- Iraq
- Background
- 2003 Invasion of Iraq
- Casualties of the conflict in Iraq since 2003
- Gulf War (Wikipedia)
- Islam's Sunni-Shiite split
- Project for the New American Century (Wikipedia)
- World Factbook: Iraq
- Take action
- Code Pink
- Green Party Action Center
- Impeach Bush
- Iraq Foundation
- MoveOn
- NOW Peace in Iraq Petition
- UCC Declaration of Peace
- United for Peace and Justice DC March
- Related Topics
- Army Stage-Managed Fall of Hussein Statue
- Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse (Wikipedia)
- Downing Street Memos
- Fallujah (Wikipedia)
- Haditha massacre (Wikipedia)
- Iraq: The unseen war
- Iraqi Refugees Overwhelm Syria
- Jessica Lynch (Wikipedia)
- Kucinich Impeachment Articles for Cheney
- Mercenaries in Iraq: Blackwater Inc
- Neglect of Iraq Vets at Walter Reed
- Plame Affair (Wikipedia)
- Starve-the-beast (Wikipedia)
- US National Guard bears Iraq burden
- Vietnam War (Wikipedia)
- Related Reading
Disarming Iraq By Hans Blix
Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq By Thomas E. Ricks
Iraq: A War
No God But God By Reza Aslan
The Occupation of Iraq: Winning the War, Losing the Peace By Ali A. Allawi
The Secret Way to War: The Downing Street Memo and the Iraq War's Buried History By Mark Danner
The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic (The American Empire Project) By Chalmers Johnson
- Related DVDs
Baghdad Burning: Girl Blog From Iraq By Riverbend
Fahrenheit 9/11
Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers
Uncovered - The Whole Truth About the Iraq War
Voices of Iraq
- Related Articles
- Ali Abbas
- Kevin Sites' Hot Zone Iraq 2005
- Soldiers' Iraq Blogs Face Military Scrutiny
- The impact of Bush linking 9/11 and Iraq
- Key Figures
- Colin Powell (Wikipedia)
- Condoleezza Rice (Wikipedia)
- Dick Cheney (Wikipedia)
- Donald Rumsfeld (Wikipedia)
- Douglas J. Feith (Wikipedia)
- George Tenet (Wikipedia)
- George W. Bush (Wikipedia)
- L. Paul Bremer (Wikipedia)
- Lewis Libby (Wikipedia)
- Muqtada al-Sadr (Wikipedia)
- Nouri al-Maliki (Wikipedia)
- Paul Wolfowitz (Wikipedia)
- Saddam Hussein (Wikipedia)
- Tony Blair (Wikipedia)
- Related Blogs
- Code for Your Site
-
The following RSS feeds are available on this page:
If you would like to include headlines from this page on your own blog or Web site, paste the following code into your site:
-
-
U.S. deserter wins appeal in battle for refugee status
Posted by Jenzaka from Canada
OTTAWA - A Canadian court has sided for the first time with a military deserter who fled to Canada seeking refugee status, ruling Friday that the U.S. soldier witnessed enough human rights abuses during a stint in Iraq that he could qualify for asylum.
-
-
-
Media in a frenzy, but Clark's comment not extraordinary or unprecedented
Posted by Damianmann from Feeds.mediamatters
The media frenzy that has followed retired Gen. Wesley Clark's comments on the June 29 edition of CBS' Face the Nation is based on at least two false premises: first, that Clark attacked Sen. John McCain's military service, and second, that his comment -- that one's, in this case McCain's, military heroism alone does not establish his qualification to be president -- is in any way extraordinary or unusual. As Media Matters for America has noted, Clark did not attack McCain's military service; he praised McCain as a "hero." Moreover, Clark's comments were far from the first time someone has said of a war veteran running for president that his military service alone does not make him qualified to be president.
Indeed, in 2004, numerous media figures argued that Sen. John Kerry's (D-MA) military record alone did not qualify him to be president. For example:
- On the September 10, 2004, edition (accessed via Nexis) of Fox News' Special Report, Roll Call executive editor Mort Kondracke asserted that "this whole business of John Kerry saying I'm qualified to be commander in chief because I was a Swift boat commander in Vietnam is bunk. ... It does not qualify you to be the commander in chief of all the Armed Forces because you were a Swift boat commander."
- In a February 13, 2004, column, syndicated columnist Kathleen Parker wrote: "Given that military service neither qualifies nor disqualifies one for political office -- and given the fact of Bush's honorable discharge -- it's time to dismount this jackass. Vietnam is over. To judge people now on the basis of what they said or did then is to forget how emotionally riven we were. And how young and naive we were. ... What's more important now is what would a man do as president?"
