Friday, February 29, 2008

The Manchurian Candidate

Dave Lindorff nails it.

The Threat in Iraq

Juan Cole and Patrick Cockburn have must-reads on Iraq.

The current 'dip' in the violence (fuck, if the Fascists can use euphemisms like 'surge' and 'pause', I can use a crappy phrase like 'dip'; I thought about 'lull', but that would indicate the level was low, not just slightly lower...'high' would be more accurate) is fooling McCain, who damn well ought to know better, into missing the threat to our troops in Iraq. Number 1, they are undertrained, overworked, and have poor leadership. Number 2, the closest thing they have to allies, the Kurds, are busy fighting the Turkish invasion. Number 3, a Sadrist-Sunni alliance focused on fighting the occupation would be a big problem for the U.S. There has been speculation about such an alliance for years, but it hasn't appeared, so this may not be much of a risk.

In any case, given the opposition to the occupation among Iraqis, it is easy to believe that the 'success' of the surge is just the Iraqis 'pausing' while they prepare a new phase of armed opposition.

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Chomsky on Iraq Unity

A U.S. survey of iraq found

'"far more commonalities than differences are found among these seemingly diverse groups of Iraqis” from all over the country and all walks of life. This discovery of “shared beliefs” among Iraqis throughout the country is “good news, according to a military analysis of the results," Karen de Young reported in the Washington Post a couple of weeks ago.

Well, the “shared beliefs” are identified in the report. I’ll quote de Young: "Iraqis of all sectarian and ethnic groups believe that the US military invasion is the primary root of the violent differences among them, and see the departure of [what they call] ‘occupying forces’ as the key to national reconciliation.” So those are the “shared beliefs.” '


The above is from an interview with Noam Chomsky on Democracy Now! I commented on similar results from the ABC-BBC-NHK poll back in October.

Monday, February 25, 2008

The Unbearable Stupidty of U.S. Iraq 'Policy'

Chris Hedges predicts an all out civil war in Iraq, aided in no small part by U.S. policy. The U.S. has paid for the establishment of Sunni militias, in order to stop the attacks on its soldiers. The result is an Iraq in which we financially support the government (SIIC Shiite) army, the Sunni militia, and the Kurds. The only militia we aren't paying for is the Sadrist Shiites.

The McCainite-Bushite idiots will say we have to stay to keep these factions from killing each other. Hedges says that hat when Iraq goes up, the U.S. military will have to scurry like rats for cover.

Saturday, February 23, 2008

Obama's Captain-The Facts Check Out

Jake Tapper verifies Obama's anecdote about the Army captain sent to Iraq with an undermanned, undertrained, underequipped platoon.

Friday, February 22, 2008

A New Invasion of Iraq

Turkey has sent up to 10000 soldiers into Iraqi Kurdistan. See Patrick Cockburn's article at The Independent.

Meanwhile, Bobby Gates has decided that the withdrawl phase of the 'surge' should be 'paused', meaning that the 'surge' all along was an escalation.

Moqtada al-Sadr, has extended his ceasefire for another 6 months. Explain this too me: the Sadrists have declared a unilateral cease-fire, we are building an alliance with the Sunni Awakening, and our allies in the puppet government are the Dawa-SIIC alliance. Not to mention, the Kurds are the only ones who are okay with us being in Iraq. So, no major faction is openly fighting us. So who the heck are we fighting over there? AQI? We need 150000 American boys to fight maybe a thousand irregulars? Or are maybe some of the Sadr-Awakeing-Dawa-SIIC-Kurd allies are both with us and against us?

We are sending Cessna 172's to Iraq to train their air force. Only, the pilot flying it to Miami to have it shipped crashed it.

Now, there is a history of funny business with Florida planes, including this recent story of CIA affiliated planes caught running drugs in Mexico. But that is a different story.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

That Man I Shot

I am pretty sure everybody out there has heard of Drive By Truckers by now (especially you Cascada fans), but whether you know them well or not, check out their new recording, 'Brighter Than Creation's Dark'. The Truckers music is an American amalgam of Country, Rock, Blues, and whatever else they feel like trying. BTCD is a little bit more country than their last few outings, but the best song on it is a rocker called That Man I Shot. That was my opinion on first listen.

I am one of those people who doesn't listen to lyrics much, and I made that judgement about the song without paying attention to the lyrics. Then I read them. They are a bit oblique, but not much. It is told from the first person point of view of some who killed someone else, and is having nightmares about it. It is not too hard to view it as being about an American soldier back from Iraq, suffering from PTSD, but that is not explicit in the words. In any case, those lyrics make the song even more powerful, but they probably make it unplayable on commercial radio. Please, folks, search it out.

