Candidates: Come Clean About Iraq
WASHINGTON — Thinking of his legacy, President Bush says he views himself as a “peacemaker” but he at the same time he acknowledges that some may see him as a “warmonger.”
The president — who launched an unprovoked war against Iraq in 2003 — had previously said he wanted to be known as a “war president.”
That is more likely since the wars he initiated against Iraq and Afghanistan have gone on longer than World War II — and there is no end in sight.
The president made the “peacemaker” remarks in an interview with ABC-TV’s “Night Line” as he was winding up his recent journey to the Middle East.
Bush acknowledged there was widespread skepticism about him in the volatile region, saying that his detractors had portrayed him as wanting “to fight Muslims.”
“I’m sure people view me as a warmonger — and I view myself as a peacemaker,” Bush said. “They view me as so pro-Israeli (that) I can’t be open-minded about Palestinian peace…You just have to fight through the stereotypes by actions.”
Meantime, war is too dangerous to be left to the generals and admirals who have become more outspoken about their view that a prolonged occupation of Iraq is in the future, but probably with less than the current 160,000 U.S. troops there now.
The U.S. commanders are talking about staying the course for another decade, despite public opinion polls showing that the American people want out of Iraq.
Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the second ranking Army commander in Iraq, said Iraq could require a U.S. military presence for many years to support combat operations
Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman if the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters that the joint chiefs will come up with an assessment about security requirements — and the strain of multiple tours and the need for troops to be deployed elsewhere.
Despite the daily violence, Bush still speaks of “winning” the war.
How long are Americans willing to sacrifice the lives of young American men and women in a country that sees us as a foreign “enemy.”
The war was based on falsehoods. That alone should have aroused the American people to recall the history of its participation in the equally unpopular and devastating Vietnam War.
But without a military draft — and I’m glad there is none — the war only touches the families who have members who volunteer to fight and especially the families who have lost loved ones.
Congress should keep Bush from making commitments concerning Iraq that could tie the hands of his successor and trap the next president in his pointless war.
In response to my question, deputy White House press secretary Tony Fratto said Bush had not signed any documents to keep the war going, but he added that work is underway on an agreement “to cement” the U.S. relationship with Iraq.
So that there will be no misunderstanding, it’s time for all the presidential candidates to take a stand on pulling out of Iraq.
It’s not a problem with the Republican candidates who are foursquare behind Bush’s policies, especially Sen. John McCain of Arizona who foresees a long war, stretching over decades. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani is also pro-war with a staff of hawkish advisers.
The two Democratic frontrunners — Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama — should fish or cut bait.
Surely, we have a right to know where they stand on the war that has caused so much human suffering and is draining the national treasury.
They can’t stand on the sidelines. They should not be sucked into that Karl Rove brand of baloney that those who call for a pull out to cut our losses are not supporting the troops.
The lawmakers can fund the troops for an orderly withdrawal and bring them home, or perhaps turn over peacekeeping to an international force.
Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina — also a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination — would have the U.S. leave Iraq in 10 months if he becomes president.
Voters should know what a new president is ready to do about Iraq.
Helen Thomas is a columnist for Hearst Newspapers. E-mail: helent@hearstdc.com.
© 2008 Hearst Newspapers.
A vision of the world without military keynsianism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wnq6cD5jk1Q
I look at it this way, Clinton is more of the same. Or at least too similar to Bush in her war rhetoric. Slow to catch on to what most Americans want. Then too, I know once both Clinton’s are in the White House, we are going to be distracted by the news that is going to be dredged up about Bill’s personal affairs. I don’t really want to see Bill in the White House under any conditions. He was not that great to begin with. Hillary is even less appealing… and there is all that baggage. I’m sure, if elected, Fox will track down Monica Lewinski and ask her for a comment. Just because the eventually stopped attacking Bill (years) after he was out of office doesn’t mean they won’t just pick it back up. Will the American public vote for Clinton in the numbers required to overcome the election rigging the Republicans are currently planning and actively engaged in? For that matter, can Barack get enough votes to beat McCain? Racism still exists in the South… and we have to have a clear winner in this next election. — In my mind, John Edwards is the only candidate that would garner votes from the left and right. (Don’t kid yourself Hillary, for all your war mongering, conservatives are still not going to vote for you.) Edwards has a comfortable appeal in the south. If you look at polls, he can beat any Republican candidate. Hillary and Barack don’t have quite that spread. And once the corporate media slime machine starts, do you really want to hear about Barack’s middle name? Or where Bill spent the night?
Let Clinton and Obama dance around the war issues. Let them drag their feet and follow Edwards plan in some small way. They are unlikely to win the election and that’s why corporate media is pushing them on us. Corporations know that “their” candidate can beat Clinton or Obama with the spin and dirt the media will throw their way.
