Today we bring you Book Salon, Double Barreled: after this edition of Book Salon, we bring you a Special Feature of Marcy Wheeler's new book, Anatomy of Deception, which chronicles the things you need to know about the Libby trial and the outing of a spy by this administration, compromising national security and our ability to thwart nuclear proliferation.
It's especially fortunate that we feature these two books in particular this week. The subtitle to The Best War Ever is Lies, Damned Lies and the Mess in Iraq. While the Libby trial, for which jury selection begins this week (stay tuned to FDL for up close coverage!), is narrowly about perjury and obstruction of justice, the two books we feature today present the backstory of the Libby trial, and the reasons why Irving "Scooter" Libby lied to protect the Vice President and other Republicrooks in the first place.
It's about the war. Moreover, how we got into the "mess in Iraq" is absolutely relevant to today's headlines, wherein we learn how the same unaccountable cabal of seeming untouchables seek to widen our current war in the Middle East to include Iran and Syria, apparently escalating our provocations and acts of war in hopes of generating some response that could provide a new excuse to an American public for more, more, more war war war.
And what of the American public, or for that matter, the American press? All have been complicit in the path we've so far trodden, and yet, as Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber point out, we live in a propaganda state, wherein more than fifty percent of the public still believed Saddam Hussein had a role in the attacks of 9/11, even after it was exposed to the world that no such link existed. No writer or writers have been so consistent in documenting and deconstructing the propaganda state and hegemony of public relations on our public life as these two men have, through a series of well researched and tightly written books, of which The Best War Ever is merely their latest.
Inside The Best War Ever, you'll find chapters on:
- the initial selling and packaging of the Iraq invasion and occupation, involving conscious administration mendacity and the gleeful complicity of a pliant press, and the assembly of a state run propaganda group to feed stories and misinformation into the world's information bloodstream,
- an account of the inclusion of the famous "sixteen words" in the president's State of the Union address, the subsequent action by Joe Wilson to expose our government's escalation of lies, and the administration's choice to take vengeance on him and on his top secret, NOC CIA agent wife, Valerie Plame,
- the machinations and deceptions that went into the construction of Colin Powell's casus belli speech to the United Nations, so instrumental in manufacturing consent for the Iraq invasion to the American public and to the administration's vast sea of enablers in the establishment press,
- the creation and use of the neocon front group, the "government in exile" Iraq National Congress, spearheaded by serial liar and opportunist, Ahmed Chalabi,
- the slithering dance of amorphous PR to justify the war on ever shifting grounds as each previous justification for our imperialist crusade lost legitimacy as events progressed,
- the government stranglehold on the recording of any imagery, including pictures of flag draped coffins, that might make real to the American public that this war is actually a war that throws American sons and daughters into a pointless, oilman's meat grinder
- a review of the lay of the land we still face today, whereby the administration's enablers continue to search for justifications for their sins of both commission and omission, spinning tales of why they were right to be wrong.
In short, The Best War Ever provides sharp reporting that amounts to a one-stop tour de force, deconstructing the propaganda effort to shield Americans from the truth of our government's actions in selling and promoting its Iraq invasion, all in about two hundred pages of sharply edited and painstakingly footnoted text.
The book merits much quotation, and I've dog eared more pages than I can possibly touch upon in this review. But since we are to follow this Book Salon discussion with some advanced, yet unseen text from Marcy Wheeler's Anatomy of Deceit, allow me please to quote a bit from the Plame chapter, just to give you a taste of the more complete work:
Joseph Wilson was also doing a slow burn. The day after Bush's State of the Union speech, he says, he telephoned a friend at the State Department to say, "Either you guys have some information that's different from what my trip and the ambassador and everybody else said about Niger, or else you need to do something to correct the record." He received no response. A month later, after Mohamed ElBaradei gave his speech to the United Nations exposing the Niger documents as forgeries, Wilson read a story in the Washington Post that quoted an unnamed White House official saying, "We fell for it." This struck him as implausible, since he himself had separately debunked the uranium claim for the government thirteen months earlier. On March 8, Wilson was interviewed on CNN. Without disclosing his role as an envoy to Niger, he said that "this particular case is outrageous. . . I think it's safe to say that the U. S. government should have or did know that this report was fake before Dr. ElBaradei mentioned it in his report at the U. N. yesterday."
In May, Wilson discussed his concerns off the record with New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. Without identifying Wilson by name, Kristof wrote a column stating that "a former U. S. ambassador to Africa" had investigated and debunked the uranium claim long before the White House began using it to make the case for war. Wilson also spoke with Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus, who used it as the basis for a story – again, without mentioning Wilson by name.
On June 8, Condoleeza Rice appeared on Meet the Press and attempted again to defend the administration's handling of the yellowcake forgery. "Maybe someone knew down in the bowels of the agency, but no one in our circles knew that there were doubts and suspicions that this might be a forgery," she said. This time, Wilson says, he phoned friends close to people in the Bush administration and warned them that if Rice would not correct the record, he would come forward with what he knew.
On July 6, he did. His op-ed, titled, "What I Didn't Find in Africa," was published in the New York Times. "Those new stories about that unnamed former envoy who went to Niger? That's me.," he wrote. "The vice president's office asked a serious question. I was asked to help formulate the answer. I did so, and I have every confidence that the answer I provided was circulated to the appropriate officials within our government. The question now is how that answer was or was not used by our political leadership. If. . . the information was ignored because it did not fit certain preconceptions about Iraq, then a legitimate argument can be made that we went into war under false pretenses.
[snip]
At the same time that White House officials struggled publicly to answer Wilson's charges, they were working behind the scenes to discredit him personally. Even before he published his editorial, they were already finding ways to respond. Beginning in late May, officials in the office of Dick Cheney began seeking information about Wilson and his trip to Niger. . .
Forgive the extended quote, but I wanted to give those who have not already purchased the book (and our colleagues who will be covering the Libby trial) a bit of a sense of what has already been documented about the backstory to the entire Wilson/Plame/Libby saga, even before the pending wide release of Marcy Wheeler's book. The chapter I've quoted goes on to document, with similar diligence, not only steps taken to investigate and discredit Wilson, not only the outing of his wife, who, as an operative with NOC status, was deeply involved in highly secret clandestine activity on behalf of national security, but also the public relations and propagandistic terms under which all of these attacks proceeded: attacks that continue today and that have already been directed at the government prosecutor in the Libby case, Patrick Fitzgerald. The Best War Ever's signature strength lies in this ability to deconstruct the rhetorical strategies and structures of the administration's conscious, serial lying as it relates to the entire Iraq invasion and occupation, and not just as it relates to the Plame affair.
