracy is-is,

Hebrew Man,

I call it and anyone who believes it, Demo-crazy!

Good thread and the truth can make us free!

The military didn't fail:

I still don't see where the military, except for Don Rumsfield and a few of his minions, failed. Having said that, the military, in my opinion never should have been in sovereign Iraq in the first place; they were only following ordrs!

So how do you blame the rank and file military when they were given a foiled mission and game plan from the onset?

Okay, sports analogy time: Let's say, hypothetically, that you have a good footbal team in Washington DC with great players on the team (just pretend) however, you continuously send these great players out to play with a poor game plan.

What happens more often than not, THEY LOOSE! So who do you blame, the players or the team owners and coaches? The military in Iraq, has not been any different from the Redskins. Perhaps there is something in the water in D.C., for both teams are headed up leaders in the Washington D.C. area! Are any of your teams doing any good, nope, but is it their fault?

Irony,

Yes, the U.S.A. joined in the fight during WWII at the eleventh hour. However, the U.S.A. had a mission and it was to stop the fascist German empire from taking over and ruling the world, a position that America clearly wanted to occupy itself!

Isn't that what is also wrong in Iraq. what we once fought against, in Mr. Arkin's own words [Washington, a place and a culture that assumes that America can shape and bend the world], America has become!

Today, Bush is the world's Hitler and America is being viewed in more places than not as the world's Nazi Germany!

In many respects the two have a lot in common, racism, eugenics, expansionism, militaristism, hegemony, invading militarities and leaders who isolate themselves and force their will upon the people instead of acceding to the will of the People!

Hitler had the Third Reich, Bush had the Republican Reich, what's the difference?

Let's understand this, the USA invades Iraq like NAZI's, and then we're surprised that Iraq's fight hard to protect their country from Bush, Cheny, and US soccer-mom's and spawn. { parasites }?

Most Iraqi's had guns, which means that they had the option to fight. Someday folks will invade the USA, but most understand here that over 1/2 the americans have guns and will fight in resistance to occupation.

Why are are so surprised that the Iraq's fight?

In many ways the US is worse than the Nazi's it took the world years to see what the Nazi's did to Europe. But everyone knows instantly what the US has done to Iraq.

Money, and mercenary's will not help, otherwise Hitler would have won. Eventually the world will cancel the US credit card, and the US troops will starve in Iraq and eventually some will trickle home.

The most obvious problem is Racism. Arab's are supposed to be stupid, like monkeys in Africa. Easy to kill. The fact is Arabs invented law, algebra, ....

The USA has been successful at wiping out the black man in Africa with Aids' { Litton-Bionetics }. Problem is that Arab's are not promiscious so that bio-weapons don't work. So instead we use de-pleted uranium to wipe out the entire arab world { muslim-islamic }.

Now stupidly ask why do they fight?

Ah yes democracy, like Malcolm-X in the 60's said us-democracy is hypocrisy, and remember he was a muslim. Everyone in the thinking world knows what us-democracy is-is,

In response to the comment, "Finally, it strikes me as a failure of our very military: They seem so confused and foiled wherever they go," I agree in part. Our military isn't well suited to combat stateless enemies such as the Iraq insurgancy, warlord militias, or al-Qaeda. Our new enemies blend with civilians, they don't wear uniforms, they fight unconventionally, and attack with fear and terror. It seems to me that we were caught by surprise, a failure of strategic preparedness. The changing face of our enemy requires our response forces to adapt. I'm not sure conventional combat arms are the right tool.

Honesty and truth....

...........this will cause some Americans, particularly those in the far Right to gag, however, only honesty and truth will dictate the true course that should be taken from hereonin Iraq. And there has been a paucity of honesty and truth coming out of America from the onset and I still haven't heard anything come out of the administration yet to suggest that truth is any way, a consideration now!

Someone wrote in the blog last week that America is loosing [the war] because America did not fully commit itself. We all knew that America had the bandwidth to go in and destroy Iraq; we could have done that at any time and we still can do that at anytime. However, the problem as I see it is that America's objectives were never honest and therefore never clear from the beginning, and that is America's real reason for failing.

The reasons stated for our going into Iraq in the first place, as explained by the Leader of his Republican base, kept changing. And keep in mind that Bush declared that the mission was accomplished not too long after the troops stormed and took down Baghdad. Did we leave? Shortly after Tommy Franks flew in and said, folks you will be out of here in 6-months. Did it happen?

No, instead we began to hear about another list of concocted reasons for America continuing its stay in Iraq that were presented by our President. Is it fair to say that one would have a difficult time knowing when they had reached their objective if they were never honest about what the objective was in the first place, after all people do lie even to themselves?

In the case of the President, he has consistently said one thing to the public while doing another. Mr. Bush knew what his true objective was (that he consistently hid under a phalanx of lies) that belied everything that he spoke about to the American public. His true objective was what he was accusing the so-called Axis nations and others of doing, to put his stamp on the middle-east, and folks it is not working. Why? Because what he is attempting to accomplish is deceitful, unlawful, immoral and dishonest. His actions were being done in the interest of America, not the Iraqi people; General MacGregor explains Bush's motives the best, simply, politics and economics.

Clearly George Bush was and is the right man for the job of 'misleading' the American public, unless you want to bring back Tricky Dick or Ronald Reagan. A long-term and sustainable outcome will only be achieved when America decides to be honest and truthful about its objectives, and when America seeks to do the RIGHT THING with regard to Iraq and pursue noble objectives that have only the Iraqi people in mind.

Otherwise, America will continue to go around in circles and seeking the help of others inside and outside of America, in hopes of saving face given the horrific mess that it has already made in Iraq and the Middle-East unfortunately while innocent people on all sides continue to needlessly sacrifice their lives for a myth-laden policy!

All of what is going on now inside and outside of America, displomacy and study groups, proves that the Bush Administration is a failure from top down and that these folks did not have a clue; and they sitll do not have a clue, thus they have to seek the help of outsiders and other nations to rescue them!

Hopefully, someday our 'misleading' leader will recognize the value of honesty and truth and the damage that can be caused when one is less than truthful, in his case he is a surreptitious liar! Did he not learn anything from Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Oliver North and the boyz of late?

I would suggest to Busy and Chaney that they both do the right thing and have themselves fired. And for the military to be succesful, we must admit the truth and either allow them to ramp up and destroy everything in Iraq that does not accede to America's vision, or simply get out.

At any rate I hope that we learn something before repeating the same mistakes in the DPRK and Iran.