![]()
From the moment the Supreme Court installed George W. Bush as President, it was laughably evident that America was being systematically looted down to the last can of Who-hash, but until Sept. 11, we didn’t realize that the rest of the planet was next. A distracted twelve year old watching the Axis of Evil speech could have seen that something was dreadfully amiss, and yet the pancaked halfwits “covering” it for us acted as though that surreal charade was perfectly normal.
Long before Andy Card mansplained that “from a marketing standpoint, you don’t roll out new products in August,” what was painfully obvious was that the Iraq War was being waged for several quite tangible reasons that were widely reported at the time. First and foremost were Bush’s personal reasons: the family grudge against Saddam and that danged floor with Daddy on it (since destroyed, natch), his desire to divide Democrats and thus win the 2002 midterms and reelection in 2004, and most damningly, his stated longing to be seen as a “War President,” with all the even bigger looting opportunities that would undoubtedly entail.
Secondly, the extreme (and politically damaging) secrecy surrounding Cheney’s energy plan essentially confirmed its unmentionable nefariousness, but since it did exempt fracking from Clean Water Act regulations, resulting in poisoned aquifers, earthquakes, and flammable taps, why wouldn’t it also involve knocking over an oil-rich country as though it were a convenience store to steal its oil? The guy had just (barely) left Halliburton, of all things; this glaring conflict could have been explained to toddlers with a felt board.
But the worst part, which still plagues us today, is the way “War,” no matter how contrived and silly, silences critics by turning them into traitors, thus enabling all sorts of time-honored imperial mischief. And boy, have we seen a lot of that. Secrecy, torture, indefinite detention, punitive (and often fabricated) prosecutions, wiretapping, racial profiling, which along with the usual graft and corruption, are the inevitable (and desired) results of putting a country, so speciously, on “War” footing.
Instead of these much more plausible and documented reasons for the war, we talked, endlessly, about mythical Mushroom Clouds, Mobile Chemical Weapons labs, and Rape Rooms (they’d already used the babies and incubators story last time, so they had to get creative and make it sexier…), and pretty much anyone in the media who wanted to talk about known facts, rather than fluctuating phantasmagoria, was tossed off TV or reluctantly run on page 17.
As an (intermittently) sentient liberal, I spent those dizzying months in a fog. Having just attended the largest peace rally in the country here in Portland, which like the many others worldwide might as well not have happened, for all the effect they had, I found myself in West LA, arguing with a drearily typical war cheerleader. After meticulously shooting down the absurd claims of Colin, Condi, et al one by one, I still found myself on the”losing” end of the argument when my opponent said, simply, “Well, they know more than we do.”
He was right, of course, but certainly not in the way he intended. Sure, I could pore over three newspapers a day and spend a disturbing amount of time online, and yet never know as much as they knew. They knew they could rely on a crooked judiciary to codify their crimes in law. They knew that a compliant and more importantly, complicit media would eagerly provide them with a mutually beneficial narrative to explain the whole sordid affair away when the time came. They knew that no one involved would ever pay the slightest price for the thousands dead and wounded or the trillions squandered.
I did not know any of this then, but I do know it now. Yet unlike Condi, I’m not so foolishly audacious as to say, “no one could have predicted” what would happen. George Orwell, and many other before and since, predicted it with humbling accuracy. Maybe Condi was too busy with her Chopin to read him, but I seriously doubt it.
They may have lost the war, but ten years later, it’s clear that they won the battle. Seems they are better at predictions than previously claimed.
U.S. Navy photo by Photographer’s Mate 3rd Class Tyler J. Clements



43 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
*heh* Luv that iconic pic of Commander Codpiece, Hag…! ;-)
Hey Hag!
And now we’re told by the Prince of Darkness, Richard Perle, that it’s somehow ‘unreasonable’ to ask if the Iraq War was worth it. The audacity, it burns.
Richard Perle should be in prison.
You can credit our lovely and vivacious FDL editor for that. All I said was “something from Mission Accomplished with basket displayed,” and it appeared like magic.