Having given you a flavor for the book, and a sense of its value to the national dialogue, I want to open the discussion up. What would you like to know from our guest author, Sheldon Rampton, who will be joining us in the comments?
For my own part, here are some things I'd like to know, though Sheldon and I have discussed some of these things personally before:
Sheldon, what parallels do you see between the runup to the Iraq invasion, and its supporting propaganda, and the current effort to escalate and expand our incursions into other sovereign states? How, given the change in the polls and the aftermath of the midterm elections, has the landscape changed for the administration, and how is it the same? What are the parameters of the effort to delegitimize Patrick Fitzgerald as we enter into the trial phase of the Libby case, and who are the players (cough, Barbara Comstock, cough) orchestrating these attacks? What have you learned about the matters covered in The Best War Ever since its publication that you think could have added even more weight and heft to the case you and John make in it? How did you become involved in the deconstruction of public relations cant and government propaganda?
Ladies and gentlemen, please join me in warmly welcoming Sheldon Rampton, who hopefully will find that wireless access in the Memphis airport is reliable. As always, please confine all discussion in the accompanying comment thread to the topic at hand.
Related posts:
- FDL Book Salon: Idiot America with Charles Pierce
- FDL Book Salon Discusses “The Test Of Our Times” With Gov. Tom Ridge
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Bradley Graham, By His Own Rules: The Ambitions, Successes and Ultimate Failures of Donald Rumsfeld
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Dahr Jamail, The Will to Resist: Soldiers Who Refuse to Fight in Iraq and Afghanistan
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Jurgen Todenhofer, Why Do You Kill?: The Untold Story of the Iraqi Resistance






Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

As always with our book discussions, please confine all discussion in the comment thread to the topic at hand.
Thanks!
Welcome Sheldon to FDL
Welcome, Sheldon to FDL!
How apropos, that the WORST President Ever brought us “The Best War Ever”
Hopefully Sheldon can uplink soon, as he’s in transit.
Welcome authors to fdl book salon. Speaking of “The Best War Ever,” I’m listening to John Edwards at Riverside Church in Harlem today. Good speech.
He just said this. “It is about time, brothers and sisters, it is about time for Americans to be patriotic about something other than war.”
Sorry for the semi OT…….
Jacqrat @ 3
Perhaps the word I meant was ironic…
I certainly look forward to reading the book. This and Marcy’s will help to ensure that there is a clear and lucid record of the machinations engaged in by this administration. Just correcting the truly bad reporting by MSM is a full time job. Thanks to those in the blogosphere who have so willingly taken on the task.
Hi, Pac…and everyone. Thanks for having me (and while I’m at it, thanks for mentioning the new Los Lobos album the other day. I’m a big fan, and this is a reminder for me to get it.)
As for Pac’s questions, let’s start with: “Sheldon, what parallels do you see between the runup to the Iraq invasion, and its supporting propaganda, and the current effort to escalate and expand our incursions into other sovereign states?”
The rhetoric about Iran in particular almost exactly parallels the rhetoric that led up to the Iraq invasion: Iran is about to acquire weapons of mass destruction. They’re supporting terrorists. They’re destabilizing the region. If we topple the regime, we’ll be welcomed as liberators. I’ve seen neocons like Bill Kristol make all of these arguments recently. It’s as though they were cryogenically frozen in late 2002 and have just been awakened with no memory whatsoever of the subsequent years of invasion, except that somehow someone has replaced the letter “q” with “n” so they’re saying it about Iran now instead of Iraq.
A more important parallel, though, is the way the rhetorical about Iran and Syria parallels the rhetoric that emerged during the later stages of the Vietnam war, when Nixon ran for election saying he had a secret plan to end the war in Vietnam, and the “secret plan” turned out to be a massive excalation in the war. The idea then was the we were stuck in a quagmire in Vietnam because neighboring countries like Cambodia were allowing themselves to be used as safe havens for Viet Cong infiltrations of arms and personnel, so the solution was to “go to the source” by bombing Cambodia.
I think a similar pattern is unfolding now. The warmongers are stuck in Iraq and can’t make headway, so in desperation they’re hoping that escalating and “taking it to the source” in Iran and Syria will enable them to shoot themselves out of trouble. It’s like the scene in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid where they’re trapped in a Mexican shootout and decide that their only hope is to make a dash for it, guns blazing. The Bush administration and its remaining supporters are trapped into this strategy because it’s they only way they can explain the world to themselves without having to admit that they were grossly wrong about almost everything they’ve ever said and done with regard to the Middle East.
That makes this a very dangerous time. The temptation to escalate is so strong that things could get dramatically crazier than they are already. That’s how it went in Vietnam, and I hate to draw facile parallels, but in fact we do see Bush escalating the war (under the euphemism, of course, of a “surge”).
Welcome, Joe. Since Sheldon has yet to arrive here, would you be willing to take any questions from the gallery about the propaganda effort to sell the war, or touch on any of the escalation related questions?
Sorry to put you on the spot, so feel free to decline!
Oops, Joe, you’re off the hook, but feel free to jump in anyway!
Welcome patriots all.
And grateful thanks for your work.
Welcome Sheldon … and Ambassador Wilson! It’s great to have you here today.
I can only stay for a minute, but will certainly read all the comments later in the evening. These salons are a great way to stimulate discussion on key issues. All the more important since the discussions of the punditocracy are so utterly sterile and self serving. I find it hard to believe that our great nation has been so badly served by its press.
Reich-shills see today’s Iraq dilemma as rooted in the first Gulf War. Cheney is reinforcing the notion of a long term struggle with his latest comments this morning.
People like to be told what to think since they don’t take the time to identify the underlying lies.
Speaking power to truth is their way of shaping the common experience and it seems that the asymmetry of our push-back is our strength.
The Cheney Shadow Government is dependent on just a a few people compared to the millions who can be brought to a fuller understanding of the problem. This book adds momentum to the unravelling of their neoconcoction.
This quote sums it up:
The bolded word is the fulcrum. The teeter-totter is about to break under the weight of their deception.
Pac’s next question: “How, given the change in the polls and the aftermath of the midterm elections, has the landscape changed for the administration, and how is it the same?”
A couple of things are interesting to me. First, it’s interesting (and good news) to see that Bush — “not a divider, a uniter,” as he said in his first presidential campaign — has become a uniter of Democrats and a divider of Republicans. This is something that I thought was almost impossible to accomplish. Prior to his presidency, Republicans were so unified and well-organized that I used to joke that I had seen Republicans chew through their own legs rather than get caught in a trap. Now some of they would rather chew through Bush’s legs than get caught in a photo op with him.