- In a September 23, 2004, column, syndicated columnist Thomas Sowell wrote of Kerry: "Never mind that people who were actually there with him in the 1960s dispute what a great job he did then. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that he did all the things he said he did and none of the things that eyewitnesses in Vietnam said he did. How does that qualify anyone to be President of the United States?"
- In an August 26, 2004, column, National Review Online editor-at-large Jonah Goldberg wrote that "experience -- while more often than not superior to the lack of it -- isn't as powerful or important as we like to think. If service in Vietnam or in uniform were the prerequisite for correct thinking on military and foreign-policy issues, then you'd think Veterans would all agree with each other. Obviously, they don't. The media's favorite veteran, John McCain, disagrees with John Kerry about Iraq and most foreign-policy issues."
Moreover, then-staff writer Ronald Brownstein wrote in a July 28, 2004, Los Angeles Times news analysis (retrieved from Nexis) that President Bush's "aides quickly insisted that Kerry's military service in Vietnam, however laudable, was less relevant to his qualifications as commander in chief than his Senate voting record on national security issues -- which the Bush campaign has tried to portray as soft on defense. 'Every American, including the president ... believes John Kerry's service in Vietnam was admirable,' said Steve Schmidt, the Bush campaign's deputy communications director. 'But what's most striking is that in order to talk about John Kerry's accomplishments, they've had to go back for 35 years. There is no mention of what John Kerry has done in the Senate the past 20 years.'"
On the June 29 edition of CBS' Face the Nation, Clark said of McCain:
CLARK: Because in the matters of national security policy-making, it's a matter of understanding risk. It's a matter of gauging your opponents, and it's a matter of being held accountable. John McCain's never done any of that in his official positions. I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands of millions of others in the Armed Forces as a prisoner of war. He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn't held executive responsibility. That large squadron in the Air -- in the Navy that he commanded, it wasn't a wartime squadron. He hasn't been there and ordered the bombs to fall. He hasn't seen what it's like when diplomats come in and say, "I don't know whether we're going to be able to get this point through or not. Do you want to take the risk? What about your reputation? How do we handle it publicly?" He hasn't made those calls, Bob.
After Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer said, "[Sen.] Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down," Clark replied: "Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president. ... But Barack is not -- he is not running on the fact that he has made these national security pronouncements. He's running on his other strengths."
From the September 10, 2004, edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:
JUAN WILLIAMS (Fox News contributor): Well, that's what they say. But let me just say, these documents have slowly poured out over the course of Mr. Bush's term. And they haven't been in a consistent fashion, where I were to say, here is an entire record of President Bush's service and here is why he did not show up for a period in the Alabama National Guard.
KONDRACKE: Let us stipulate this whole business is nonsense. It is a diversion.
WILLIAMS: That is a good point.
KONDRACKE: It's a diversion --
FRED BARNES (Weekly Standard executive editor): No, I don't agree with that.
KONDRACKE: No, it's a diversion from what the voters of America deserve.
WILLIAMS: I agree.
KONDRACKE: And that is a discussion of their future. I mean, this whole business of John Kerry saying I'm qualified to be commander in chief because I was a Swift boat commander in Vietnam is bunk. And the idea --
WILLIAMS: Why is it bunk?
KONDRACKE: Because you command a little boat. You are not commanding --
WILLIAMS: Let me just say this to you.
KONDRACKE: Just a second.
WILLIAMS: If you are in the military --
KONDRACKE: Just a minute.
WILLIAMS: -- and served --
KONDRACKE: Just a minute. Just a minute. Just a minute. It does not qualify you to be commander in chief. Abraham Lincoln did not fight in any wars, right? And he ran a very good war in the Civil War. FDR did not fight in any wars and he ran a very good war in World War II. It does not qualify you to be the commander in chief of all the Armed Forces because you were a Swift boat commander.
WILLIAMS: Can I respond to this point?
KONDRACKE: Nor does it mean that you were a lousy commander in chief if you were a hack-off back in the 1970s, and then became an upstanding person because you had a religious conversion --
WILLIAMS: Do you think that it adds to your credibility as the American people look at the fact that we're in war right now that you were able to say, I put myself on the line. I went to war for this country. I risked my life? Do you think that adds to something to the voters in terms of their information about your character and your willingness to put their children at risk?
KONDRACKE: But your record for 20 years on foreign policy is a much more important thing. And that's very weak.
WILLIAMS: I think people have a strong feeling about your character on this point.
JIM ANGLE (guest host): We need to take a break at this point. Coming up, maybe a little bit more of this.
[laughter]
ANGLE: But also, John Kerry says if the president were serious about fighting terrorism, he'd extend the weapons assault ban -- the assault weapons ban, rather. We'll ask our All-Star panel about that and maybe some more of this next.