That would have been a serious vomit moment, but because I drink so much it was only a more than usually smelly burp. I was happy not believing in Hell until I met these guys.
What’s scary is, you wouldn’t have needed to predict or read George Orwell or any other booksellers, because the principals wrote it all down in a major document. The Statement of Principles of the PNAC (Project for a New American Century) was written June 3, 1997. The American people have been allowing this to happen for way too long, either out of disbelief, apathy, whatever; we were not paying enough attention. Democracy, like marriage, requires work and communications. Too much of our communications are $. Great post, cocktailhag.
All these PNAC signatories need to be facing the Docket…! 8-(
Ya know, I didn’t toss in PNAC out of a combination of Alzheimers and typing fatigue, but in retrospect I almost didn’t have to. Even without such damning documents, a case can be easily built against such heinous idiocy.
More than any other thing, this foolish war showed that the US government doesn’t listen to its citizens. Among the pundit class there are these discussions of what went wrong, like this one at The New Republic, and there isn’t one of them that doesn’t claim that the war was debated openly and freely. Not one of them recognizes that those debates were phony. The Bush administration was set on war, and it just ignored the overwhelming opposition of us citizens. The pretense of pubic discourse just made the whole thing more awful for all us anti-war people.
Now they know they don’t have to listen to us, and they aren’t. We have no role in government. Too many of our fellow citizens are lost in a haze of American exceptionalism and deep interest in People Magazine.
I don’t want to appear dense or ill-informed, but what are we referring to here?
Remember the good old days, when they “hated us for our freedoms?”
Well, they must love us now. It’s been an almost unprecedentedly horrifying decade; and I only wish it were the last of that sort.
But I doubt it, especially at the rate we’re going.
wonderful post hag!
Is that a photoshopped photo, or was Bush really greeted on the flight deck of the Abraham Lincoln by the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles?
After his “victory” in the first Gulf War, Saddasm put in a gorgeous, tessellated mosaic floor in one of his oh-so-tasteful buildings that was a likeness of Bush the Elder. Thus, a lot of naughty Ay-rabs got to give him the daily shoe treatment each day. This, obviously, could not stand. And when you’re the leader of the free world, nobody disses your Daddy.
That is, if you’re Republican.
I didn’t get that reference, either. Hope Hag will come back and inform us.
Okay, got it!
Ah, thank you.
Did the mosaic get destroyed? Did the MSM report on that as the ‘war’ progressed?
I had never heard the story about the floor, either. All I recall was, “And he tried to kill my Dad!” whined as only C-Plus Augustus could whine.
Here’s the link:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,83891,00.html
sweet thanks hag
The funny thing is that at the end of the article, even Fox has a hard time believing the whole thing wasn’t personal.
I’ve always believed that Bush the Lesser was easily persuaded by the Cheney/Rumsfeld Gang of Thugs because Bush the Lesser could be led to believe he could show his daddy just how tough he was. Family vengeance, yes, but also the wayward fuckup son showing up his patrician dad and nasty mother.
Tis a shame the Iraqi had missed… Protester hurls shoes at Paul Bremer, former US envoy to Iraq… I so do hope a whole bunch of foreign itineraries are subsequently curbed…! ;-)
Because of that golden moment, I established a whole category on my blog, “thrown shoes.” Needless to say, I use it all the time.
Just in from the environmental-development wars and, as an added bonus, the effort to steal our public utility. It was really excessive today with two seriously egregious issues at tonight’s city council meeting. Got slight delays on both to do studies. So we bought a little time. I spoke on one issue and donated my time for the other. I’ve been at city hall now for 3 days in meetings with council members and their aides.
Well, this weekend is a street band festival with lots of street theater. I’ll get to lead the request-donations-for-the-bands team and play all weekend. It is a fantastic event.