The other thing I’m noticing, which is less encouraging, is that Democrats seem to be adopting a confusing and dissembling rhetorical strategy. On the one hand, they’re increasingly united in saying we should get out of Iraq, which is good. (I see that Hillary Clinton has now taken the leap.) On the other hand, it’s being expressed in language which suggests that the problem is all due to those feckless Iraqis who have “failed” to “take up their responsibilities.” There’s a deliberate emulation of right-wing rhetoric which seems to be trying to cast the Iraqis as some sort of lazy welfare moms who have grown too dependent on the generosity of America’s military heroes. If that’s the lesson that people draw from the debacle in Iraq, we won’t have learned much from the experience.
Greetings, Ambassador Wilson. As always, it is good to see you here.
To go from memories of Martin Luther King Jr. in the earlier thread to this book is quite a shift of mental gears. Thanks, Sheldon, for pulling it all together as you have.
Hello patriots!
I mean to buy Marcy Wheeler’s book.
I’ve already read Best War Ever. (Someone actually gave it to me.)
It’s probably the first book I’ve read that actually paid attention Iraqi casualties, which are downright appalling. I can’t believe the every single member of the press is completely biased, so why didn’t they address Lancet-type studies earlier? And the number of casualties? It would surely horrify a number of us including those, who sit FDL Lakeside here.
Joe Wilson @
13
Glad you could drop by. Maybe I’ll see you in town soon. I’m covering voir dire this week, but anyway, I’m always around, over the river.
neurophius @ 17
Thanks
On my last point, you’ll note that Bush himself relied heavily on rhetoric about how “the Iraqis have failed to stand up” during his speech last Wednesday. I find this sort of thing deeply offensive. Talk about blame the victim…it’s like a rapist criticizing his victim for failing to use birth control.
Pachacutec @ 20
We are going to keep a very low profile during the trial but we are planning to do something for the bloggers from FDL and the next hurrah sometime after the first of Feb. We look forward to seeing you then if not before.
If’n this war is so gol-darned good…
How come we’re losin’ it?
If we’re so gol-darned powerful, da sole hyphy-power, how come we done lost every war since WWII.
Huh?
Note: Korea was not a ‘tie’ homes.
This will likely be my favorite chapter:
administration mendacity and the gleeful complicity of a pliant press,
Can you offer me some hope:
Do you see any improvement, any movement toward curiosity being revived in our press, or will the reporters need to be replaced by attrition before we can see improvement?
Greetings from me, too, to Joe Wilson. I’ve got a chapter about “The Plame Game” in The Best War Ever, and it wasn’t until writing it that I realized how scandalous the whole thing was and how much you put on the line by speaking up as you did.
Sheldon Rampton @ 22
Don Rumsfeld tried out the line that we gave the Iraqis all the tools they needed but they weren’t up to the task in a speech to the National Press Club at least two years ago.
Sheldon – well said!
I’ve been amazed at the ability of the media and the administration and our elected Dems to portray the problem as the Iraqi’s not doing what we want rather than our invasion of a sovereign country. And even in progressive spheres we continue to use the CW language while Iraqi friends speak of US troops as “the army of occupation” and “the invaders.” I suspect we’ll never have peace until we understand the truth of those Iraqi descriptions.
Thanks, Pach. And welcome, Sheldon. You’re right — Joe put much on the line to speak out, and we’re always delighted when he shows up.
I also would like to wish Joe Wilson and Valerie the very best. I had the great pleasure of meeting you Joe at YearlyKos 2006 and came away wishing there were more folks like yourself and your wife in government.
Your actions in standing up to the vile fascists of BushCo. are something every American should aspire to.
Thanks for what you’ve done.
Sheldon Rampton @ 26
I look forward to reading it, though I am of the view that it is hard to realize that the administration would put so much on the line just to try to attack me, especially through Valerie. What idiots.
Welcome, gentlemen.
Your book, and others, amply document the lies in the run up to the war. It would seem that many of the same untruths are being dusted off for another go.
Is it enough to point to the lies this time around? What has to happen to derail the train? What will stop it with certainty? Bush and Cheney are on record saying that they don’t care what we think, or what the congress may do. They are on a mission and will not be deterred.
It seems to me that impeachment may be the only recourse, and even that may be too late. Are there any other options? I’m really grasping at straws, here.
Joe Wilson @ 13
Although I think Chuck Hagel and Chris Dodd did a pretty good job vis-a-vis with Joseph Lieberman on Meet the Press this morning.
Sheldon
WHY did you decide to write this book? Was it because of one thing or the sum of many things?
U.S. “Foreign Policy” since WWII has been quite consistent: wholesale rape, theft, and slaughter the world over on the largest imaginable scale.
It seems with Iraq, however, the chickens came home to root a tad earlier.
A. Citizen @ 30
Thanks. I think the lesson of our experience, quite apart from how stupid and mean the administration is, is that a citizen can, and must stand up to its government when that government is engaged in skullduggery. Our history is replete with the fights to preserve our rights against subversive regimes. This is just the latest.
mui @ 33
Senators, not pundits, but I agree. Chuck Hagel has been great on Iraq from the beginning.
The press was especially adept at hiding the anti-war movement from view. This was of particular import in that there were MASSIVE anti-war demos all over the place before the war started.
Gotta run. Have fun and hopefully we will get to see at least some of you here in DC in the next month or so.
NJR wrote, “Do you see any improvement, any movement toward curiosity being revived in our press, or will the reporters need to be replaced by attrition before we can see improvement?”
John Stauber and I used to joke that the biggest journalistic mystery in America was where they hid the mass grave after they executed all the investigative reporters. The run-up to the war was the biggest failure of journalism in America that I’ve seen in my life. The press has never been more compliant or jingoistic.
That’s changing somewhat, but I think the press is still lagging behind public opinion in its rejection of Bush administration rhetoric. I’m still seeing lots of headlines that characterize Bush’s excalation of the war as a “plan to end the violence in Iraq,” and last night CNN’s coverage was like flag-waving marathon about the need to support our troops.
Joe Wilson @ 36
Too often though Congresscritters are often acting like pundits, or is it demagoguery. Forgive the confusion.
I am glad you are here, ambassador.
Sheldon, this blame the victim meme is indeed in play, and obviously designed to insulate the architects of this invasion and occupation from responsibility.
I notice also in the book you outline, at the end, the “stabbed in the back” post hoc argument. Care to elaborate on that kind of rhetoric, and its history?
The press continually manufactured the picture of a “divided” nation. It wasn’t “divided” at all. There was next to no support for the war when it started and literally none today.