Here are the lyrics. -TT


That man I shot, He was trying to kill me
He was trying to kill me He was trying to kill me
That man I shot I didn’t know him
I was just doing my job, maybe so was he

That man I shot, I was in his homeland
I was there to help him but he didn’t want me there
I did not hate him, I still don’t hate him
He was trying to kill me and I had to take him down

That man I shot, I still can see him
When I should be sleeping, tossing and turning
He’s looking at me, eyes looking through me
Break out in cold sweats when I see him standing there

That man I shot, shot not in anger
There’s no denying it was in self-defense
But when I close my eyes, I still can see him
I feel his last breath in the calm dead of night

That man I shot, He was trying to kill me
He was trying to kill me, He was trying to kill me
Sometimes I wonder if I should be there?
I hold my little ones until he disappears

I hold my little ones until he disappears
I hold my little ones until we disappear
And I’m not crazy or at least I never was
But there’s this big thing that can’t get rid of

That man I shot did he have little ones
That he was so proud of that he won’t see grow up?
Was walking down his street, maybe I was in his yard
Was trying to do good I just don’t understand

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Bush is our Brezhnev

My comment made it onto Captainsquarters. User docjim replied:

I don't recall ever making the "died in vain argument" myself, and I don't recall reading anybody else who has.

I'm for staying and WINNING because (A) I think we are winning; (B) I think we can win; and (C) the price of losing is too high.

Now, what IS the price of losing?

1. Demonstrating to all the world that the United States can be "beaten" by killing a relative handful of our men.

2. Demonstrating to all the world that terrorism is a viable tactic to combat the United States and influence American policy.

3. Demonstrating to all the world - again - that we will abandon our allies if the going gets even a little tough for us.

4. Demonstrating to all the world that we really DON'T believe in democracy; it's only for the "right" people, which is to say "white, Christian or Jewish people".

5. Risking Iraq turning into The Killing Fields v2.0 and / or Afghanistan v2.0.

6. Demonstrating to our military that we really do think they are expendable: we'll ask them to go fight and die, but not let them finish the job. (cf. morale in the armed forces after Vietnam)

I replied:

At a press conference in May, 2007, George Bush answered a question from someone whose cousin died in Iraq with, "Secondly, one way to make sure that your second cousin didn't die in vain is to remind legislators that regardless of their position on the war, that they have got to fund our troops, ... without conditions ... that say you've got to withdraw by a certain date."

As for your points, 1. has already been demonstrated in Beirut in 1983 (Reagan's legacy), 2. is nonsense since Saddam Hussein was not supporting terrorism against USA, 3. is backwards, its our allies abandoning us cause we are screwing up big time, 4. is like, 'duh'; if we believe in democracy, why pick 2nd place vote getter president, why support Musharref, et. al. 5. Iraq has already been turned into killing fields, read the Lancet article by Burnham et. al., 6. Walter Reed. Why is Ron Paul the number one recepient of donations by active duty military?

The price of staying is that the rest of the world is going to get sick of putting up with our shit, and they will continue to dump the dollar and pump the euro until we have a third world economy that is not capable of supporting our oversized military. Bush is our Brezhnev, Obama will be our Gorbachev, and who knows who will be our Yeltsin.

Goodbye, Fidel

The fascist blood pressure went through the ceiling this morning on C-Span, talking about Fidel. The brown shirts were apoplectic about people pointing out Cuba's achievements in health care and education. 'But he was a dictator, he killed millions of his people!'

Granted, Cuba under Fidel was not a free country. However, it is not accurate to say that he killed millions.

Anyway if you object to Fidel's tyranny, why don't you object to the far more brutal dictatorships in Guatemala, Honduras, etc.? Those dictatorships killed far more people than Fidel's, and they provided absolutely nothing in the way of health care and education.

Constructive engagement, anyone?

USDA not on the job

So you might think the USDA is doing it's job with the beef recall, and that this is an isolated case. Guess again.

The USDA was forced to act because the Humane Society sent an undercover investigator to work in the Westland/Hallmark plant. Now he fears retaliation.


Humane Society officials say the Chino plant was randomly chosen for the investigation, and they suggest that the findings may not be all that uncommon.


Last year I posted this snotty bitabout the outpouring of sympathy for Kentucky Derby winner Barbaro.

Ianquihas some nice vegetarian recipes.