Let’s put up a candidate that has the best choice of winning. And at the same time, the only viable candidate with the best war plan, best healthcare plan and best plan for dealing with this countries economy. That’s clearly Edwards. (We don’t need more Clinton/NAFTA or Obama/Big Inclusive Table for corporations to sit at when deciding how to take our money.) I’m not saying Edwards is perfect. No one is perfect. But he is electable and he is capable of leading this country in a new direction. And that’s exactly what we need right now.
I am OK with Obama saying whatever he needs to say to stay alive and win.. as long as when he is in power he stands by the priciples that have guided him from his humble as well as worldly and educated beginnings. I dont have a problem with him saying that we have to sit at the table with the corporations, because it is true , while we are creating a new energy and lifestyle paradigm that is needed for prosperity -not to mention survival in the upcoming decades- we need to talk to corporations that employ many of the little people and that affect us all.
Veiw from outside the US: It will make very little difference which of the top 3 candidates from either party gets in. The military industrial complex will continue to rule your country as it has done despite the inconvenience of periodic elections. They make pretty good TV though, all that spirited resolve and idignation.
I totally agree with ruscle. I want a candidate who says what he means and means what he says. There’s been enough of saying what people want to hear just “to stay alive and win”. I just sent the Edwards campaign a small contribution–as much as I could afford–so that I put my money where my mouth is. I encourage as many of you as want what Edwards clearly stands for to do the same. He needs our practical support, too, and a lot of small donations add up!
GO EDWARDS!
Falsehoods? C’mon Helen, you of all people should tell it like it is.
LIES! LIES, and nothing but LIES!
Come on Helen! You have stature sufficient to proclaim the direct truth without need to placate the MIC. Unless and until the MSM gets tougher, the scum will continue to have what they call credibility, ie, plausible deniability, and we’ll continue down the chutes. Speak up! Stop this diplomatic clap trap and tell it like it is
Saying what they really meant got bullets for JFK, MLK, And RFK. Staying Alive is a very real thing if you are going to fight the Power, I’m sure Paul Wellstone would have something to say on this!
Now look at GWB otoh, he said whatever it took to get into office and then he did whatever he wanted to anyway once he got in. Not that I think it is how it Should be, but we are playing against snakes in the grass, Karl Rove, et al.
Bush, Cheney, and the Repug’s invest heavily in psychological warfare against the American people. Do not make them bigger than they are. They are an irritation but a weakened one. And if you were hungry who would you prefer to help you, a Democratic Leadership Committee politician or a traditional Democratic politician? I’m going with tradition.
I am for Edwards too, because of his principled stand on the issues that matter most: Iraq and the disparity of wealth/workers. However, if it is truly going to come down to Hilary and Obama, Please people, Obama. If he chose Edwards as a running mate would be a good start. I believe they would have people like Kucinich in positions of importance. Would Hilary? No.
Thank you Helen. You are one of my (s)heroes!
For chryssakes!!! Who are Hilary’s Friends..Lieberman, McCain, Bush Sr., The Board of Walfart? Just to name a few. Dont politicians reward their loyal friends whence they secure The Office?
With all due respect Helen, no need for a draft was devised by squandering $ on private contractors and enriching a huge neo-con republican supporter (Eric Prince of Blackwater).
The “ten year” plan in Iraq is in part to extract Oil of course, the ostensible reason for those permanent/not permanent bases. And if we follow Colin Powell’s initial reasoning, “You break it, you fix it,” then it has to take at least 10 years to put together that Humpty Dumpty of a once sophisticated nation now reduced to sparks, ashes and splintered pieces (not to mention lost human treasure)!
@terryb January 26th, 2008 2:44 pm
“Falsehoods? C’mon Helen, you of all people should tell it like it is.
LIES! LIES, and nothing but LIES!”
Did you see the video of Kucinich being forced to retract his allegations
that the Bush administration LIED us into war?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19148.htm
He was forced to withdraw those NASTY allegations for the sake of
“civility, calmness here with legitimate debate” I dont know what would
have happened had he refused.
You must not say such NASTY things, Terry. That is just plain NASTY, and it prevents
“civility, calmness here with legitimate debate”.
I wonder where the “civility, calmness here with legitimate debate” was in
late 2002/early 2003. Saddam was trying to say that he didnt have WMD.
What LIES! What a LIAR! And anyone who refused to say so was “giving
comfort to the enemy”.
And when 2007, Ahmadinejad, elected in 2005, with the very limited powers that
Iranian presidents have, visited to try an lay a wreath
on the site of the twin towers we werent even allowed to listen to what he
had to say, because he was a LYING LIAR and a DICTATOR too. And
didnt our media make sure we knew it. There certainly wasnt any need for
“civility, calmness here with legitimate debate”.
