Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Dog and Petraeus Show
The apologists of perpetual war in Iraq got lucky last week. The latest catastrophic fiasco -- the Iraqi government's face-saving surrender to a truce offered by resurgent Shiite militias -- was overshadowed here by meltdowns in the economy and sectarian battles inside the Democratic Party. From luck to spin. Today, the Bush administration gets to do what it does best: translate defeat at Arabs' hands into victory with an American accent.
Army Gen. David Petraeus, commander of occupation forces in Iraq and President Bush's Man Friday there, appears before two Senate committees to canonize the 2007 troop escalation no matter how much the Shiite Awakening disagrees. The administration Petraeus is shilling for, like the strategy he's shelling out in Iraq, never was much concerned with reality; otherwise, we wouldn't still be lurching from calamity to curfew to standoff while calling it all a success. Adding irony to insurgency, all three presidential candidates sit on the two panels Petraeus will be reading his script for -- Hillary Clinton and John McCain on the Armed Services Committee, Barack Obama on the Foreign Relations Committee.
McCain has the advantage of sharing Petraeus' script writers, to whom facts are inferior to faith. Two weeks ago, in a Middle East trip designed to show off his knowledge of the region, McCain had to be corrected about al-Qaida's ties to Iran (it doesn't have any) and to Shiites (it loathes them). The clanger recalled his other visit to Iraq a year ago this week, when McCain, in a bulletproof vest, said you could "walk freely" through Baghdad. He had to be reminded by NBC News that Baghdadis generally don't get to stroll to the market with an escort of "100 American soldiers, three Black Hawk helicopters and two Apache gunships overhead." Or with bulletproof vests.
But as McCain said four years ago when he was cheering for Bush's war before he started pretending to criticize its execution, "We must fight. We must." Especially those liberals who'd put a stop to perpetual war to better focus on an increasingly Iraqi-looking economy here at home. So McCain will milk the troop escalation's imaginary gains for all their Thousand And One Night fantasies and give Petraeus some free advertising for his presidential run in the coming decade. Clinton and Obama won't do much better if their Iraqi scripts continue unchanged. The draw-downs they're talking about differ in degrees, not in policy, from those of the Bush-McCain-Petraeus axis of whatever.
Not one of them has yet come to terms with a reality the American occupation helped enable: In the Middle East, big-power bullying is bankrupt. As Aaron David Miller, who served as an adviser to six secretaries of state in Arab-Israeli negotiations, concludes in a coming book that "small powers can't always best you, but they can outwit and outwait you."
That's the real story behind the Shiite uprising in Iraq. It's also the story of Hezbollah's stand-down of Israel in Lebanon in 2006, of Hamas' standoff of Israel in Gaza now and of the Taliban's standoff of NATO forces in Afghanistan. That's not to give those "small powers" credit, either for their agendas or for their means. What they all have in common, although somewhat less so in Hezbollah's case, is brutality, repression and Islamism (as opposed to Islam) -- as murderous a perversion of Islam, or any religion, as there is today. They have two other things in common: No matter what's thrown at them, none has been, or can be, defeated militarily. And with the Taliban's exception, they all despise al-Qaida, have popularly elected representation in their respective countries and know that political engagement trumps bombs any day. They know that the people electing them want them, even if that popularity is by default -- an inevitable reaction to the occupation's brutality and humiliation.
Yet in every case, Israel, the United States or NATO still act as if the long-term solutions they seek (in Palestine-Israel, in Lebanon, in Iraq, in Afghanistan) can be attained without seriously engaging them politically -- not as inferiors, but as equals more legitimate than their occupiers.
For all the wishful talk you'll hear this week from the Petraeus show and the war apologists, and even from those, like Clinton and Obama, who pretend to be looking for solutions, little will change until they concede that there will be no peace except on Arabs' terms. To save himself, the occupier has a choice: submit to reality, or keep suffering its defeats while pretending that not losing is somehow success enough.
Tristam is a News-Journal editorial writer. His website is www.pierretristam.com.