Monday, February 18, 2008

Contradiction or Tautology: you decide

Here is a comment I attempted to post at Captain's Quarters. Since I am 'unverified' there, I don't know if it will show up, so I copied it here so as not to forget this wisdom:

Ed Morrissey scribed,

The Los Angeles Times editorial board not only contradicts its previous editorials on Iraq, today's editorial contradicts itself. After pushing for withdrawal from Iraq on the basis that the US and Iraqis had made no real political progress, today they argue that we should withdraw because political progress has undeniably begun

My comment in reply is

The Republican logic is what is contradictory. "We are losing, so we have to stay so the soldiers who died won't have died in vain." "We are winning, so we have to stay so we don't start losing again." It's Catch-22 all over again, Yogi.

Of course, there is the spin. "We are winning because we surrendered to the Sunni in Anbar and they haven't started shooting at us again." Also, the surge is working because violence is "down", that is, less than it was at the peak of the surge, but still higher than it was two years ago.

The conclusion that we should withdraw from Iraq, whether we are "winning" or "losing", is a logical tautology.

A reasoned, factual response to right wing smears and lies

I previously referred to the Lancet study conducted by Gilbert Burnham, et. al. These studies established that hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died as a result of the U.S. war and occupation against Iraq. Apparently, some the brown-shirt newspapers are whining like babies about the fact the the sponsor of the study received a few dollars from George Soros. Now, normally even a C student like George Bush can dismiss such a tactic as mere ad hominem. But in this case, the sponsor, John Tirman, has strongly defended the intellectual rigor of the original study.

If you haven't done so already, read the original study. It is one of the best scientific papers I have read. It is very clear in explaining in detail the full methodology used, much more so than the usual scientific papers that leave out explanations of "standard" practices, ones that only experts would be familiar with. Of course, the authors had good reason to expect a readership broader than usual.

By the way, it is Dr. Tirman who presents the "reasoned, factual response." Me, I will extend my previous invective about the lying fake journalists who support the fascist branch of the republican party. These sons and daughters of coulter have no shame and no professionalism. They spew out lies in support of their agenda of acquiring billions for the satans they serve, and dish out apologetics for the killing needed to gain those riches.

Thursday, February 14, 2008

The first president to lose two wars?

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

At the Hour of Our Death

Rose Marie Berger's article "At the Hour of Our Death" is a powerful story about two parents whose son died at the Twin Towers, and who are searching to recover his body from the Fresh Kills landfill.

This story shows how hypocritical all the claims to honor 9/11 heroes are. The incessant use of 9/11 as an excuse for all manner of reprehensible policies, and the cynicism of those who exploit it when they actually disrespect those who died is sickening.

Sunday, February 10, 2008

Bush: US not in recession

Fuck linking; in the reporting of the astounding comments of the intolerable moron, copying the whole schmeer is fair use.

We are not in recession because he says we aren't; his economic plan is to play it by ear; U.S. forces will be in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi government; however we tortured prisoners, it was legal, a la Nixon; he wants to keep the pressure on Iran so they understand they are isolated.

Just thinking about the Iran comment, he seems to have some doubts that the Iranians realize they are isolated.

Now why might the Iranians be unaware of their isolation? Here is what the U.S. State Dept. says:

Trade (2007 est.): Exports--$56.9 billion: petroleum 80%, chemical and petrochemical products, carpets, fruits, nuts. Major export partners (2006): Japan (17.3%), China (11.4%), Italy (6.2%), South Korea (5.2%), South Africa (5.5%), Turkey (5.7%), Netherlands (4.6%), France (4.1%), Taiwan (4.1%). Imports--$48.1 billion: industrial raw materials and intermediate goods, capital goods, foodstuffs and other consumer goods, technical services, military supplies. Major import partners: Germany (14.2%), U.A.E. (6.7%), China (8.3%), Italy (7.5%), France (6.2%), South Korea (5.4%), Russia (4.9%).


Now maybe $57 billion seems like a lot to you and me, but it is smaller than the November U.S. trade deficit:

The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of
Economic Analysis, through the Department of
Commerce, announced today that total November exports
of $142.3 billion and imports of $205.4 billion resulted in
a goods and services deficit of $63.1 billion, up from
$57.8 billion in October, revised.

Are Bush's advisers incapable of shutting him up, or are they as deluded as he is?


WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush maintains that the country's economy is not in a recession.

In an interview with "Fox News Sunday," Bush says experts would say there isn't a recession, but that signs have been troubling enough to get the government to come together on a "robust" economic stimulus package.

Beyond the plan, Bush says Washington just has to "play it by ear."

Bush also touched on the war on terror in the interview. He says the issue of electronic terrorist surveillance inside the U.S. has been "difficult" for him because he understands the complexities of trying to protect Americans and doesn't want to "trample" civil liberties.