Sheldon Rampton @ 39
I do not think we’d be here, or that the blogosphere would have so much momentum, had the problem not been so bad. I think the downfall of one is definitely related to the interest people have in the other.
Here’s Lieberman, today, laying out the framework for the stabbed in the back argument:
Sheldon–have you read Rick MacArthur’s Second Front? If so, do you find parallels in the propaganda campaign of both White House and press leading up to Gulf War–as MacArthur describes it–and what went on leading up to the invasion?
Suzanne asked, “WHY did you decide to write this book? Was it because of one thing or the sum of many things?”
Two things: First, personal outrage at the disparity between the way the public discourse about Iraq focused on Americans and ignored the experience of Iraqis. With some notable exceptions (such as Anthony Shadid’s excellent Night Draws Near), American journalists treated the war as a stage upon which American soldiers acted and the Iraqis were just a backdrop. Even groups on the left, like Iraq Body Count, used a double standard in the way they talked about U.S. vs. Iraqi deaths. With regard to the U.S., every soldier’s death is counted and mourned. With Iraq, only CIVILIAN deaths get counted, and even those don’t get counted with any precision or seriousness.
I think there’s a serious problem here that goes deeper than the Bush administration: a long-standing tradition of American cultural isolationism, which combines in contradictory and harmful ways with our recent history of economic and military interventionism. The two trends have come together under Bush in the form of unilateralism — the idea that we can and should intervene aggressively in the rest of the world, and that simultaneously we don’t need to even consider the opinions or interests or desires even of our allies such as nations in Europe.
The result is that we’re writing heroic narratives about ourselves in our heads, while the rest of the world sees our behavior as anything but heroic. And we’re sending soldiers who never learned to speak even languages like French or German — let alone a word of Arabic — to try to control populations in cultures that they don’t begin to understand or care about. This is what leads to Abu Ghraib and all of the other disasters in this war, and although I see people now saying that the war was a mistake, I don’t see many people grappling with the underlying cultural attitudes that made the war possible.
Sheldon Rampton @
46
Just the opposite — a bunch of opportunitsts willing to exploit the biases inherent in those attitudes for their own political fortunes.
Pac,
Re the stabbed in the back argument: I think that’s the long-term trajectory of this, and progressives need to start anticipating and countering it now. When the Vietnam war ended, very few people thought that “we were winning the war until the liberals and the media stabbed us in the back.” Over time, that meme became a common revisionist history, thanks to incessant repetition by the conservative echo chamber. When the war in Iraq ends, the only people who think it ended because “we didn’t fight hard enough” will be the neocons themselves, but they’re going to spend the next decade trying to establish that as a dominant narrative, and we have to foretall them.
That’s the way we’ve ALWAYS behaved. It’s about us and no one else.
How many people did we slaughter during “shock and awe”?
Dos anyone even CARE to know?
Sheldon Rampton @ 46
Sheldon, I hope your marketing people are listening. This idea needs to be “sound-bited” and trumpeted throughout all media.
Very powerful statements, all too true.
Is this where the line begins to spit on Joe Lieberman and John McCain?
I apologize for not having read the book yet but one thing that I think was perhaps under appreciated in the run up to the war was Tony Blair’s support. I suspect a lot of people figured Blair was a realist even if Bush et al were delusional. Any opinions on this?
Sheldon, I have not read your book yet but how does the meme of “America is a GREAT Nation” and because we are GREAT we must be good ties into the propaganda about the Iraq war and the upcoming Iran war?
David Ehrenstein wrote, “There was next to no support for the war when it started and literally none today.”
I think that’s a bit oversimplistic. One of the points that John and I make in The Best War Ever is that any national crisis creates a “rally behind the leaders effect.” Opinion pollsters are very familiar with it. During the months leading up to the war, public opinion was generally reluctant to go along with it, but in the month just before the war began and during the first few months of it, opinion swung sharply in the direction of “support the president.”
I don’t think this means that everybody thought suddenly that the war was a good idea. More likely, it meant that they knew it was inevitable and felt that “now is not the best time to criticize, when our boys are in harm’s way.”
Politically, though, it translated into support for Bush.
This is the thing that drives me insane about the right wing crowd, especially people like Michael Ledeen (may he rest in peace). They seem to have formulated their views on foreign policy entirely on comic books and Star Wars. It’s very disturbing to me that such ignorant bastards are controlling the discourse in this country.
Brownandserve wrote, “I suspect a lot of people figured Blair was a realist even if Bush et al were delusional. Any opinions on this?”
I think you’re on to something. For a lot of people in the United States, England serves as a sort of emotional proxy for “the rest of the world.” The British are not Americans, but they speak English and we can kind of understand them, so when Blair supported the war, it enabled a lot of people (particularly the Fox News crowd) to imagine that this meant there was a lot more international support for the war than there actually was.
This writing of heroic warrior narratives about the self, with the blood of others existing only in the hypothetical, abstract sense, whereupon we solely possess agency and others function as objects for use in our internal dramas played out in real life. . . this is the special territory of little boys and adult sociopaths.
Europe has in many respects come to grips with its own potential to build a culture on precisely these narratives, and has experienced the fruits of these tragedies. Will it take such desruction and humiliation at home for us to do the same? Can these truths only be learned through deep trauma? Was Katrina but a foretaste of the karmic debt we’re racking up?
I don’t suppose that’s a question for anyone in particular, but the contrast of what Europe now comprehends, which we do not, is perhaps material for Sheldon to address, with regard to rhetoric and propaganda.
Late to the party again. [sigh] Missed Joe, too, wanted to ask if he could share any observations about Iran and the current sabre rattling.
Pach — too cool that you will cover voir dire! Thanks in advance, looking forward to reading your feedback!
Sheldon — thanks for your efforts in this book and for joining us. I’ll ask you about your thoughts in regards to Iran; are we seeing the same kind of run-up, in your opinion, on the part of the neo-cons in office, or are we seeing something altogether different. It’s rather like asking if this is Son of Best War Ever or Best War Ever – Phase II or Best War Ever Redux…
I’m sorry but this was something pimped by th press, bearing NO relation to reality whatsoever.
The systematic burial by the bought and paid for media whores of the exceedingly widespread anti-war movement is one of the most important stories of this debacle.
No one wants to be caught saying that they don’t “support the troops.”
Except me.
I don’t support tyhe trooops in any way shape or form. They’re a pack of fools and the sooner (and louder) this is said the better.
I will be 60 next month. I survived Vietnam because — being gay — I was considered far too immoral to be trained and shipped half way across the globe to kill perfect strangers. Being more of a sentimental sort back then I entertained the troops on the homefront.
