

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Finally, after many fits and false starts, President Bush has given us a good reason to support the war in Iraq. We must fight the war in Iraq, he says, to honor the soldiers who already have been killed fighting the war in Iraq. In a speech to a VFW convention in Utah, he mentioned that we have lost more than 2000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and said:
"Each of these heroes left a legacy that will allow generations of their fellow Americans to enjoy the blessings of liberty.
"We'll honor their sacrifice by staying on the offensive against the terrorists."
Finally, after many fits and false starts, President Bush has given us a good reason to support the war in Iraq. We must fight the war in Iraq, he says, to honor the soldiers who already have been killed fighting the war in Iraq. In a speech to a VFW convention in Utah, he mentioned that we have lost more than 2000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and said:
"Each of these heroes left a legacy that will allow generations of their fellow Americans to enjoy the blessings of liberty.
"We'll honor their sacrifice by staying on the offensive against the terrorists."
Make your heart swell with patriotic pride? Well I should say. And it makes sense.
If we hadn't invaded Iraq we wouldn't have anyone to honor, would we? We might as well be Switzerland. And the beauty of the reasoning is that the longer the war goes on and the more of our soldiers get killed the more reason we'll have to fight it.
The hard-hitting White House press corps was turned to butter by the President's performance. It pointed out that it was virtually the first time he had acknowledged that American troops were dying in Iraq and Afghanistan and, not only did he prove he knew it, he knew how many, giving lie to those who say he's not on top of things.
He went so far as to mention the survivors of the dead in his speech, another first. "Each of these men and women left grieving families and loved ones back home," he said.
He did not, however, mention Cindy Sheehan, an actual grieving mother who camped outside of his Texas retreat trying to get a word with him. She's unhappy with his war policy.
But you know what they say: There's always one sorehead who complains no matter what. So she lost a son. She got her tax cut didn't she?
After making the speech, Mr. Bush went off to fish and bike at Tamarack Resort overlooking Lake Cascade in Donnelly, Idaho.
The new rationale for the war comes just in time for Mr. Bush. One of the old ones---that we invaded Iraq so that we could bring democracy to the Arab world---is beginning to look a little dicey. It seems that the Shiite majority has adopted the Tom DeLay, winner-take-all philosophy of democracy. They have the most votes so they can pretty much do what they want, which is to control the south of the country where most of them live and, more importantly, most of the nation's oil is.
The Sunnis---who under Saddam Hussein used to run the place and got the lion's share of everything, oil included---object. They want a national government that will divvy up the oil spoils equitably.
The Kurds up north don't care about the Sunni-Shiite dispute so long as everybody leaves them alone and lets them have the oil in the north.
At this writing, they were trying to write a constitution that reconciled these irreconcilable aims but were having imperfect success. Unless the problem is solved, however, a civil war is virtually inevitable, constitution or no constitution. I know, some say they're in a civil war over there already but if the Sunnis decide there's nothing in a united Iraq for them and throw in with the extremists, the resulting strife will make what's going on now look like an Easter egg roll.
Would we then stick around to try and referee the fight or would we leave? It depends on how much honor the nation can stand, I suppose. It took 58,000 dead before the American people got truly sick of the Vietnam War.
Right now, we're about 3 percent of the way there.
As for me I'm going to do my part to support our troops. I'm going to buy an SUV. With all those kids dying to keep us in oil, it would be unpatriotic not to use as much as you can.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Finally, after many fits and false starts, President Bush has given us a good reason to support the war in Iraq. We must fight the war in Iraq, he says, to honor the soldiers who already have been killed fighting the war in Iraq. In a speech to a VFW convention in Utah, he mentioned that we have lost more than 2000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and said:
"Each of these heroes left a legacy that will allow generations of their fellow Americans to enjoy the blessings of liberty.
"We'll honor their sacrifice by staying on the offensive against the terrorists."
Make your heart swell with patriotic pride? Well I should say. And it makes sense.
If we hadn't invaded Iraq we wouldn't have anyone to honor, would we? We might as well be Switzerland. And the beauty of the reasoning is that the longer the war goes on and the more of our soldiers get killed the more reason we'll have to fight it.
The hard-hitting White House press corps was turned to butter by the President's performance. It pointed out that it was virtually the first time he had acknowledged that American troops were dying in Iraq and Afghanistan and, not only did he prove he knew it, he knew how many, giving lie to those who say he's not on top of things.
He went so far as to mention the survivors of the dead in his speech, another first. "Each of these men and women left grieving families and loved ones back home," he said.
He did not, however, mention Cindy Sheehan, an actual grieving mother who camped outside of his Texas retreat trying to get a word with him. She's unhappy with his war policy.