Lucky I don’t own a tv or listen to much radio. I got just a wiff of the WAR Inc cheerleading over “celebrating” the 10 th anniv of Dick Cheney ripping us all off via a ginned up War on Iraq. I was at the airport where it’s like orwell’s 1984. Big Bro TV propoganda is neigh on inescapable. Some C&W idiot was yodeling some treacle about the troops & then begging for donations to help the Vets. Un-effen-believable.
And, thank you very much for your wonderful post. Great to come home to.
I always thought it was mainly about Oil. Black Gold. Texas Tea. And Dick Cheney stuffing his greedy piggy pockets as fast as possible.
Oh yeah! That mosaic on the floor. Heh. I always liked that touch! Nearly as good as the shoe tossed at Dumbo the W.
Speaking of Iraqi oil… whatever happened with that? I do recall rigs being erected ASAP after the troops got in. Allegedly the oil was supposed to help pay for this boondoggle. Anyone know who’s running the oil wells & siphoning off the profits?
Only the neocons wanted the oil so they could break OPEC’s stranglehold and give the Israel-hating Saudis the finger.
The adults in the room (Exxon, Shell, etc), however, wanted it kept in the ground because the less oil there is available the higher the profits.
I remember seeing Bush on tv telling the Iraqi people not to set the oil on fire which, at the time, struck me as stupid because it seemed like the best way to remind them to set the oil on fire.
Later, after reading Greg Palast’s Armed Madhouse, I became certain that that is exactly what he was doing:
When word got out that Bremer waa about to privatize Iraqi oil, Philip Carrol, former CEO of Shell Oil USA (with no official authority in Iraq) stopped by DC and then flew on a C-17 cargo airship (i.e., with military escort) to Iraq where he told Bremer, “No”.
was about
Good comment masaccio … concur …thank you
I want to elaborate on the ease of hammering the GOPs as we observe this 10 year Iraq Debacle mark and the role of the Ds in how this all unreeled.
Hammering on Bush and Cheney Inc. was seldom / never a difficult exercise in political hammer wielding being it was so plain to see these guys and the guys they led or fronted for were throwbacks to 19th century USA practices of what happens to those who goy/get in WashingtonDC’s / American Empire’s way.
Imagine if D zealots had hammered on Obama post 2008 in same measure(s) what Ds could have caused Barack Obama to reconsider and recalculate — I am all for hammering on USian national politicians — GOP and D alike.
But it was not just G.W.Bush and R.B.Cheney and the GOPs in on this Lets Attack Iraq! Plan back in 2002 leading up to March 2003 tho was it?
Plenty of Democrats were in on the Attack Iraq! party too.
In particular Ds like Hillary Clinton who could have used her position as a U.S.Senator to throw lots of light,ongoing inquiry and to place a good portion of political peril in front of Bush and Cheney. Hillary Clinton did not. Diane Feinstein did not. Harry Reid did not. Profiles in Courage? Hard to find any amongst Opposition Ds back in 2002 then or now.
By late 2006 Nancy Pelosi — another D — told USians the Ds needed more Ds in WashingtonDC to confront Bush and Cheney. So USians elected more Ds.
What did Nancy Pelosi do in 2007? Nancy Pelosi took/kept impeachment off the table.
In 2008 Hillary Clinton ran to be the D Party POTUS candidate. I do not recall Hillary Clinton having said much about indicting War Criminal G.W.Bush.
Post 2008 when Hillary Clinton became Barack Obama’s SoS did Hillary Clinton come out in public and demonstrate any disagreement with Barack Obama about not going after Bush and Cheney?– the Obama Not Looking Back Concept? Did SoS Clinton come out against killing innocents with Killer-Drones?
Has Hillary Clinton ever indicated it was a mistake to attack Libya?
Where is Hillary Clinton on War Mongering/War Crimes?
During the 1990′s Hillary Clinton often was seen with then SoS Madeleine Albright who very knowably has claimed killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis was “worth it” — Hillary Clinton has now been a SoS as well — Hillary Clinton who did not work to detour/halt Bush/Cheney also seemed indifferent to what Madeleine Albright appeared comfortable in public stating about dead Iraqis being worth American Empire success.
