Air America Radio Debuts

Attention Progressives, Liberals and Moderates: Be sure to tune in and support Air America Radio.

Tell Me Again Mr. Bush: How is the Occupation Going??

Read this news report of the latest carnage in Falluja, Iraq where 5 Marines & 4 civilian contractors have been killed.

Then read this surprising opinion piece by Pat Buchanan entitled "No End to War". Surprising in the sense that, while not a departure from Mr. Buchanan's embrace of isolationism, this piece nevertheless sounds in criticism of the Bush Administration's orchestration of the wars on terror and in Iraq, as well as the neo-con hijacking of responsible and "conservative" foreign policy.

Spain to double its forces in Afghanistan

As reported in Salon.com Spain's outgoing government, in consultation with the in-coming regime, has decided to double its Afghanistan troop level to 250 sometime this summer. Almost two and one-half years after 9-11, the U.S. and its allies in Afghanistan should have gone into that Central Asian nation in greater numbers since Bin Laden & co. still remains at large. As if this campaign wasn't difficult already, George Bush created a diversion by invading Iraq. Recently the U.S. has committed an additional 2,000 Marines to Afghanistan. Meanwhile our proxy army (Pakistan) is claiming minor victories in its recent assault in the tribal areas of its border region. I have maintained that Afghanistan was the center of gravity that was essential in defeating al Queda which would have been weakened severely if its political, spiritual, and financial leaders were vanquished. Instead, we slapped them around a bit while Bin Laden and his lieutenants roamed in the mountains freely and al Queda cells continued to attack global targets.

Thomas Friedman of the NY Times weighs in on the issue of the Spanish Elections and terrorism. My earlier post regarding this same issue sounded closer to Friedman's view than that of Paul Krugman. To the point, the 3-11 bombings in Madrid have exposed the bifurcation the war on terror and the war in Iraq. As much as George W. Bush and his posse have tried to cement the two together, the centrifugal forces of reality and global terrorism have conspired to separate them. This week much of the new focus has been on the serious blow dealt to Bush & Co. over the testimony rendered at the 9-11 Commission. Especial by former terrorism czar Richard A. Clark. I have and still maintain that, for me, the real travesty is not which Administration is to blame for 9-11 but how this administration has squandered the global good will and national inertia to fight al Queda by wasting lives, money, and political capital over the war in Iraq. Especially since this war was predicated on a lie (i.e. WMD).

The newsmagazine television program 60 Minutes last night interviewed Bush's former terrorism chief, Richard A. Clark, where he soundly criticized the Administration's war on terror and the bogus link between Iraq and al Queda. The NY Times also published an article challenging Bush's Handling of the Terror Threat. While I wasn't surprised, I cannot believe the depths to which Condelezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, and the "W" himself sought a 9/11 connection to Iraq so that they could justify going to war in Iraq. Moreover, this calculated foray into Iraq served to weaken the U.S. in its counter-terrorism program. The Center for American Progress researched a 9/11 time line that demonstrates Bush's move away from concern with al Queda. These reports collectively are a must see for those who will be voting this November.

You can be sure that the Bush machine will hammer down on Clark for his disclosure. Hopefully he will be able to better withstand the counter-assault (See NSA Condelezza Rice's Op-Ed "9/11: For The Record" in the Washington Post) than former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill. For example see this swipe on O'Neill by Bush's attack dogs.

P.O.S.

I was only going to post once today since I'm real busy at work, but I couldn't resist making a comment on this crap floated by one of Bush's minions. Donald Rumsfeld today writes about why we were right in going to war in Iraq. You have to hand it to this guy, no rhetorical technique is beneath him in order to justify the war including, lo and behold, the lie. Here's a quote:

[T]he world gave Saddam Hussein every opportunity to avoid war. He was being held to a simple standard: live up to your agreement at the end of the 1991 Persian Gulf war; disarm and prove you have done so. Instead of disarming . . . Saddam Hussein chose deception and defiance.

Repeatedly, he rejected those resolutions and he systematically deceived United Nations inspectors about his weapons and his intent. The world knew his record: he used chemical weapons against Iran and his own citizens; he invaded Iran and Kuwait; he launched ballistic missiles at Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain; and his troops repeatedly fired on American and British aircraft patrolling the no-flight zones.

Recognizing the threat, in September 2002 President Bush went to the United Nations, which gave Iraq still another "final opportunity" to disarm and to prove it had done so. The next month the president went to Congress, which voted to support the use of force if Iraq did not.