But you know what they say: There's always one sorehead who complains no matter what. So she lost a son. She got her tax cut didn't she?
After making the speech, Mr. Bush went off to fish and bike at Tamarack Resort overlooking Lake Cascade in Donnelly, Idaho.
The new rationale for the war comes just in time for Mr. Bush. One of the old ones---that we invaded Iraq so that we could bring democracy to the Arab world---is beginning to look a little dicey. It seems that the Shiite majority has adopted the Tom DeLay, winner-take-all philosophy of democracy. They have the most votes so they can pretty much do what they want, which is to control the south of the country where most of them live and, more importantly, most of the nation's oil is.
The Sunnis---who under Saddam Hussein used to run the place and got the lion's share of everything, oil included---object. They want a national government that will divvy up the oil spoils equitably.
The Kurds up north don't care about the Sunni-Shiite dispute so long as everybody leaves them alone and lets them have the oil in the north.
At this writing, they were trying to write a constitution that reconciled these irreconcilable aims but were having imperfect success. Unless the problem is solved, however, a civil war is virtually inevitable, constitution or no constitution. I know, some say they're in a civil war over there already but if the Sunnis decide there's nothing in a united Iraq for them and throw in with the extremists, the resulting strife will make what's going on now look like an Easter egg roll.
Would we then stick around to try and referee the fight or would we leave? It depends on how much honor the nation can stand, I suppose. It took 58,000 dead before the American people got truly sick of the Vietnam War.
Right now, we're about 3 percent of the way there.
As for me I'm going to do my part to support our troops. I'm going to buy an SUV. With all those kids dying to keep us in oil, it would be unpatriotic not to use as much as you can.
Finally, after many fits and false starts, President Bush has given us a good reason to support the war in Iraq. We must fight the war in Iraq, he says, to honor the soldiers who already have been killed fighting the war in Iraq. In a speech to a VFW convention in Utah, he mentioned that we have lost more than 2000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and said:
"Each of these heroes left a legacy that will allow generations of their fellow Americans to enjoy the blessings of liberty.
"We'll honor their sacrifice by staying on the offensive against the terrorists."
Make your heart swell with patriotic pride? Well I should say. And it makes sense.
If we hadn't invaded Iraq we wouldn't have anyone to honor, would we? We might as well be Switzerland. And the beauty of the reasoning is that the longer the war goes on and the more of our soldiers get killed the more reason we'll have to fight it.
The hard-hitting White House press corps was turned to butter by the President's performance. It pointed out that it was virtually the first time he had acknowledged that American troops were dying in Iraq and Afghanistan and, not only did he prove he knew it, he knew how many, giving lie to those who say he's not on top of things.
He went so far as to mention the survivors of the dead in his speech, another first. "Each of these men and women left grieving families and loved ones back home," he said.
He did not, however, mention Cindy Sheehan, an actual grieving mother who camped outside of his Texas retreat trying to get a word with him. She's unhappy with his war policy.
But you know what they say: There's always one sorehead who complains no matter what. So she lost a son. She got her tax cut didn't she?
After making the speech, Mr. Bush went off to fish and bike at Tamarack Resort overlooking Lake Cascade in Donnelly, Idaho.
The new rationale for the war comes just in time for Mr. Bush. One of the old ones---that we invaded Iraq so that we could bring democracy to the Arab world---is beginning to look a little dicey. It seems that the Shiite majority has adopted the Tom DeLay, winner-take-all philosophy of democracy. They have the most votes so they can pretty much do what they want, which is to control the south of the country where most of them live and, more importantly, most of the nation's oil is.
The Sunnis---who under Saddam Hussein used to run the place and got the lion's share of everything, oil included---object. They want a national government that will divvy up the oil spoils equitably.
The Kurds up north don't care about the Sunni-Shiite dispute so long as everybody leaves them alone and lets them have the oil in the north.
At this writing, they were trying to write a constitution that reconciled these irreconcilable aims but were having imperfect success. Unless the problem is solved, however, a civil war is virtually inevitable, constitution or no constitution. I know, some say they're in a civil war over there already but if the Sunnis decide there's nothing in a united Iraq for them and throw in with the extremists, the resulting strife will make what's going on now look like an Easter egg roll.
Would we then stick around to try and referee the fight or would we leave? It depends on how much honor the nation can stand, I suppose. It took 58,000 dead before the American people got truly sick of the Vietnam War.
Right now, we're about 3 percent of the way there.
As for me I'm going to do my part to support our troops. I'm going to buy an SUV. With all those kids dying to keep us in oil, it would be unpatriotic not to use as much as you can.