© 2008 News-Journal Corporation
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
31 Comments so far
Show AllThe title of the story says it all. Betray-us, Crock-of-crap, mccan't and all repugs (including lieberman) are all reading from the same scipt. I believe they mentioned Iran and Syria more than Iraq. They are using the same talking points on Iran they used on Iraq. It's all boilerplate, just a change of one letter.
Someone needs to send little dorky yes-man Crocker to a speech class, too much mumbling and ums and ahs. Through all this, bush and cheney are sitting back with their feet up on their desks smiling while their grunts have to do the dirty work of defending them and this illegal war.
inhofe tried to pre-empt dems by saying things like - "I know the far left will say..." By far left, he means all dems, except lieberman. Reminder - a mccain/lieberman ticket will be very dangerous to us and the world.
Petraeus and Crocker have to be good actors to defend a war that over three-quarters of Americans now say wasn't worth 4,000 American deaths, 30,000-40,000 injured, a million Iraqi deaths and eventually trillions of dollars. Good luck gentlemen.
I'm listening to the testiphony now on NPR. Turns out Iran is the problem in Iraq but real progress has been made. And our brave soldiers are doing a heck of a job.
Who would've guessed?
There is a seriously injured wild animal corralled in the chambers of Congress today. Will any true opponents of militarism humanely euthanize that creature? Now is the moment. I'm not going to hold my breath.
I listened to Petraeus and McCain giving opening statements and, of course, they both read off the same playbook. I knew exactly what they were going to say, and they said it. No surprises there.
However, I did find something a bit humorous (I have to look for humor in this stuff or I'll go crazy). While Petraeus was speaking, they put up some of his accomplishments on the screen.
One said that he was a Master Parachutist. One the next blip, it said that while skydiving in 2000, he suffered a parachuting accident that shattered his pelvis. I'm sorry for his accident, but when they showed one factoid followed by the other, it sounded like something that will make the Daily Show or Colbert Report.
The basic problem is that the McCain "no surrender!" approach to the Iraq war will have a strong, emotional resonance in the American spirit in spite of its complete lack of rationality. It has a mythic quality like "Remember the Alamo," "Damn the torpedos, full steam ahead," "I have not yet begun to fight," etc., etc. Americans love to be winners and absolutely detest being losers. "We're number one!"
The Obama and Clinton approaches to the war, while perhaps being more sober in some respects, differ only in the conditions for departure, but do not fundamentally challenge the morality and legitimacy of America's war and continued presence in Iraq. As a result, they will likely lose to McCain, since policy distinctions will be easily drowned out by McCain's "courage & victory" vs. "defeatism" demagoguery. Even if Obama or Clinton win, they will be unlikely to successfully resist these emotional factors much less the institutional inertia that continues this debacle.
The war will end, but I do not believe it will end from the presidential leadership in either party. It will end when it is no longer sustainable from a fiscal or military perspective in spite of the prevailing emotional and institutional forces.
Then, it will be time for the guardians of the status quo to seek out scapegoats to blame. Someone, likely those who opposed the war, did not let them "win." Remember Vietnam? Only this time, a more frightened and less constitutionally restrained leadership will take their vengence.
Progress - the numbers are going up!
U.S. Deaths Confirmed By The DoD: 4017
Reported U.S. Deaths Pending DoD Confirmation: 7
Total 4024
DoD Confirmation List
Latest Coalition Fatality: Apr 07, 2008
We have hugged the tar-baby. French kissed the bugger, and now we can't let go.
BTW, Americans (those that now oppose) never opposed the war because it was Evil and a War Crime. They oppose it because we're losing.
Tell America that dropping a Nuke on Iran will make us "winners", they will sit up like Fido, begging for a treat and asking "how soon".
Don't bother paying your insurance premiums. In six months they're going to be bankrupt and all that money will just "disappear", like your home and your "21st Century American Consumer" future.
Think about Gaza as a Warsaw Ghetto for Palestinians, starved, brutalized, used for target practice by dehumanized 19yo's. Now look at your neighborhood. You've got 24 months, tops.
Peace.