Especially sailors.
Katymine wrote, “how does the meme of “America is a GREAT Nation” and because we are GREAT we must be good ties into the propaganda about the Iraq war and the upcoming Iran war?”
The idea that America is great and noble and our soldiers are too has acquired the status of a sort of sacred myth in our society. I don’t think that America is a uniquely evil nation, and soldiers aren’t fundamentally WORSE than other people, but they aren’t saints, yet there are strong cultural taboos about admitting that we are just a nation like any other and that our soldiers are not much different from the soldiers of other countries. This in turn means that it becomes very difficult for people who buy into these myths to imagine that anything in our own behavior or character is responsible for the mess in Iraq. When things go badly, therefore, we look for scapegoats: Blame the Iraqis, Blame Iran. Blame Syria. Blame the liberal media (which isn’t really American, after all).
Any support in a storm, eh?
Sorry, back to our scheduled show.
Yoo Hoo– over here!
We are a nation founded on rape, murder and theft on a massive scale that staggers the imagination.
Rayne asked whether our title for a book about a future invasion of Iran would be titled Son of Best War Ever.
Actually, John and were thinking we might title it The Second Best War Ever. ;)
Sheldon,
How is it we are not paying that much attention to the high mortality rate of Iraqis, but only American soldiers? I remember your book goes into that somewhat, in the “tomb of the unknown civilian.” But, what a media blackout on that, and there is that lancet study on causes of death. Are we all too afraid of the rabid right-wingers to talk about Lancet studies? Because so many of us do care about the welfare of our fellow human beings in Iraq. It almost seems like a taboo subject, and “unpatriotic:” to bring up the number of Iraqi dead (whch the right-wing equate with terrorists).
Looking forward to your book, Sheldon. I trust Noam Chomsky is cross-referenced.
Sheldon Rampton @ 54
I tend to assume my ideas are half baked (thus the moniker) so thanks for the comment. This raises and interesting possibility should Blair eventually recant. In the short term maybe we should try to get The Trial of Tony Blair onto the US airwaves.
Sheldon Rampton @ 59
Totally agree from the advantage point of being stationed in Greece in the late 70’s when Iran hostage situation occurred.
This Good == Great meme in my mind prevents strategic deplomacy that is soooo needed right now. So many American’s do not believe the current hatred against the policies of the USA are because of our countries past and current. If America is Good therefore the other country must be an axis of evil.
How can we crack that meme?
David Ehrenstein @ 66
I don’t seem Ol’Noam in the index.
Or wait . . .
Sheldon,
In your book did you try to address the administrations true motive for the invasion of Iraq? One would assume such a hypothesis would be rank speculation, barring a “deep throat” source. We know why we didn’t invade, namely every stated reason given.
What’s left? Oil, 2004 election, war-profits??
Sheldon Rampton @
64
I like it.
Mui wrote, “How is it we are not paying that much attention to the high mortality rate of Iraqis, but only American soldiers? I remember your book goes into that somewhat, in the “tomb of the unknown civilian.” But, what a media blackout on that, and there is that lancet study on causes of death. Are we all too afraid of the rabid right-wingers to talk about Lancet studies?”
I wrote a fairly long piece about the Lancet study, at the following URL:
http://www.prwatch.org/node/5339
What’s interesting to me is that some vitriolic attacks on the Lancet study came from liberal opponents of the war, like Fred Kaplan at Slate. I think there’s a certain type of liberal who tries to establish his “realist” bona fides by attacking anti-war “excesses.” In actuality, the Lancet study is a very credible, solid piece of research. I don’t think it’s the final word on the death count in Iraq, but it certainly deserves to be taken seriously, and it’s the best, mostly scientifically grounded information we have about the number of Iraqis who have died.
It’s interesting also that as soon as the Lancet studies came out, supporters of the war began carrying water for the Iraq Body Count figures, simply because they were lower estimates than the Lancet numbers — even though Iraq Body Count is an anti-war group.
Joe Wilson @ 36
I agree with you. It’s incumbent on each citizen to determine what they want from the government, whether it be a little or a lot, and speak out to make those who work in government aware of what is desired. This administration is way over the line in many areas…rule of law…privacy rights…corruption…dishonesty…and much much more but they are not the first to do this in our nation’s history. I remain confident, as I know you do, in our nations citizens demanding that the right thing be done. Further, I know that the citizenry will act to see that that ‘right thing’ does come to pass.
The 2006 mid-term elections are a harbinger of things to come.
And once the immediate concerns revolving around the Bush administration are dealt with we, the people, must keep pushing to make this nation the nation it should be.
Sheldon Rampton @ 72
Its pretty appalling. Now more than ever Iraqis are more likely to die of violent death. I look forward to reading your piece.
Sheldon, I wanted to ask you if you are aware of any of the other nefarious activities going on at Fort Bragg, and the media blackout about the place that has hosted the tremendous propaganda infrastructure of the Pentagon’s operations?
Isn’t that where Padilla has been held?
I found that part in the beginning of yor book, the very size of their propaganda operation, dwarfing in manpower and budget the major news networks combined, to be staggering.
By the way, Sheldon, if you find you have to do something silly like catch a plane, I want to thank you again for taking the time with us today, and for all your work. Thank John for us too, please.
Sheldon, your efforts to elucidate how we got here are unparalled. Vielen, Vielen Dank (much thanks).
But it’s getting worse… what do we do now?
David Ehrenstein wrote, “Looking forward to your book, Sheldon. I trust Noam Chomsky is cross-referenced.”
I assume that you’re making some sort of ironic quip here, but I don’t quite understand the point of the sarcasm. Years ago, some Marxist book reviewer criticized the first book that I wrote with John Stauber by calling it “Chomsky lite.” John and I actually thought that was a bit of a compliment.
With regard to Chomsky, I don’t think we quoted him at all in The Best War Ever. Actually, I have a video clip of Chomsky talking about Iraq in early 2002, shortly after the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Someone in the audience asked him if he thought an invasion of Iraq was in the works, and he answered something to the effect of, “No. The administration likes to win easy wars. They’re bullies, but they’re not stupid enough to get themselves into a big quagmire in Iraq.”
So, Chomsky was wrong. Nowadays, of course, people are saying the same thing about Iran. It’s a mess in IRAQ, but they’d never be stupid enough to invade IRAQ….and thus the cycle of violence continues.
Speaking of which…have you noticed how the Bush administration is using the phrase, “ending the cycle of violence” to describe what they’re trying to accomplish in Iraq? It’s as though Iraq is a big dysfunctional family where abused children become wifebeaters, and we’re the social workers trying to provide advice and therapy.
