Friday, May 18, 2007

Rejecting Reality in Iraq

By Robert Parry
May 18, 2007

The well-regarded British research organization, Chatham House, has published a new report with the seemingly unobjectionable title “Accepting Realities in Iraq.” But it is that difficulty – facing up to what is real – that has been at the heart of this political and military catastrophe.

From the beginning, George W. Bush and his neoconservative advisers have put ideology and wishful thinking ahead of rationality and realism. This tendency explains why so many pieces of evidence cited to support the Iraq invasion have proven false and why so many claims of progress have proven overly optimistic.

Read on.


M Henri Day said...

«The invasion of Iraq and other U.S. threats have caused the jittery Iranians to redouble their efforts to obtain nuclear weapons ...» Does Mr Eland possess any evidence to substantiate his claim above that the Iranian authorities - jittery or no - are attempting to obtain nuclear weapons ? Or is it no longer de rigeur to present evidence for claims, in particular claims which can have drastic consequences, such as serving as a pretext for a US attack on Iran ? Of course, if the Iranian authorities previously were making no efforts to obtain nuclear weapons, «redoubling» these (non-existent) efforts would still amount to no efforts at all. But surely that is not the thrust of Mr Eland's piece ?...

Bob Giffin said...

You (Mr. Parry) asked, "Doesn’t it make more sense, in a twisted sort of way, for Bush to just string out the war until January 2009 and then have his followers blame the new President for losing Iraq?" But let us be careful that we don't dilute the whole reality of why the President insists on maintaining the U.S. presence in Iraq. And that is to use Iraq as just another stepping-stone in expanding the New World Order. So, I not only believe that the war will be strung out until 2009, but it will soon expand and escalate into Iran. I also doubt that there will be a "new President" in 2009. The monied elite, New World Order war-mongers (who pull the President's strings) will not allow an opposition-led President to take office. Would you consider the possible scenario of a "national emergency" (another terrorist attack?) that would pre-empt the next election and precipitate martial law and almost total presidential power? All things are possible in this increasingly tumultuous fascist state in which we live.

MikeSar said...

"Rejecting Reality in Iraq" and
"Washington's Bloody Make-Believe"
By Carla Binion April 26, 2007 have a very critical common thread.
A frightening common thread, one that tells us that "Rejecting Reality.." and "Make-Believe" are often-seen, common charcteristics amongst the, dare I say it?, the INSANE!

Today, May 24th, our President was very comfortable saying "if we don't fight them there, they will follow us here" and other familiar nonsensical cliches and "they attacked us in the United States BEFORE we went to Iraq."
And, the most incredible: "We are there because they invited us!"

The word he most frequently used was Alquida, Alquida, Alquida, ad nauseaum.
We have lost 3,400 soldiers, how many has ben Laden lost? 34?
We have paid $500 Billion, how much has UBL paid? $500,000?
Why would UBL want us to leave Iraq? UBL has found our strings and he is using them. We are defeating ourselves!

We are self-destroying our nation, our reputation, our friends, our soldiers and the wealth of our nation by borrowing TrillionS, how much longer does Pres. Bush want us to stay in Iraq? (Longer than he was in Vietnam?) "Whatever it takes!" he says, with bravado!

To try to counter insanity with logic is, in and of itself, a sign of insanity.

Perhaps, we should not pursue impeachment but a sanity check.
The most insane, and logical, conclusion is that Pres Bush seems to follow the commands of UBL!!!

Is the destruction of our nation, as we know it, impeachable? Probably not, it's unimaginable.

slycube said...

hi man