The only general we should be listening to today is the late USMC General Smedley Butler. The author of WAR IS A RACKET. He will tell you who we really fight for, and what we fight for.
Hoa binh
It is the Democratic "strategy" on Iraq that is most fully on display here. Having funded this clever liar and the Bush agenda they are now reduced to blaming all the violence resulting from our invasion on the "government" of Iraq , and complaining that Iraq isn't paying for their own occupation and division into warring factions. The lies go completely unchallenged. Crock of it actually said Iraq defended itself from the aggression of Iran in the Iran Iraq war.. The words "victory", ""success"" also go unchallenged and therefor endorse the the idea that this illegal war that killed more civilians than Saddam can be "successful".
Petraeus says it is good that Maliki wants to disband all militias while he touts the "Sons of Iraq" militias and funds them with no assurance that their weapons will not soon be instruments of a civil war.
The big "success" of the Iraqi govt. touted by Crocker is the reversal of the deBaathification we originally supported.
Why are all the Democrats so eager to kiss this liar's brass butt. No one mentions how clearly the policy is simply the classic imperial tactic of divide and conquer. We have now overseen massive ethnic cleansing and armed all 3 factions. To hell with the Christians, Mandaeans and secular Iraqis.
In this ugly show we see how thoroughly the Democrats have undercut their opportunity to renounce this war lead us out of this mess.
I'm from Canada. I used to admire the U.S. because of the ideals it espoused and acted upon. Now, I see that you are no better than the worst imperialist dictators you ever propped up in power. I don't believe in you any longer. Maybe China or India will be more worthy of my admiration.
Pascal, thanks for the comment. I'm from America and I feel the same way. But I would caution you in admiring China or India. They are empire wannabes and very likely will continue to pursue the same empire that is rapidly killing America today.
Hoa binh
And if the US could have just kept public opinion favorable for another 100 years on Viet Nam it could have "won" that one too.
The Military Industrial Media Complex doesn't care where the war is...the revenue stream is what matters. Betrayus will make sure the facts don't get in the way of a good story.
It's the classic Catch-22: If the "surge" is successful, we can't leave and if it's not, we can't leave either!
And the public is so gullible and fickle, they will swallow it with gusto.
I'm with you Pascal!
There is only one solution....IMPEACHMENT...but the war profiteers in the US Congress will never upset THAT applecart.
The Demo-rats are all for making noise about troop withdrawl, but would never lift a finger to actually stop the Iraq gravy train.
"The title of the story says it all. Betray-us"
What a contempitble thing to repeat. The Betray Us ad was bad enough and put out by cowards. But to repeat it is shameful too. He is a serving officer,what do you expect him to say? The president is an asshole and we should never have gone to Iraq.
He is an honorable soldier who has served his country honorably and is doing his best as most of those folks are. Think he would have attacked Iraq? Like hell he would. The whole military was against Cheney's war and said so. Think those folks that are there are all overjoyed to be there? They have no choice. None. Nada. So lighten up on the serving military. I know its fashionable to Dis them and very satisfying to feel so superior, but consider ....what if it were you? What would you do? How would you feel if you had no choice but people that took no risks were spitting on you.
Reality is a better wepon in politics than wishful thinking. Best remember it.
jonabark correctly notes that it is strategy on parade today, but not just Dems who would love to keep blame on Iraq 'government', whatever that is. The Republican strategy is to drag it out until the Democrats take the Whitehouse. Even one Democratic senator said words to the effect that we have to leave, everyone knows we have to leave, Iraq's neighbors must know that we are leaving. Today is a pageant. I just wanted ONE of the questioners to ask "how many dead today, sir?"
Pascal,
My question is-does Canada have enough space, politically, physically and psychologically to make room for all the statesiders who soon will want to be there ? The Democrats seem utterly clueless, having silently endorsed this debacle and are in the process of handing the election to the repugs. What are we to do?
Thomas More: "He is an honorable soldier who has served his country honorably and is doing his best as most of those folks are."