Glad to see american exceptionalism addressed so fully … it underlies “progressive” attitudes as well as rightwing ones.
At Long Last, Can We Please Start Counting the Dead? . . . which means that although 650,000 is their most likely estimate, the true number could be substantially lower or higher. Even so, the low end of this range is nearly 400,000, while the high end is nearly a million.
I am flabbergasted and ashamed that so little attention has been paid. Thanks for writing on this Sheldon.
Not sarcasm at all.
Not in any way shape or form.
The man has been telling the truth for decades and paying the price for doing so. But he doesn’t care.
There’s no place like Noam!
TRex — you are very generous with Ledeen, more kind than I can been even with his announced passing.
I’ve always thought he was malevolent to the core. While I do take with a grain of salt the fact that it is Lyndon Larouche I quote here, Larouche referred to Ledeen as a “universal fascist.” I think this is a spot-on explanation, have yet to find a better label.
His passing has conjured up a lot of tin-foil thoughts today; without his malefic presence, will the neo-cons really be able to organize as effectively in a dolchstasselegende against progressives?
edit(adder): And will the neo-cons be able to mount an effective assault on us to propel regime change in Iran? Ledeen was too close to the forged documents used to gin up the Iraq War; assuming he is well and truly gone, he can no longer do the same for Iraq. (And Judy Miller no longer has a solid puppetmaster in him, or a stage on which to play.)
Hoping that I am staying on topic, I would like to ask Sheldon as well as any commenters whether you have seen any good op-eds on Iraq today or recently, and if so, where?
Note to Jane:
Do you have any idea how many half-read books I have scattered through the house?? Now two more I gotta go fetch.
Yer killin’ me.
Oilfieldguy wrote, “In your book did you try to address the administrations true motive for the invasion of Iraq? … What’s left? Oil, 2004 election, war-profits?”
Does it matter? I imagine it was combination of thinking they could reshape the Middle East politically, with a desire to control Iraqi oil resources, with “Saddam tried to kill my daddy,” plus some displaced remorse from neoconservatives who supported Saddam in the 1980s and were trying to compensate for their past errors by making new ones in the opposite direction.
When you look at most wars in history, the people who start them imagine they’ll accomplish some political goal or that there is plunder to be won, but usually it doesn’t work out that way. Most wars end in mutual ruination for all nations involved. Whatever the reasons they THOUGHT justified the war, the Bush administration has almost certainly failed to ACHIEVE those goals.
It certainly has. It was apparent from day one that grabbing the oil (always the main objective IMO) wasn’t about to happen.
Pac…my flight doesn’t leave for another hour. Other than the fact that the airport wi-fi is pretty obnoxious, I can keep at this until either my fingers start to bleed or people get the hook. Were you planning to do something tonight also with Anatomy of Deceit?
Sheldon (64) — The Second Best War Ever.
I’ll put it in my tickler file to remember to watch for this one. Unfortunate, isn’t it, to have “job security” and an ever-growing reading list like this? [sigh]
Oh, Rayne, that’s actually a joke. Last week Ledeen announced his BREAKING PJ MEDIA SCOOP! That the Ayetollah Khemenei was dead. Then a day passed and another day and Mr. Khemenei was rude enough to disoblige Mr. Ledeen by not actually dying.
Ledeen reappeared, “Well, he’s VERY VERY near death!”
Still nothing.
72 hours later, Ledeen, “Well, I know he’s been VERY VERY sick! I know THAT for sure! He could be AS GOOD AS DEAD!”
So, that piece I linked to is satirist Jonathan Swift writing Ledeen’s obit. Tomorrow, I am sure he will update it. And then again the next day.
Sheldon Rampton @
61
Thank you for saying this – very unusual statement coming from an American. The mythology about the general wonderfulness of American soldiers results in some odd cognitive disonance on the left when it comes up against stories of rape/murder/torture etc. perpetrated by soldiers.
Neurophius wrote, “whether you have seen any good op-eds on Iraq today or recently, and if so, where?”
Good stuff is written about Iraq all the time. Read Greg Mitchell’s columns at Editor and Publisher. Or Juan Cole’s Informed Comment weblog. I also like reading HealingIraq.blogspot.com or asterism.blogspot.com for some actual Iraqi perspectives.
I think so. The argument put forth for Iraq is always prefaced with “regardless of why we are there…” is a subtle perversion of “we need to look forward” which is a way of painting any investigations as “sniping”.
Until there are criminal prosecutions and sentences, we will live under the Ford authorization to the claim, “If the President does it, it is not a crime.”
If there is no punishment, there is no deterence from future “adventures.” Motivation that is contrary to the stated reasons, goes a long way toward setting that stage, if proven.
Sheldon Rampton @ 86
There will be a post up at 8PM EST. Stay as long as you like!
You come across a lot of stories on the net. One, that I never saw verified, was that in the beginning of the war, during a major sand storm, a secret hauling mission was friendly-fired upon and that many troops got sick and or died in the aftermath. It was allegedly a letter home from one of these troops.
I also read that Brewster Jennings had intercepted WMD’s from across the Syrian border, and that this also was an attempt to plant the evidence promised by the adminstration.
Was exposing Plame and her cover was more than retaliation for Joe Wilson, but to stop her company from doing their job of defending the world from WMD.
Does Sheldon, or anyone have any good info on these stories?
Just commented at the end of Watertiger’s Snark, but maybe this isn’t OT for this thread after all.
While I disagree with the “blame it all on the Iraqis” meme, it still important to remember that Maliki is feckless, sectarian, and not up to the job. Part of that is due to just who he is, part to the weak government prescribed by a constitution that we heavily influenced, part to a deep well of sectarian resentment now unleashed, part to the absence of an effective army and police (even a small one after 4 years, another fact in which we played a determining role), and part to ongoing meddling by us and the dependency that has produced.
Pachacutec @ 93
Please!
Fern wrote, “The mythology about the general wonderfulness of American soldiers results in some odd cognitive disonance on the left.”
American exceptionalism actually cuts both ways. If we’re not imagining that America is infinitely better than the rest of the world, we’re imagining that it’s infinitely WORSE. As a case in point in this very thread, David Ehrenstein wrote awhile back that “We are a nation founded on rape, murder and theft on a massive scale that staggers the imagination.” I don’t dispute his point, but I also don’t see how that makes America qualitatively different from, say, France or Germany or Russia or a long list of other nation-states. Most of the world’s nations were founded on violence and baptized in blood. Over time, some of them have gotten a little more civilized, and defeat in war is often a great civilizer. Japan was a pretty bloodthirsty place before it lost the Second World War. The defeat in Vietnam actually helped civilize the United States for awhile, and if we’re really, really lucky, maybe the mess in Iraq will help consolidate the lesson.