Pounding on the GOPs here at FDL is considered sporting and surely it is easy to do. But as we USians observe this 10 year mark since Bush and Cheney led our nation to attack Iraq and inflict/impose terrible and brutal events on the Iraqi people lets try to keep the R vs. D stuff on the up and up.
No doubt Bush and Cheney got away with a lot of BS but Hillary Clinton was there then and now appears set to run for the WH in 2016.
Lets keep the record in the open as to who let who do what. Then. Now.
All quite correct & I hope FDL brings all this up when HRC runs in 2016. Goes for any other D enabler who runs.
Let’s not forget Bill Clinton who provided Bush-Cheney cover saying to anti war critics not so fast, Bush may have something here. For a guy who had just left office and presumably knew what was going on that assist was invaluable to the pro war effort.
Cocktailhag, Great piece, esp. between the lines. Not aboout W’s daddy. He doesn’t even like his daddy, but about $$$, the size of which is privately held empire. Who were the winners $$$ and otherwise? Saudi’s and Isreal get rid of Sadamn and a million arabs or so, then there’s the war profiteers. All the PNAC members(wishing for another Pearl Harbor)knew what to invest in, Bush empire enhanced. Cheney and Rumsfeld had there chance at empire…It was after all, their “due.” JFK. Blown away. What else do I have to say. Redux.
You know I hate George W like crotch rot, but I was impressed how he zigged and zagged out of the way of that hurled shoe(s). Maybe that Arab protestor should have fed him a pretzel instead
FWIW I tore up my D party membership a long time ago for reasons you elaborate. FDL does lean D supportive but not do much anymore. Plenty who comment feel exactly as you do. That said, this week has been one of unending fapping in the propaganda media about the frickin 10th Anniv of how Bushco lied us into a dirty big WAR inc. loads of skeevy Bushco creeps slithering out from under rocks to parsel tongue about why they were right or something. Hence appropriate to chuck some more shoes at those bastards.
Thanks. Makes sense but didn’t have that info. Gradually the propaganda media just stopped talking about Iraqi oil which was allegedly going to “pay” for “bringing Democracy to Iraq.”.
I have conservative friends who used to think they were so clever by getting in my face about how Team USA was right to go to Iraq to “take” their oil cuz “we need it.” thought they were so smart. I keep asking: so where’s OUR Iraqi “oil dividend”??? You NeoCons got what you say you wanted & needed. Why are we paying more than ever for gas? Who got conned in this game? You or me?? No answer.
Or a mortar.
Good stuff, wish I could have been there.
There’s another reason why Bush invaded Iraq, which I have stated many times on this site and others, but nobody seems to have paid attention or addressed it:
Remember during the first Gulf war, Desert Storm, when Saddam retaliated by shooting Scud missiles into Israel? That was seen as a grave threat to Israel’s security — which it was — so they wanted Saddam’s regime removed. They were disappointed that George H.W. Bush didn’t invade to get rid of Saddam, and they lobbied the rest of the neocons to get it done the next time.
The invasion of Iraq was planned well in advance, along with 9/11 and a wider annexation of the other “unfriendly” Arab countries in the region. This whole scheme was just waiting for a Republican president to fulfill the plan, and George W. Bush was installed to enable it to go forward.
BTW regime change in Iran is also part of the plan.
… good comment onitgoes … the last sentence easily gets a X 10 … :-)
With Bush Clan lining up Jeb B. with a likely 2016 WH bid we ain’t done with Bush Inc. as yet … too bad B.H.Obama did not put G.W.Bush in the docket … but Obama was/is ObamaBush so not going to see that happening.
H.Clinton and hubby WJ not good Ds and I am not glad to see the Clintons still seeking to be in politics in any shape and way but watching H.Clinton likely contaminate 2016 WH election will not be pleasant.
The Clintons sold out common USians back in 1990′s too many times … the Clintons should be seeing some big political blowback(s) and shut-outs.
Politically the Clintons as Ds and as politicians sold out too much too many times… done with them both…be gone Clintons.