Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Despite Celebration, the Iraq War Continues
Something about 21st century warfare brings out Washington's lust for historical comparison. The moment the combat starts, lawmakers and the national press corps inevitably portray every explosion, invasion, front-line dispatch, political machination and wartime icon as momentous replicas of the past's big moments and Great Men.
9/11 was Pearl Harbor. Colin Powell's Iraq presentation at the United Nations was Adlai Stevenson's Cuban Missile Crisis confrontation. Embedded journalists in Afghanistan strutted around like the intrepid Walter Cronkite on a foreign battlefield. George Bush was a Rooseveltian "war president." The Iraq invasion was D-Day.
A byproduct of reporters' narcissism, politicians' vanity and the Beltway's lockstep devotion to militarism, this present-tense hagiography ascribes the positive attributes of sanitized history to current events. And whether or not the analogies are appropriate, they inevitably help sell contemporary actions-no matter how ill-advised. As just one example: If 9/11 was Pearl Harbor, as television so often suggested, then American couch potatoes were bound to see "shock and awe" in Baghdad as a rational reprise of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima.
Of course, after we were told seven years ago that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended," and after an historically unique conflict that has lasted longer than almost any other, you might think the press would start questioning the government's martial stagecraft. You might also think all the comparisons to the past would stop. Instead, D.C. journalists and lawmakers are now celebrating the supposed withdrawal from Iraq, implicitly presenting the White House's August announcement as the second coming of V-J Day.
The trouble is that the announcement is anything but, because the war isn't even close to over. And we know that because the military is quietly acknowledging as much.
Just beyond pundits' soaring paeans and President Obama's history-referencing declaration of victory, the Pentagon admits "nothing will change." That isn't a paraphrase-it's a direct quote from the Army's chief spokesman in Iraq. It came just before a Colorado Springs Gazette dispatch quoted another military official saying "our mission has not changed." The article then went on to point out that "current and scheduled deployments will resume as planned," as 50,000 soldiers remain stationed in Iraq.
"American troops in Iraq will still go into harm's way," notes the Brookings Institution's Kenneth Pollack. "American pilots will still fly combat missions in support of Iraqi ground forces, and American special forces will still face off against Iraqi terrorist groups in high-intensity operations. ... (The United States) will probably face casualties therein the years to come, regardless of how we label our mission there."
The truth, in short, is clear: Despite Washington portraying this month's Iraq announcement as another big happy event created by Great Men, the only history that's truly germane to this moment is the kind that may portend future misfortune.
Notice that the White House has taken to saying that the remaining American troops are merely serving with the Iraqi army in an "advise-and-assist" role. Notice, too, that these same officials are now touting the Iraqification of that nation's security.
Considering this, if historical allegory must infuse America's foreign policy discourse, shouldn't reporters be pondering how our government deceptively employed the same "military adviser" moniker in the disastrous Vietnam buildup? And shouldn't elected officials remember that "Vietnamization" was the seemingly pro-withdrawal panacea floated four blood-soaked years before U.S. forces finally left Southeast Asia?
Sure they should-but they don't because it's easier to pretend this is just another gauzy snippet in a saccharine History Channel documentary. And it's not just easier-as with most present-tense hagiography, pretending the Iraq conflict has concluded serves a deliberate purpose: to make America forget the altogether unglamorous consequences of permanent war.
20 Comments so far
Show AllAs David Sirota correctly notes, Americans who believe that the Iraq War has ended are engaging in an exercise of delusion.
"When war enters a country it produces lies like sand".-Arthur Ponsonby [1871-1946], British politician, writer and social activist
And the truth, the first casualty of war, has been dead for 9 years.
America is constantly at war. It's what America does best. It's what we have been doing my whole lifetime. And I've come to learn that the consequences of a war never end. Nor are there any real winners in a war. And there is absolutely no glory in war. But this is something that Americans will never understand because it is something that you have to learn. Most Americans get their learning from the TV so they will celebrate as the war continues.
Hoa binh
Back in the stone age folks had to work together to even exist but, and this is ironic, these assholes talk about bombing some country or other back into the stone age.
The question is who is the more "civilized"?
Even considering the tremensous advances in technology, we are still The Planet of the Apes.
"The greatest acievement of humanity is not its works of art, science or technology, but the recognistion of its own disfunction, its own madness:. ...Echert Tolle
With all of the demonstrable lying, cheating, slaughter for profit, spying on Americans, yadda, yadda, yadda, and still most Americans will insist that there is nothing to question regarding the official conspiracy theory of 9/11.
That morning, explosion after explosion rocked the WTC, before the first building "collapsed" (and all documented via the many local and national news coverage that still exists, but was never shown after that day), yet hardly anyone asks what would have once been considered a completely rational question, "what were those explosions" or "who planted the bombs"?
Most Americans are still unaware of WTC7, and the easily found videos that should at the very least spark a few questions.
Those who have seen the footage of WTC7 collapsing, and have asked others if they even know that a third building fell that day, know exactly what I'm talking about. Most people aren't aware that the collapse of WTC7 even occurred. And once told, most shrug their shoulders, like why should they care?
But Brittany Spears personal life, or Tiger Wood's affairs…those same people want to know the truth, and yesterday.
And let's not forget the 100,000 private contractors in Iraq supporting the remaining 50,000 troops.
And those troops will engage in various forms of combat.