I look forward to reading your book Sheldon. In your opinion, early on in the war, what mission was accomplished and why the banner?
Oilfieldguy wrote that it’s important to know the “real reason” why Bush invaded Iraq because “until there are criminal prosecutions and sentences, we will live under the Ford authorization to the claim, ‘If the President does it, it is not a crime.’”
Interesting point, but I don’t think that we need some special insight into Bush’s MOTIVES to determine whether he has committed crimes. If someone rapes a woman, does it matter whether he did it because he was horny, or because he was trying to work out his anger at his mother? A crime is a crime, regardless of motive (unless, of course, you can establish that the perpetrator suffered from a mental defect that made it impossible to conform to the law — which actually may be Bush’s best defense).
Have my book in hand. Sheldon has a description of how thousands of Iraqi soldiers were buried alive by “plows mounted on Abrams battle tanks.” This was the gulf war. Media blackout on that one. 20,000-35,000 soldiers killed (buried alive?)
I guess I am seeing Bush I and Bush II parallels. It is outrageous that we Americans don’t see the true cost of the war.
Is there anyway to turn this media blackout around? I think Sheldon you mention how in previous wars (Civil War) carnage was well documented. Why are we so not-informed, the American public?
I’ll be back for another book club soon. This is a wonderful thread… and my first time to book club.
I followed Plamegate closely here at Firedoglake, National Journal, NYT, WaPo and Truthout. What I learned helped me recognize the spin cycle, a tour de force, of those powerful interests trying to minimize the impact of the event, bfuscating, discred facts reported as the story developed, and effectively recasting the criminal nature of it as a case of one good man, who misremembered because he was so busy protecting the nation.
The only bright star is the prosecutor and the persistence of the reporters who’ve doggedly pursued the truth.
1.What are the chances that the trial will produce additional subpeonas or indictments and will Cheney be found responsible for an illegal role in this clusterf*ck?
2.Will the coverage of the trial reignite national interest in examing the con job that took us to war? What is happening with the Senate Intelligence Committee?
3.How can this trial serve the interests and/or thwart the interests of former CIA NOC agent Plame in her civil suit?
Fern @ 90
There will always be some level of criminality in the military as long as there is criminality in the civil society. Events like Abu Ghraib and the murders in Haditha should have been a wake up call that something else was going on, instead they were swept under the rug as a few bad apples. Despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary, they are still largely portrayed that way. I see them as more symptomatic of a rotten mission. Such a mission is one where no one is sure what the mission is or what the rules for it are. Without direction, clear oversight, strict rules of engagement, and an understandable goal, bad things are likely to happen and even become endemic. When a blind eye is turned to these or even a quiet sanctioning of them is made, all hell breaks loose. There are bad apples in Iraq. There are a lot more in Washington and it is there that the real responsibility lies.
Sheldon:
how much of the incentive to go to war was to protect our oil supply? At the beginning of the war, we were deceived to believe that Iraqis would be the owners of the oil and use the revenue from the sale of the oil to finance the reconstruction of their country. Now we don’t even pretend any more that we want the Iraqis to own the oil, we want to grab 75% of the oil revenues for our multinational oilcompanies.
Mui makes an interesting comment “Is there anyway to turn this media blackout around? I think Sheldon you mention how in previous wars (Civil War) carnage was well documented. Why are we so not-informed, the American public? ” Sheldon, is it possible that they actually do count numbers at the Pentagon???
ccmask wrote, “In your opinion, early on in the war, what mission was accomplished and why the banner?”
I think that episode is actually a great example of how thoroughly the Bush administration believed its own propaganda. Bush probably thought the mission WAS accomplished, and his advisors though the the aircraft landing footage would be great clips to use during his re-election campaign.
One of the themes that John and I keep encountering when we study propaganda is that the propagandists end up believing their own bullshit more deeply than the audiences they try to indoctrinate. It may seem paradoxical, but it’s a common phenomenon, and it explains a lot about how they end up eventually destroying themselves. Hitler, for example, probably believed his own propaganda about what a great military genius he was. There’s an Austrian journalist who commented at the end of the First World War that nations are led into war when “politicians lie to journalists and then believe those lies when they see them in print.” It’s uncanny how accurate those words are as an explanation of what happened with the Bush administration’s campaign for war with Iraq.
Thanks :))
Sheldon: Who can ever forget the “Whatever it Takes” photo shopped picture of the troops featured in a DailyKos diary.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/27/22442/878
Titanyum wrote, “how much of the incentive to go to war was to protect our oil supply?” I don’t think it’s much of a secret that people (and not just Bush administration insiders) thought the war would somehow help America consolidate control of Middle East oil. Some supporters of the war talked openly about the idea that war with Iraq would mean cheaper oil and an economic boon.
You might want to watch “The War Tapes,” a fascinating documentary about Iraq that was filmed by U.S. soldiers themselves. At the end of the film (after they’re back in the states), several of them discuss the reasons why they thought the war was fought, and I think all of them say that they thing the war was for oil. More interesting still, some of them seem to think that’s a GOOD thing. Here are a couple of actual verbatim quotes:
You can deplore those attitudes from a moral point of view, but you have to recognize that they exist. And these two soldiers aren’t at all unique. You can walk into any bar in America and probably find someone sitting on a barstool who has a similar opinion.
David Ehrenstein @ 42
Polls at the start of the war showed substantial support for the war. The trouble was that most folks who supported it at the time had no idea how much they had been misled and lied to by the government. When you subtract the people who wouldn’t have supported the war had they known the truth, the polls would have looked much as they do today, I suspect.
Hugh said: “There will always be some level of criminality in the military as long as there is criminality in the civil society.”
Now here is what interests me – is someone who sort of likes the idea of killing people more likely to become a soldier or an accountant? Is someone who likes to have control over others more likely to become a prison guard or a hairdresser? How do these kinds of personal inclinations affect the overall make-up and organizational culture of an organization? And the kinds of actions that are acceptable within that culture?
Vanity comment here–I will buy, read, and follow the book’s exposition and her posts and always am enlightened and provoked to thoughts by the latter–well wishes.
Thanks for such a great site for this combination and best wishes on your coverage of the trial. Also, thank you for such wonderful guest bloggers–I think at some point I stopped thinking of them as guests.
Sheldon, my boyfriend works in the TeeVee industry working as a TV engineer doing NBA for several years. During 2004, many times one of the games would have a Bush event before, during or after one of the games while the crew was setting up for the game, the advance team made their life hell. But the point of the shaggy dog story is that there were very clear instructions the Bush crew had to follow. NO cables or equipment would be in the path that he would walk. All cables were flown overhead.