From Parker's February 13, 2004, column:
In defense of Bush's record, the White House has produced military pay receipts. Outside entities, including The Annenberg Political Fact Check, a project of the nonpartisan Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania, have investigated records and found nothing to substantiate claims of desertion. (www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=131)
Kerry wisely has taken the high road during this obvious witch-hunt, saying he has no interest in Bush's record. Of course as long as he has people like Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe cluster-bombing the media with AWOL charges, the high road is a pretty easy leap. There's no way to go but up when the source for "desertion" is movie producer Michael Moore.
Given that military service neither qualifies nor disqualifies one for political office -- and given the fact of Bush's honorable discharge -- it's time to dismount this jackass. Vietnam is over. To judge people now on the basis of what they said or did then is to forget how emotionally riven we were. And how young and naive we were.
By that standard, it is possible to forgive Kerry's 1970 Harvard Crimson interview in which he said he wanted to eliminate CIA activity and turn our troops over to the United Nations. He's changed his tune. Presumably he's wiser. So are we all.
What's more important now is what would a man do as president? We know what Bush would do. Kerry voted for the war on Iraq but against funding to finish the job, thus making life more difficult for our service men and women still on the front lines.
Which Kerry would be president, the hero who advances assertively against the threat of danger? Or the antiwar demonstrator who turns protest into political currency?
From Sowell's September 23, 2004, column:
Yet for the most important job in this country -- indeed, the most important job in the world -- Senator John Kerry has applied by talking about what he did in a wholly different job back in the 1960s.
Never mind that people who were actually there with him in the 1960s dispute what a great job he did then. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that he did all the things he said he did and none of the things that eyewitnesses in Vietnam said he did. How does that qualify anyone to be President of the United States?
The Kerry campaign and the liberal media want to make this election a referendum on President Bush, especially as regards Iraq. That too is an insult to our intelligence.
From Goldberg's August 26, 2004, column:
As for the president, the only area in which he beats John Kerry decisively in the polls is, broadly, in his capacity as commander-in-chief. The American people -- as well as a majority of veterans and (I presume) those serving in the military -- generally think Bush is a better war president than Kerry would be. And yet the Kerry campaign insists that Kerry's stint in Vietnam makes him more qualified to be a war president because George W. Bush's four-year term as a war president cannot outweigh the fact that John Kerry spent four months in Vietnam. Meanwhile a bunch of guys who served alongside Kerry under similar circumstances all say that Kerry's full of it, and the Democrats say they have no right to talk at all. Indeed, they want the book pulled from bookstores. Follow all of that?
Now, keep in mind this is all largely a reversal from twelve years ago when Bill Clinton ran for office. Back then the Paul Begalas and John Kerrys claimed that service in Vietnam -- or anywhere else -- was irrelevant to being an effective president (while some Republicans were largely saying the reverse). Now, suddenly, it is the qualification that trumps all others.
My point isn't the usual hypocrisy gotcha, though that's certainly worth pointing out. It's that experience -- while more often than not superior to the lack of it -- isn't as powerful or important as we like to think. If service in Vietnam or in uniform were the prerequisite for correct thinking on military and foreign-policy issues, then you'd think Veterans would all agree with each other. Obviously, they don't. The media's favorite veteran, John McCain, disagrees with John Kerry about Iraq and most foreign-policy issues (depending on which day of the week Kerry is talking). John Edwards talks about how Kerry still carries shrapnel in his leg and therefore...therefore...therefore, well, something along the lines of nobody's ever allowed to criticize John Kerry. Obviously, that's idiotic on its face. If it's not, maybe we should count the side with the most shrapnel in its collective body and declare it the most qualified to lead the country. My guess is Karl Rove would be happy with that.
We do not live in the world of Starship Troopers where only veterans are allowed to vote.
In a democracy, arguments and reason must count for something, if not necessarily everything. During the lead-up to the war, opponents of the war (including hundreds of nasty folks in my e-mail box) declared that the White House had no right to send troops into combat because they hadn't seen it themselves. Or, I remember Chris Matthews trying to bully Rich Lowry into silence during the lead-up to the war. Matthews shrieked at Rich something to the effect of "Have you ever been to the Middle East!?" And when Rich said no, Matthews responded something like "Well, then you have no right to talk."
This is the path to madness. If reading books and articles, talking to experts -- including veterans -- and making arguments built on facts and logic is always insufficient compared to the experience of being shot at -- or taking a walking tour of a Middle Eastern city -- then we must have compulsory military conscription for everybody -- men, women, Quakers, Amish, gays, and invalids included (and then find ways to rotate them through combat). That's the only way to ensure that everyone maintains their rights.
From the July 28, 2004, Los Angeles Times article:
And Bush aides quickly insisted that Kerry's military service in Vietnam, however laudable, was less relevant to his qualifications as commander in chief than his Senate voting record on national security issues -- which the Bush campaign has tried to portray as soft on defense.