To me, this reads as if Helen endorses “John Edwards”. She just didn’t come right out and plainly say so. There is a genuine endorsment, one to savor! When Helen Thomas writes something, I pay attention. __ So do the politicians, __ except Bush, who only reads what Cheney’s speech writers put in front of him.
I think you are right, Kem Patrick; that’s how I read it–an endorsement for Edwards. It’s about time he got some credit for what he’s been standing up for. If you close your eyes and you don’t see race and you don’t see gender, who speaks the closest to your philosophy? I want to support the Black candidate; I want to support the woman candidate; but my heart and head hear Edwards as ringing true. A lot of people pay attention to Helen Thomas and have for many years. I hope that holds true today as well!
GO EDWARDS!
It’s time to expose “The Carlyle Group”, and the sell out of our assets to the Arabs through the Bush Family Corporation called “The Carlyle Group”. If our Presidential candidates had any back-bone, they would make public the wheeling and dealing of the Bill Clintons in their accumulation of money as consultants and advisers for Dubai and any other Arab country that is buying out our assets.. Where is the
All American Press on this story? Where is
Sixty Minutes? How about our War Hero McCain?
What does he think of these adventures in the Middle East by our fearless leaders?
Joseph is right about the Carlyle Group. Check this out:
http://www.hereinreality.com/news/axis.html
McCain and Bush are two peas in a pod!
It seems to me that the candidates Obama and Clinton *have*
told us what they are going to do - they are going to deliver the status quo - no more and no less. Oh, they may take troops from here and send them there, and cut this here military program to fund that one there. But c’mon its all STATUS QUO. Life is good if you are a Brahmin - don’t mess with that what’s brought you success.
Sorry Hardtruth!
Tis election DOES NOT make for great TV. It’s Booooooring! One size fit all?
I watch the foreign news channels to see what’ going on in the world.
And all the liberals online will settle for John Edwards; BUT HE TOO IS BEING DISAPPREARED!
Too many really dumb Murikans listen to the media!
WARNING. When I linked per sllawrence (above), what I got was an offer for a free software trial. Only replication will prove this out.
Hmmm .. Sorry, bobpomeroy, but I tried that link I gave above, and here’s a portion of the page that comes up:
“The Axis of Corporate Evil
In what appears to be an attempted corporate takeover of America, the same names keep coming up time and again. Click on the numbers or scroll down to see the connections.
Note: This chart does not touch on campaign spending. Bush/Cheney represent the State Department. Many of the seeds of this evil axis were sown during the Bush, Sr. and Bill Clinton administrations. ”
Can someone else try that link and see if you get the same?
Here it is again:
http://www.hereinreality.com/news/axis.html
“Bush acknowledged there was widespread skepticism about him in the volatile region, saying that his detractors had portrayed him as wanting “to fight Muslims.”
again, he’s wrong. he should be acknowledging the widespread KNOWLEDGE that he wants muslims to fight muslims, christians to fight christians, cops to fight criminals, and peace activists to fight homegrown fascists.
I have been for Edwards and I wish him well. Right now he is the best remaining candidate. But Obama actually opposed the war before it started, and he may actually win and he seems far preferable to Clinton, especially if we can increase the number of progressive Congresspeople. I have a question though .What happens if Obama leads on entering the Convention , but Edwards has enough delegates to throw the primary to Clinton. Can he do that or are those delegates independent agents or do they go by percentage to Hillary and Barak?? Some of this party stuff is pretty unclear to me.
I am so sick and tired of all this “support our troops” baloney. They are there because they volunteered to work for a fascist regime. What would you think about someone who said, “I don’t agree with Adolph Hitler, but I support the S.S.”
I don’t for a moment think that the servicemen and women in our military are culpable as are Bush/Cheney et al. This may be a ‘volunteer’ based military, but the reasons for volunteering are as varied as there are volunteers. Some are hoping for the chance at an education through the GI Bill because they know that they won’t be able to afford to get one and support their families simultaneously. For whatever reason they volunteered, and maybe some thought it was the right thing to do (maybe some still think that),the deal is it is their job. They don’t make policy. They have to do what the Commander-in-Chief, in this case, Gee Dubya Bush, God help them, orders them to do. Don’t forget that there is some arm-wringing going on during the ‘volunteer’ process. There are signing bonuses that look like a way out to someone in dire financial need, there are clauses in the contracts that they sign that are incredibly misleading–about time served, for just one example–and some of these troops were signed up by recruiters roaming the halls of our high schools. Some of these troops are no more than kids. All of them are putting their butts on the line every day, regardless of what we think of Bush’s war. It is old men behind desks that start wars; they never feel the consequences. They get to keep their arms, legs, and sanity. They get to keep their lives.
But without a military draft — and I’m glad there is none .
Helen , I agree with your essay but disagree with this statement because it is a contradiction . A sure way to end the occupation would be to reinstate selective service . Let’s make it personal :do you have any loved-ones serving in Iraq or Afghanistan ? Do you have any loved-ones who may be required to serve in Iraq or Afghanistan if the draught was reinstated ?