And under the Obomber plan, an additional 7,000 private security contractors will be sent to Iraq.
http://www.truth-out.org/media-manipulates-end-war-iraq62826
Fascist amerikas terrorist act of invasion, and occupation continues, as do the deadly lies from war criminals obomber and biden... no change from mass murderers bush and cheney! While accomplices of murder..congress, just plays along ! The good news is : the empire IS collapsing !
David Sirota's essay i reflects two of the most important books of out time, "EMPIRE OF ILLUSION" by Chris Hedges and "WASHINGTOM RULES" by Andrew Bacevich.
They don't because they are simple fools and sycophants, for the most part.
Great piece by David Sirota. His mention of vietnamization is right on!
Good that Sirota can occasionally see past his absurd loyalty to the Dem Party- an institution whose chieftains are no less war loving than the GOP's.
To the extent having political parties makes any sense at all, why not at minimum align oneself with, or try to build new, parties that oppose initiatory war as a first principle?
Since initiating war is the most insane thing that politically organized humans do, how can any commentator's hand wringing about it be taken seriously if he/she maintains personal loyalty to a party that refuses to disavow it?
1. The MIC does and has had, major influence on America's politics and policy since WW2
2. In the spirit of 'randian self-interest', the MIC wants what is best for the MIC: more money/power.
3. The only way for the MIC to get more money/power is more war and more fear.
4. The MIC has no interest in ending any war. Why start another one when you can milk the current one for as long as possible?
That's why the press and the parties tell us nothing; waiting for them to change their tune is a fool's errand. They are controlled by the corporations and the MIC which work together where it suits them, which is all over the country.
All this is o's razzle dazzle through the over zealous help of the mainstream media which doesn't throw dust in my eyes when I see just a nefarious re-positioning of 'combat troops' doomed or destined for other illegal wars and invasions of sovereign nations.
And more of the taxpayers money to pay some overly high priced mercenaries to take over from the troops.
So, for o, another piss poor attempt at some slight of hand juggling which is just too blatant for even the whole world to see and believe just how feeble that 'slight of hand' crap truly is misdirected.
Only the well cultivated msm dumbstream garden is full of those lapping up this fecal dribble from our well oiled tongue president who from time to time spouts such from his chicken hawk pulpit.
hue :
"....is nothing to question regarding the official conspiracy theory of 9/11.
That morning, explosion after explosion rocked the WTC, before the first building "collapsed" (and all documented via the many local and national news coverage that still exists, but was never shown after that day), yet hardly anyone asks what would have once been considered a completely rational question, "what were those explosions" or "who planted the bombs"?"
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5474006551011489413#docid=-5061514770009171572
Can't be more clear. Although, just one of many. But those who prefer to scream "Conspiracy THEORY" will continue to ignore what their eyes and their ears and their reason tell them. And the purpose that the actual conspirators had in mind.
~
raine September 5th, 2010 7:04 pm
hue :
"....is nothing to question regarding the official conspiracy theory of 9/11.
That morning, explosion after explosion rocked the WTC, before the first building "collapsed" (and all documented via the many local and national news coverage that still exists, but was never shown after that day), yet hardly anyone asks what would have once been considered a completely rational question, "what were those explosions" or "who planted the bombs"?"
"Who planted the bombs.. who demolished those buildings"
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5474006551011489413#docid=-5061514770009171572
Can't be more clear. Although, just one of many. But those who prefer to scream "Conspiracy THEORY" will continue to ignore what their eyes and their ears and their reason tell them. And the purpose that the conspirators had in mind. These people could even ask : Whatever the facts of the matter are, if the 9/ll happening was a conspiracy (so that they don't sound TOO stupid) - it was for (my and) America's overall benefit. !
~
www.bogusstory.com/911_inside_job.html
makes a good case for the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld cartel orchestrating 9/11.
Not sure who the mastermind was. Unlikely Bush Jr.
U.S. aggression against the Iraqi people has been going on since before the 1991 first gulf war. Economic Sanctions imposed before, during and after the first gulf war were so severe that they were called a weapon of mass destruction, leading to genocide of Iraqi children. The no fly zone policy continued bombings through the Clinton presidency. Then as if the Iraqis did not have enough starvation, malnutrition,permanent injuries, deaths destruction, depravation, and constant bombings, Bush/Cheney demonized Iraq as a great military threat to the world, which must be "shock and awed" with more bombs and an endless war. A destitute nation that was not a formidable enemy to their neighbors, Israel, or the U.S. was and still is the target of unbridled endless war, and occupation. All this was spearheaded by the most superior, hi tech ,multi-trillion dollar, military industrial complex,of the world, the United States of America.
We had to move our troops out of Saudi Arabia; Osama bin Laden didn't want them there.
Afghanistan was too far from away from Israel.
"Despite Celebration, the Iraq War Continues."–( David Sirota)
This grows beyond tedious.
Why do David Sirota and his ilk continue to tell people what is obvious?
It was even obvious before the Iraq war even began, that it would never end.
To say that the Iraq war has 'ended,' is the same as saying that America itself has ended.
Neither are about to happen anytime soon.
Why is the liberal punditry even surprised?
"The Iraq war continues?" Duh. These articles are nothing but fluff.
America 'is' war. Proceed from that.
Only Obomber and his zombies, and neocons celebrated the fake withdrawl.