And, when Saddam Hussein passed up that final opportunity, he was given a last chance to avoid war: 48 hours to leave the country. Only then, after every peaceful option had been exhausted, did the president and our coalition partners order the liberation of Iraq.

This is sheer brilliance (in a morally corrupt sort of way). Not once does he mention the WMD ("weapons of mass destruction") that were the impetus for going to war in the first place. Hello, Donny! Did you just forget about all of your remarks prior to the invasion?? Justifying a war post hoc doesn't sew confidence amongst our allies and fear amongst our foes. Conjuring up memories of past glories in Europe and the Pacific does not erase the fact that this administration has lied to the American people and the world. Invoking the memory of your departed classmate who fought and died in Korea doesn't ameliorate the 560-odd Americans who have to date died for your Neo-con crusade to line the pockets of Halliburton. As my good friend likes to say, this opinion piece is a P.O.S. — a piece of shit.

I stand corrected.

Paul Krugman's Op-Ed in today's NY Times refines the analysis that I gave in my post on Tue. Mar. 16. Entitled "Taken for a Ride," Krugman posits:

A year ago, President Bush, who had a global mandate to pursue the terrorists responsible for 9/11, went after someone else instead. Most Americans, I suspect, still don't realize how badly this apparent exploitation of the world's good will — and the subsequent failure to find weapons of mass destruction — damaged our credibility.

But yesterday, according to Agence France-Presse, the president of Poland — which has roughly 2,500 soldiers in Iraq — had this to say: "That they deceived us about the weapons of mass destruction, that's true. We were taken for a ride."

This is the context for last weekend's election upset in Spain, where the Aznar government had taken the country into Iraq against the wishes of 90 percent of the public. Spanish voters weren't intimidated by the terrorist bombings — they turned on a ruling party they didn't trust. . . . By voting for a new government, in other words, the Spaniards were enforcing the accountability that is the essence of democracy.

I think this analysis captures more of the essence of what happened in Spain's election post-3/11 bombings. Still the PSOE should be guarded at how its public discussion over troop pull-outs is managed since to the uninitiated (many who happen to live in the vast flyover-interior of the U.S.) will perceive this move as qow-towing to al Queda.

Leave it to John McCain to clear through the rhetorical crap coming from Congressional supporters of George W. Bush regarding John Kerry and National Defense. Let's just say that while I disagree with many of McCain's votes in the Senate, he, like Howard Dean, freely speaks his mind which is very refreshing in the sewers of Washington politics. Still I find it striking that McCain says that he still is going to support Bush, despite his own campaign for president being sandbagged by Bush in 2000. Like the good soldier (sailor) he is, he'll step in line like all the rest. It remains to be seen if McCain will be slapped upside the head for this tacit acknowledgement of Kerry's national security acumen.

I'm pleased as punch. (Actually, why is punch so pleased?!) Anyway....it seems as if Metro-North has begun to come through on some capital improvements to the New Haven line. This morning my rear-end was greeted with a new clean seat. And just in the nick of time. The old dilapidated seats were so ass-crevassed and encrusted with stains that I was worried I was going to catch some nasty communicable disease. Bravo Metro-North. Now if you could only get newer rolling stock and clean the bathrooms....

The provocative article in the New Republic online about al Queda winning Spain's recent general election raises many issues that cry out for discussion. Though it was all but certain that José Maria Aznar's Partido Popular was ordained to achieve victory, the terrorist bombings in Madrid cleared the way for Spain's opposition party the PSOE to supplant them as the governing party. Adroitly analyzed by Josh Marshall, Spain's sizable opposition to the war in Iraq (previously relegated to anti-war demonstrations) sprouted legs and manifested political action. Spain's Prime Minister-elect José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero "repeated his promise to pull Spanish troops from Iraq in the absence of a United Nations mandate". This reaction but the PM-elect, arguably a mandate, could spell geo-political doom for the Bush Administration as well as have strategic implications in the war on terror. Having studied terrorism in graduate school, I hazard to assume that al Queda is congratulating itself on having had a military and political effect stemming from the Madrid attack. Though Spain's 1,300 troops in Iraq have a marginal impact on the "boots on the ground" phase of the war, the larger international affect is that Spain was one of George Bush's cornerstone allies (along with Great Britain) which, comprised his so-called international coalition. More to the point, the fact that the PSOE's knee-jerk response to the Madrid bombings is to suggest the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, I think sends the wrong message to al Queda specifically and terrorists generally. By their act Spain is saying: if you bomb us, we will run. Now, truth be told, I never bought into the notion that (to paraphrase Josh Marshall) the Iraq war = war on terrorism. However, it now looks like the Neo-con's great Persian Gulf experiment may welded the two together. So much for imperial meddling.