"Every American, including the president ... believes John Kerry's service in Vietnam was admirable," said Steve Schmidt, the Bush campaign's deputy communications director. "But what's most striking is that in order to talk about John Kerry 's accomplishments, they've had to go back for 35 years. There is no mention of what John Kerry has done in the Senate the past 20 years."
The dueling arguments over the relevance of Kerry's Vietnam experience illustrate a key way the convention is sharpening and advancing the debate between the two contenders. In effect, the two sides are competing to define the frame that swing voters could use to assess Kerry's fitness to be president.
-
-
-
Abu Ghraib inmates sue, claiming torture
Posted by Jeff from MSNBC
Former detainees of the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq are suing U.S. contractors in four states for alleged torture. The first complaint was filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Seattle. Others are being filed in Detroit; Columbus, Ohio; and Greenbelt, Md.
-
-
-
Iraq to award oil contracts
Posted by Jeff from Al Jazeera
Foreign firms set to return after 36 years for developing Iraqi oil fields. The war appears to be a "success" to corporate interests!
-
-
-
It was oil all along
Posted by Damianmann from Consortiumnews
Oh, no, they told us, Iraq isn't a war about oil. That's cynical and simplistic, they said. It's about terror and al Qaeda and toppling a dictator and spreading democracy and protecting ourselves from weapons of mass destruction.
-
-
-
Deadly car bombs hit Iraq
Posted by Jeff from Al Jazeera
Seperate attacks kill at least 35 people in the north and centre of the country.
-
-
-
Bloomberg.com: Worldwide
Posted by theangryindian from Bloomberg
June 24 (Bloomberg) -- The world's biggest financial firms may lose as many as 175,000 jobs by this time next year as Citigroup Inc. and other banks shed workers amid slowing revenue and billions in writedowns, executive recruiters say.
-
-
-
A New Social Contract
Posted by Jeff from Washington Post
For the first time since 1964, Democrats have a good chance not just to win the White House and a majority in Congress but to enact a sweeping new liberal agenda. Conservative ideas are widely discredited, as is the Republican Party that the right has controlled since Ronald Reagan was elected. The war in Iraq has undermined the conservative case for unilateral military intervention and U.S. omnipotence. Economic insecurity has led Americans to question the rhetoric about "big" government, while President Bush's embrace of new federal programs has undermined GOP promises to cut spending.
-
-
-
Bush Urges Iraqis To Pass Amendment Banning Gay Marriage
Posted by Jeff from Feeds.theonion
BAGHDAD—In a private meeting with Mohammed Bahr al-Ulloum, President Bush urged the Iraqi Governing Council president to amend the recently ratified Iraqi constitution to protect the sanctity of heterosexual marriage. "The Iraqi constitution, signed just a few short weeks ago, will usher in a new era of democratic freedom in Iraq," Bush said. "But there are some unlawful and unholy acts that the constitution's original drafters could not have possibly intended to protect." Bush then told al-Ulloum he must act quickly and decisively to preserve his country's most sacred tradition.
-
-
-
Female suicide bomber kills 15 in Iraq
Posted by Jeff from International Herald Tribune
A female suicide bomber struck near a government compound northeast of Baghdad on Sunday, killing at least 15 people and wounding 40, police said.
-
-
-
t r u t h o u t | US General Accuses Bush Administration of War Crimes
Posted by okami from Truth Out
Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba (now retired) served as the deputy commanding general for support for the Third Army for ten months in Kuwait during the early days of the Iraq occupation. In a statement released today, he bluntly accuses the Bush administration of war crimes and lays down a challenge for prosecution.
-
-
-
Afghanistan toll exceeds Iraq in June
Posted by Jeff from Feeds.feedburner
At least 32 troops have fallen in Afghanistan in June, more than Iraq.
-
- Sponsors
-
Want to sponsor this NewsCloud?
If you are a motivated individual or organization involved with this topic, email us if you would like to lead the community for this NewsCloud.
- Recent wire stories
- Female US Casualties More Common in Iraq War (t r u t h o u t)
- Despair Drives Suicide Attacks by Iraq Women (NYT International)
- Istiklal (t r u t h o u t)
- Obama Fuels Pullout Debate With Remarks (NYT International)
- Committee Questions State Department Role in Iraq Oil Deal (t r u t h o u t)
- Iraq MPs say no-bid oil deals could be in doubt (FT)
- Iraq talks advance on deal for US troops (FT)
- Plan to include Hizbollah in UK list condemned (FT)
- Committee Questions State Dept. Role in Iraq Oil Deal (NYT International)
- Chairman of Joint Chiefs Says More Troops Needed in Afghanistan (t r u t h o u t)