The crowd would be a specified number of feet behind him (around 15ft) but they use TV camera angles to make it look like they are closer. They have their own drapes to cover empty seats.
The fact that the American President only speaks at handpicked crowds, that no everyday citizens have access to our employee is a big issue with me. My tax dollars are paying for his events but I will never have access.
Speaking of sitting in bars…about 15 years ago, a friend of mine from college and I walked into a bar and happened to sit down next to a guy who told us that he was out partying with his friends because it was his last day of civilian life before joining the army. I asked why he signed up, and he said, “To tell you the truth, I really want to know what it feels like to kill another human being. I know that’s wrong, but I want to experience it.”
That’s a true story. I wouldn’t assume that all soldiers think that way, but I’m sure he’s not the only one. For some it’s a way to get job training or escape a dead-end, minimum wage job. (For example, read My War an Iraq war memoir by Colby Buzzell.) For other’s it’s adventure. Others genuinely think they’re protecting America. And for some, it’s a way to do things that they wouldn’t be allowed to do as civilians.
Bad analogy. No such thing as a “good rape.” And motives are automatically presumed. Same as bank robberies. Some wars are neccesary, and some are elective. I don’t mean to belabor the point, I just wasn’t sure if you addressed it in your book.
I’m just curious about the true motive, not obsessed with it or anything.
Anyway…it’s getting close to boarding time for my flight, so I should sign off. Thanks again to having me. I had a great time!
Thank you Sheldon…. off to do my errands.
Thank you, Sheldon. You’ve been a fantastic and informative guest.
Buy the book, folks!
Mucho thanks Sheldon.
I’ve been here a while and got distracted from my question by all the previous Q&A. A good thing for the thread, IMO.
Hi Sheldon,
In 2003, Naomi Klein wrote an article for the Nation about the illegalities perpetrated by this Admin and the CPA when they disbanded the Iraqi government and privatized the countries assets (aside from illegally invading a sovereign country). I noticed early on that the Bush Admin withdrew from the ICC. Did they think that would give them immunity from prosecution? Or what? Thoughts, please.
BTW: Thanks so much for taking the time to do this.
I am at a loss to discover why anyone would want to join the military these days. As to the argument about getting out of poverty, getting an education or whatever, these things will not count for much if one is dead. And I won’t even get into the whys of anyone wanting to serve under our President. This is an unjust war.
Thanks for stopping by Sheldon, very informative. Now I gotta go and buy two more books!
perhaps, but that does not make the military — or rather the concept of a military — bad or irrelevant. The more important question from my point of view is whether combatant command authority is functional/integral and that it works in a manner consistent with laws and rules governing military conduct. If soldiers routinely disobey the orders of their superiors to murder and torture, then command authority is ineffective, and there is a problem. Similar, if command authority is exercised in such a way so as to facilitate, condone or even mandate torture and murder, then there is an even bigger problem. If a president and his cronies systematically subvert command authority to cause soldiers to torture and murder or to require soldiers to turn their backs while secret policemen completely outside the chain of command torture and murder the enemy or innocent bystanders, then we have a fundamental problem. Unfortunately, the latter is precisely what’s going on here.
Fern @ 111
I was just thinking that perhaps Congress should just photo shop Bush his troops.
I don’t have this book, but Sheldon’s answers and comments here have convinced me to buy it.
Thanks for stopping by, Sheldon. Good luck with the book. It should be a brisk seller.
Thank you Sheldon. It’s been an interesting conversation and I look forward to reading the book.
Swopa @ 125
I fear some people see the Tom Tomorrow cartoon covers on their books and think the content is somehow pedestrian or mundane, when it’s anything but. Of course, Tom himself, and his works, are exceedingly sharp and insightful, but nevertheless, cartoon covers can connote a certain lack of heft.
Pachacutec @ 127
Damn,
yer tellin’ me it isn’t a cartoon book??
I like pitchers! Specially funny ones!
OFG, you don’t want to know what “pitchers” is slang for, in some circles.
But then, you’re a trucker: maybe you already know. In which case, per your comment, TMI!
Pachacutec @ 130
WOOPS! (damn them double entendres)
“There will always be some level of criminality”
I’d argue that discipline and standards of behavior are more explicitly defined and more closely monitored in the military than in general society.
When orders came down to torture captives and obtain intelligence is when the wheels began to fall off.
Sheldon Rampton @ 46
Wow, you expressed this so beautifully and succinctly. I have long been troubled by this national phenomenon. The obvious potential for it to repeat itself to the detriment of all nations, including our own, is fed by these wrong attitudes not being challenged by the msm. If we spent a small fraction of what we spend on the “war on terror” instead on cultural enlightenment (not only about other cultures, but with an emphasis on our own as well), we’d be much better off and perhaps learn to play well with others.
Thank you for your insight.
The repeat of the propaganda, with no shame and no institutional memory, is difficult to understand.
The prospect of war against Iran is so horrible I can hardly breathe.
What Senator Webb [I just love saying that] has to say about Iraq, military service, and going to war against Iran without consulting Congress.
He calls Iraq “invasion and occupation.”
What a world.
Marcy Wheeler comin’, any second now. . .
Sheldon Rampton @ 78
Assume this is invade IRAN.
By breaking the door down and shooting the family. Haditha anyone?
TRex @ 89
He isn’t dead til we get that wooden stake aimed just right.
Oh flip. I had to drop off and missed so much fun.
TRex — thanks for letting me in on the joke. Here and I thought it was rather ironic that Ledeen died so soon after the Ayatollah dead/dying/so-sick/sick/sniffle crap…joke’s on me.
But unfortunately, Iraq and Iran and Ledeen’s contribution are not jokes. [sigh]
egregious — we’re going to have to do more than a stake, yes?
- Silver bullet
- Wooden stake in the chest (no heart)
- Cut off the head
- Stuff garlic in the mouth cavity (that’s a lot of garlic)
- Bury the head at the opposite end of the earth
- Burn the body and spread the ashes
For starters.
New Iraq Commander Spoke Up for Judith Miller
The military commander President Bush is counting on to rescue Iraq from chaos, Lieutenant General David Petraeus, once came to the defense of an American reporter caught up in one of Washington’s most intense legal battles.
In 2005, when Judith Miller of the New York Times was facing the possibility of jail for refusing to name one of her sources in front of a grand jury, General Petraeus wrote to a federal judge to discourage him from imprisoning her.
http://www.nysun.com/article/46518
new thread above w/ emptywheel
oops, wrong thread!!