On Feb. 8th the Bushwick Papers commented on the Janet Jackson exposed breast incident and all its attendent furor. The latest salvo was wrought by the U.S. House of Representatives yesterday when the House voted, 391-22, to Raise Broadcaster's Fines for Indecency. Generally, there is a lot of crap on the airwaves but I come from the school that if you don't like what you see and hear — change the channel. This measure is merely one of the paternalistic "legislative lulus" that the Republican led Congress is ramming down our throats this year while not seriously attending to the nation's more pressing business like economic stimulus for the middle class and true education reform. I'm so glad the Republican's are in charge! They are so tireless in their quest to improve my life. [n.b.: the preceding sentence was employing the literary device known as sarcasm].

I just found this site called Iraq Coalition Casualties which I linked to. Check it out for a somber look at who is dying for the Neo-Cons great Middle East experiment.

Have you ever began your day only to find that everyone you encounter turns out to be a raving asshole?

My commute this morning presented me with some of the crankiest bitches I have had the misfortune of meeting in a long time. Let's see: First there was the tool on the subway platform who, despite it being over crowded by about 4 people deep, insisted on lumbering ever-so-slowly in the middle of the only path of space from one end of the platform to the other. Only to loudly huff 'n' puff when one attempts to pass him. Then there was "Johnny-make-a-crowd" on the shuttle from Times Square to GCT who, despite there being plenty of room in the middle of the car, found it necessary to sandwich his stank corpus next to mine. Next there are the scores of idiots who block the door of the arriving subway and do not allow those to walk off the car unimpeded, forcing the arriving passenger's to smash there way through them, of course earning their indignation. Oh here's a treat: the rod who sat next to me on the 8:07 to Stamford — this figity fuck must have gotten up 50 times, occupied the middle of the seat with his elbow (effectively forcing me into the corner near the window), played with his laptop as if it was the very first time he ever used it, and then began making cell phone calls. The best part is as we approach my stop, I asked him to let me out so that I could get my coat from the overhead rack and wait by the doors — this prick looked at me as if I just asked him for one of his kidneys. What an ass. Then there was the seemingly polite lady in her car who was willing to let me cross the street in front of her. However her true colors were shown when I politely declined and she glared at me as if I gave her the bird. Finally, there was the ignominious fool in the car behind me at the stop light who, at the instant the light changed green leaned on his horn and wildly waved his hands. I noticed that this jerk had his child in the front seat as he sped around me to race to the next red light. Was it a full moon last night?? I just want to go back to bed and start over again. Hopefully my evening commute will be better.

Suicide Bombings in Iraq

Today's suicide attacks in Karbala and Baghdad on Iraqi Shiite pilgrims is an awful display at the way things are spiraling out of control in U.S. occupied Iraq. BBC NEWS has posted a great piece of news analysis that attempts to understand who or what factions are behind the recent spate of attacks on Iraqi Shiites. What I find most disturbing is that in the immediate aftermath of the bombings as Iraqis sorted through the carnage, some grief-stricken locals began chanting and blaming the U.S. and Israel for the deaths, shouting "We defy you America and Israel!" (See the NY Times article linked above.) Besides the fact that the U.S. and its allies cannot stop the insurgency nor completely make the occupied areas secure, the U.S. State Department is doing an awful job at communicating the message of what our mission was and will be in Iraq. The State Department has not reached out the ordinary Iraqi — Shiite and Sunni alike — with a message of inspiration, respect, and hope. Moreover, the lack of money to average Iraqi families, jobs for the tens of thousands of unemployed, piss-poor utility services, and sub-par medical care has all but disenfranchised the few Iraqis that likely welcomed U.S. troops into their country. George W. Bush, Donny Rumsfeld, Condi Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and Dick Cheney had no real plan in place to make the occupation go smoothly. What they did have was window dressing and a little hope that they could get in and get out before the 2004 election. They have set U.S. foreign policy back 50 years and squandered any shred of goodwill that was ours post-September 11th. For a terrific view of what's really going on in the occupation check out George Packer's piece for the New Yorker. It'll make you think. And you'll realize that old "W" and his cronies have no idea what they've gotten us into.