

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.
The invasion of the major Iraqi city of Mosul by the Sunni militant group ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) has US reporters recalling the Iraq War-and showing once again how they see that deadly conflict mostly through the prism of US sacrifice and suffering.
The invasion of the major Iraqi city of Mosul by the Sunni militant group ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) has US reporters recalling the Iraq War-and showing once again how they see that deadly conflict mostly through the prism of US sacrifice and suffering.
On ABC World News (6/10/14), Martha Raddatz declared that "Mosul was once a focal point of America's fight to bring peace and stability to this country." It is hard to imagine many Iraqis would think of the Iraq invasion as an effort to bring peace, but this is not a new approach for ABC. When militants seized control of Fallujah in January, ABC's Terry Moran spoke of "a decade of US-led war to plant democracy in Iraq" (Extra!, 2/14).
Raddatz went on to talk about ab out how more than 200 Americans had "given their lives to secure this city," and that Mosul "is just the latest city to spiral out of control after the US pulled out"-which might suggest that Iraqi cities were in fine shape when they were occupied by US troops.
Her report closed: "So 11 years after the US invaded Iraq-lost nearly 4,500 American lives and spent over $730 billion-Iraq is in crisis."
Iraq is in crisis not in spite of the US war, but because of it. And it's beyond perverse to frame the ongoing catastrophe in Iraq through the prism of US suffering, as if Iraqi lives are of secondary concern. According to the most comprehensive study (PLOS Medicine, 10/15/13), approximately half a million Iraqis lost their lives as a result of the Iraq War-a hundred times the number of Americans killed there.
Still, US news programs tended to focus on US deaths, ignoring or downplaying the much larger number of Iraqis killed in the war the US launched. As NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams (6/10/14) put it, "After all the American lives there were lost, all those who came home grievously wounded, Iraq's second-largest city, Mosul, has now fallen under the control of an Al-Qaeda offshoot. " And CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley told viewers (6/10/14), "Another major piece of what America fought for in Iraq was lost today."
And here's CNN host Wolf Blitzer (6/10/14):
This is heartbreaking. The United States spent 10 years there. We assumed that Iraq would emerge a peaceful, stable democracy after the hundreds of billions of dollars the US invested, the 4,500 US troops killed, tens of thousands who came home without arms or legs or burned, post-traumatic stress, and look at this disaster.
Blitzer was interviewing Peter Brookes of the right-wing Heritage Foundation, who refused to concede that the war was a mistake because Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. "We didn't know that at the time," he told Blitzer-which of course depends on who "we" are. But it's not as if Brookes thinks US government should avoid blame-just not the Bush administration: "The real blunder is when the Obama administration got out in 2009 and left the Iraqis on their own."
Brookes goes on to reject arguments about starting the Iraq War based on hindsight, since it's clearly not fair to re-assess Iraq based on what politicians know now about how the war would go. At one point, Brookes says that predictions are difficult-it's "especially hard about the future, right?"
But right before the Iraq War started, it wasn't so hard. In fact, Brookes told CNN (3/5/03) that the Iraq War was "going to last a couple of weeks."
He was wrong, of course-but he's still an Iraq expert in the corporate media.
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 |
The invasion of the major Iraqi city of Mosul by the Sunni militant group ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) has US reporters recalling the Iraq War-and showing once again how they see that deadly conflict mostly through the prism of US sacrifice and suffering.
On ABC World News (6/10/14), Martha Raddatz declared that "Mosul was once a focal point of America's fight to bring peace and stability to this country." It is hard to imagine many Iraqis would think of the Iraq invasion as an effort to bring peace, but this is not a new approach for ABC. When militants seized control of Fallujah in January, ABC's Terry Moran spoke of "a decade of US-led war to plant democracy in Iraq" (Extra!, 2/14).
Raddatz went on to talk about ab out how more than 200 Americans had "given their lives to secure this city," and that Mosul "is just the latest city to spiral out of control after the US pulled out"-which might suggest that Iraqi cities were in fine shape when they were occupied by US troops.
Her report closed: "So 11 years after the US invaded Iraq-lost nearly 4,500 American lives and spent over $730 billion-Iraq is in crisis."
Iraq is in crisis not in spite of the US war, but because of it. And it's beyond perverse to frame the ongoing catastrophe in Iraq through the prism of US suffering, as if Iraqi lives are of secondary concern. According to the most comprehensive study (PLOS Medicine, 10/15/13), approximately half a million Iraqis lost their lives as a result of the Iraq War-a hundred times the number of Americans killed there.