No, he's an "ass-kissing little chickenshit" who is advancing the neo-con agenda and trying to put a happy face on the Iraq disaster. You want to know who really has honor in the military? Look at the ones who resigned.
McCain is as ignorant of the issues as Bush. How a man wish such long experience in Washington--the thing on which he stakes his claim--could fail to understand crucial, simple details that any 12 year old who reads the newspapers understands could know so little should be cause for concern. However, the same media, pundits and neocon politicians who greeted and followed Bush as a political messiah are now telling us that this doddering old fool can solve our unprecedented military, foreign relations, economic, environmental, constitutional and health care catastrophes using the same logic and theories that got us into this mess.
Pascal, you don't need to admire any country. Even Revolutionary France has let us down. Your own country is nice, very nice (Vancouver!), but you need to do something about your own country's inadmirable americanization.
TRUTHMONGER: Would you surmise then that "Betray-us" is the royal court eunuch?
ALEX LAWYER: Our nation's love of militarism dresses the hero as a warrior, and McCain has a huge claim to that status. He graduated at the bottom of his class, and against the wisdom of one of my favorite adages, "The enlightened warrior best understands the benefits of peace," he has proven to have learned nothing, now has even become torture's advocate when he himself stood before the abyss and gazed into this dark portion of the human heart. He is craven and loyal only to the masquerade of power; but to Americans fed a psychic diet of "brave warrior = good guy" media extravaganzas, he's compatible with what's too long been on the menu.
Thomas More: What they should have done is to refuse to obey an unlawful order. The soldiers have failed the people in their constitutional obligations. Watada is an exception and an excellent example of proper behavior by a soldier. He was prosecuted. That's bravery.
"But as McCain said four years ago when he was cheering for Bush's war before he started pretending to criticize its execution, "We must fight. We must."" Ah, yes. Why have all those lovely American weapons and not use them?
Americans and their love of guns will be the downfall of the world. Always it's more, bigger, stronger firepower, fight, kill, shoot, bomb them into the dark ages. Who's in the Dark Ages, "they" or America?
War and killing does not make one better: it only shows a lack of ability in communication. Child psychology has long cited that children are aggressive when they do not have the words to express themselves.
The funny thing about Petraeus' performance was that he was being perfectly honest. There is no end in sight because there never was. The United States invaded Iraq with the intention of staying there until the oil runs dry. But you're not supposed to say that in public. Watching the Republican congressmen who are up for re-election squirm as this incovenient truth was laid bare made for excellent comedy. "Stop giving away the game, Petraeus!" was written all over their agonized faces. "What am I supposed to tell my constituents now?!" After Petraeus and Crocker, the Republicans have nothing to look forward to but a complete rout in congress.
Respected general officers demurred, even retired, rather than further support President Unitard's malign and irrational warmongery. (What ever happened to the "War Czar", BTW?)
But Petraeus, an ambitious sort reminiscent of General George McClellan, was thrilled at the opportunity to become President Unitard's shill and yes-man-- to spin the illegal and utterly immoral invasion and occupation of Iraq as a "winning" venture.
And, as Oliver North sadly proved, a military officer with a chest full of tin and tinsel easily renders critics timid and mute. Petraeus is a Hero, you see, and the weak-minded crash to their knees before him.
PURVIS AMES: Great observation and character analysis!
A VOICE APART: Your posting reads like P.R. for my consistent contention that in America, "MARS (god of war) RULES!"
"ass kissing little chicken shit" sums it up for me...I wish Fallon would speak out now that he's "retired".
Just an opinion from a proud Republican American.
___________________________________
Opinions, it is said, are like fundamental orifices. And some opinions are more like fundamental orifices than others, suffice it to say.
well, devil1, I guess it's true--you CAN fool some of the people all of the time.
"what if it were you? What would you do? How would you feel if you had no choice but people that took no risks were spitting on you."
I would refuse to continue the murder for profit racket that is the occupation of Iraq. In situations such as these, such as Petraeus always have a choice. The easiest way out is to resign. If I ever behave as he does, I do hope that getting spit on is the least of what I get.