Right on, Ronald White. If a draft DID exist to scoop up sons and daughters of Congressmen, of Senators, Of PRESIDENTS, of families regardless of position or income, I expect this unholy war would already be over. Of course, we’d need some safeguards so that, never again, would we have an entire administration who had never actually served (okay, okay, Bush was on the rolls, but I said ’served’)–who had never actually served then waging war from that privileged position.
People keep thinking there must be some sensible way to handle this war or occupation Bush put us into, and it probably is not possible to do that. It is not the nature of war to have some nice neat solution as it is killing and destruction caused by leaders that have their own agenda in mind with little thought about making sense. I, too, think Edwards is the best candidate, but he will have superhuman problems to face if he gets the job. Bush opened a pandora`s box for his own purposes and it may take decades to return to some degree of normality. “Peace president” is a good one for someone that could not leave well enough alone after a half job in Afganistan.
900+ Lies and still going strong!
Paul is the only one with a Pair of B***s big enough to
Tell the Truth and
Stand up to these:
Torturous, lying, spying, murderous, cowards.
Pathetic Cor‘pirate’clones.
Yes they lied and millions died.
Again!
What no Holocaust?
All worship the never ending WAR!
Bend over for GREED.
One more time for the Gipper!
We have no money for:
Health care,
School lunches,
Homeless,
Vets,
Education,
Jobs!
Infrastructure,
Green energy,
But,
WE GOT WAR!!!
A Dick Chainey,
Halliburton/Carlyle
Dirty War!
What a sham.
Enough is enough.
Shut it down and
REBOOT!
A Mob is control of our Government.
Hit Men
of
The Cor’pirate Mafia’.
Assassins!
How do they sleep at night?
Get back to the basics!
Re-institute The Constitution and Bill of Rights!
Kick the Crooks out of Government.
End Corpirate corruption and influence NOW.
The system is horribly broken.
And
They broke it!
In more ways then one.
Financially and structurally.
The Criminals are in control.
Impeach Dead Eye and The Shrub!
Accountability is
JOB ONE
I’m pissing myself watching you Americans carry on like your votes will be counted.
Most hilarious.
Who says you lot don’t understand irony?
Besides, coming clean about Iraq means also having to come clean about the fascist nature of US “democracy”.
Elect a poor person, then I might take it all seriously.
I don’t know why pundits and politicos keeps calling the Iraki fighters insurgents. Insurgents are people who rise up against an established rule, as in the French Revolution. The fighters in Irak are resistors…resistors of a foreign military occupation. And will the US be able to Vichy-fy Baghdad? Or will they have to hunker down behind reinforced walls on a hilltop like Herod of yore?
That really worked, eh?
Call me Canadian.
AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS COME?
–IF NOT NOW, …WHEN?
RADICAL ETHICS: NO BUCKS FROM WAR
“…even if this administration and Congress ignore the idea, the topic ought to draw discussion among 2008 presidential candidates, who have a lot of air time to fill in an overly long campaign. Forswearing profits from war is very little to ask of someone who would be president. More important, anything that can ease the painful levels of distrust among people for this or future administrations is worth consideration.”
Seattle P-I (Editorial Board)
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/11/25/5422/
A TRUE CLEAR-EYED UNFLINCHING AMERICAN JOURNALIST
–TO THE NEW GENERATION OF HER PROFESSION–
–MIT Tech Talk / Sarah H. Wright 11/06/02
“…Remind
the politicians you interview that you pay them, that they are
public servants.
Remember every question is legitimate. And don’t give up. There’s always a leak. There’s always someone who’s trying to save the country…”
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/tt/2002/nov06/thomas.html
George Bush and his “front men” mafiosos are not in charge. The decision makers–The Likudites, stand in the shadows pulling the strings. They control our economy and the U.S. government. They could not care less about the American people or the people of the world in general.
Their arrogance and greed are limitless. They could gain the universe and it would not be enough. Their sights would be set on God next. Their disease is incurable. It is a malignant tumor of the spirit. These monsters have to be brought to justice!
There are only two things the Likudites fear: The Patriots in our armed forces and the Internet.
Peter Montana
Any candidate who’s really going to “change” anything needs two things: a media-proof channel of access to the public, and a bulletproof vest and helmet. The empire is going to go down hard and dark and bloody—like the Christian capitalists who “built” it fighting human progress tooth and nail every step, leading us boldly ass-backward into the (past) future. Hell, they already kept Europe in a 1000-year Dark Age (paintings show black people with white hands and feet, for they’d never seen the real thing)….No doubt that’s the goal again, and the master plan being to rape the Earth to death, to finish just in time for Baby Jesus to come out of the clouds and save “the good people”! There will be no “reasoning” with this mentality….