Still, US news programs tended to focus on US deaths, ignoring or downplaying the much larger number of Iraqis killed in the war the US launched. As NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams (6/10/14) put it, "After all the American lives there were lost, all those who came home grievously wounded, Iraq's second-largest city, Mosul, has now fallen under the control of an Al-Qaeda offshoot. " And CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley told viewers (6/10/14), "Another major piece of what America fought for in Iraq was lost today."
And here's CNN host Wolf Blitzer (6/10/14):
This is heartbreaking. The United States spent 10 years there. We assumed that Iraq would emerge a peaceful, stable democracy after the hundreds of billions of dollars the US invested, the 4,500 US troops killed, tens of thousands who came home without arms or legs or burned, post-traumatic stress, and look at this disaster.
Blitzer was interviewing Peter Brookes of the right-wing Heritage Foundation, who refused to concede that the war was a mistake because Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. "We didn't know that at the time," he told Blitzer-which of course depends on who "we" are. But it's not as if Brookes thinks US government should avoid blame-just not the Bush administration: "The real blunder is when the Obama administration got out in 2009 and left the Iraqis on their own."
Brookes goes on to reject arguments about starting the Iraq War based on hindsight, since it's clearly not fair to re-assess Iraq based on what politicians know now about how the war would go. At one point, Brookes says that predictions are difficult-it's "especially hard about the future, right?"
But right before the Iraq War started, it wasn't so hard. In fact, Brookes told CNN (3/5/03) that the Iraq War was "going to last a couple of weeks."
He was wrong, of course-but he's still an Iraq expert in the corporate media.
The invasion of the major Iraqi city of Mosul by the Sunni militant group ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) has US reporters recalling the Iraq War-and showing once again how they see that deadly conflict mostly through the prism of US sacrifice and suffering.
On ABC World News (6/10/14), Martha Raddatz declared that "Mosul was once a focal point of America's fight to bring peace and stability to this country." It is hard to imagine many Iraqis would think of the Iraq invasion as an effort to bring peace, but this is not a new approach for ABC. When militants seized control of Fallujah in January, ABC's Terry Moran spoke of "a decade of US-led war to plant democracy in Iraq" (Extra!, 2/14).
Raddatz went on to talk about ab out how more than 200 Americans had "given their lives to secure this city," and that Mosul "is just the latest city to spiral out of control after the US pulled out"-which might suggest that Iraqi cities were in fine shape when they were occupied by US troops.
Her report closed: "So 11 years after the US invaded Iraq-lost nearly 4,500 American lives and spent over $730 billion-Iraq is in crisis."
Iraq is in crisis not in spite of the US war, but because of it. And it's beyond perverse to frame the ongoing catastrophe in Iraq through the prism of US suffering, as if Iraqi lives are of secondary concern. According to the most comprehensive study (PLOS Medicine, 10/15/13), approximately half a million Iraqis lost their lives as a result of the Iraq War-a hundred times the number of Americans killed there.
Still, US news programs tended to focus on US deaths, ignoring or downplaying the much larger number of Iraqis killed in the war the US launched. As NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams (6/10/14) put it, "After all the American lives there were lost, all those who came home grievously wounded, Iraq's second-largest city, Mosul, has now fallen under the control of an Al-Qaeda offshoot. " And CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley told viewers (6/10/14), "Another major piece of what America fought for in Iraq was lost today."
And here's CNN host Wolf Blitzer (6/10/14):
This is heartbreaking. The United States spent 10 years there. We assumed that Iraq would emerge a peaceful, stable democracy after the hundreds of billions of dollars the US invested, the 4,500 US troops killed, tens of thousands who came home without arms or legs or burned, post-traumatic stress, and look at this disaster.
Blitzer was interviewing Peter Brookes of the right-wing Heritage Foundation, who refused to concede that the war was a mistake because Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. "We didn't know that at the time," he told Blitzer-which of course depends on who "we" are. But it's not as if Brookes thinks US government should avoid blame-just not the Bush administration: "The real blunder is when the Obama administration got out in 2009 and left the Iraqis on their own."
Brookes goes on to reject arguments about starting the Iraq War based on hindsight, since it's clearly not fair to re-assess Iraq based on what politicians know now about how the war would go. At one point, Brookes says that predictions are difficult-it's "especially hard about the future, right?"
But right before the Iraq War started, it wasn't so hard. In fact, Brookes told CNN (3/5/03) that the Iraq War was "going to last a couple of weeks."
He was wrong, of course-but he's still an Iraq expert in the corporate media.