He also says a long-term relationship with Iraq would mean that U.S. forces will be there "at the invitation of the Iraqi government."

On waterboarding used to interrogate suspected terrorists, Bush says whatever was done "was legal."

And on Iran, he says he would like to keep up pressure on the government in Tehran "so that they understand they're isolated."

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Dance California

Alright, California danced this week to the Hillary beat, despite sister Maria (married to the mob), and of course they wished they all could be McCain girls, after Bomb Bomb Iran. As I write this I am listening to the song with the same title as this post, performed to awesome Cowgirl in the Sand droniferousness by the San Francisco band Wooden Shjips.

San Francisco makes me think of Dead Kennedys; where have you gone, Jello Biafra, a nation turns its pampered ears to you.

And another sip of O.P.R.

Weekend reports of the primaries hint that we are on the edge of a Barack waterfall. For whatever reason, the Bradley effect seems not to occur in low profile primaries in the heartland; is this due to more racism in the urban fringes, or is it that Hillary is push-polling racism?

Friday, February 08, 2008

Worthless Democrats

Cynical article by David Michael Green on Democratic wimping out.

His website is www.regressiveantidote.net.

Thursday, February 07, 2008

Mea Crapa

Boy, I laid a big turd on November 24 last year. I predicted than Ron Paul would do much better than expected in the Republican primaries, and I bloggled the following gems:


McCain's base will all be voting for Paul this year. He is toast.


I think the Republican establishment will settle on Romney as the anti-Paul.


Anyone want to hear my prediction on the Obama-Hillary showdown?


<chirp chirp chirp>



Didn't think so.

Monday, February 04, 2008

Rice and lackey Zelikow covered up 9/11

New York Times reporter Philip Shenon has a new book out, The Commission. It reveals that 9/11 commission executive director Philip Zelikow conspired to cover up the administration's responsibility for the attack. He also tried to have lies about al-Qaeda links with Iraq inserted into the 9/11 commission report.

The Post-Intelligencer calls his position with the commission Fox in the Hen House.

On the other hand, Shenon's employer The New York Times calls it a Tragicomic Tale. Tragic, yes, but what in fucking creation could they think is comic about the situation?

Dan Froomkin's article is called The White House Mole. Despite my rants about Rice's mischaracterization of the August 6 PDB as a 'historical document', I had not recalled the July 10 Rice-Black-Tenet meeting, in which Rice gave the CIA men's warning about an al-Qaeda attack the brush-off. Froomkin reminds us of that travesty, which was reported by Bob Woodward in State of Denial (which sits unread on a shelf here at home; abject confession noted.) Shenon reported that this meeting was withheld from the commission. We also now know that tapes of CIA interrogations of al-Qaeda members were withheld illegally from the commission.

I am practically speechless at the audacity of these criminals.

Labels:

The Foreclosure Society

Well, the title is more than a little obvious now. But that was not the case back in September, 2004, when the brilliant slacktivist popularized the phrase, in commenting on an article by the also brilliant Daniel Gross.

Caveat Emptor.

Sunday, February 03, 2008

No Good Answers for Iraq

Five years ago, we were sold an Iraqi war to protect us from weapons of mass destruction. Colin Powell went to the U.N. and shredded what reputation he had with his shameful litany of non-existent WMD. Despite solid evidence to the contrary, and weapons inspectors working to deal with what WMD may have been present without resorting to war, we as a nation took the wrong path.

After the depleted uranium laden dust settled, and it was obvious to everyone except the hallucinating right wing that there were no WMD in Iraq, sane people questioned why we were still there. The answers came: We would bring democracy to Iraq. If we leave, there will be chaos, civil war, and disintegration of Iraqi civil society. So we stayed. Still, the Iraqi government is not functioning, and though elections may have been held, it is not meaningful to call a non functioning government democratic. We stayed, and still Iraq descended into chaos, civil war, and a disintegrating civil society.

Now, after a year of a surging violence and languishing reconciliation, we are faced with the same situation in Iraq. Last year's answers are untenable. What do we have to chew on this year?

"There are no good answers."

That phrase is the euphemism for "stay the course" preferred by gutless wonders of both parties. The implied meaning is it doesn't matter what we do, so let us handle it.

A more meaningful expansion of "there are no good answers..." is "Iraq will be a mess whatever policy we follow". That is certainly true. However, it is certainly also not an argument for continuing the policies that created the debacle, and it is not an argument for making things worse.

Maybe there are no good answers. But let's hear all the answers, so we can decide which are bad and which are worse. Then, we can do what 80% of Iraqis want us to do, which is get the hell out of Iraq.