Iraq Study Group

Videos from June 13 Iraq Forum, "Reframing the Iraq War Discussion," in Cherry Hill, NJ

dlindorff — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:16:21 -0400

Adam Kokesh of Iraq Veterans Against the War (Part 1)

Kokesh Reams Rep. Robert Andrews (D-NJ) for Backing the War (Part 2)

Dave Lindorff on the Bush/Cheney Push for War with Iran (Part 1)

Dave Lindorff on the Bush/Cheney Push for War with Iran (Part 2)

Talk is Cheap, Even with Enemies, and By the Way, Rivals Aren't Enemies

dlindorff — Fri, 30 May 2008 10:41:02 -0400

By Dave Lindorff

What the hell is Barack Obama talking about?

He says that America should be talking with leaders in Cuba, Iran, Venezuela, Korea, Syria. Fine. But he calls this “talking with our enemies.”

What enemies?

Let’s get something straight. Enemies are people who are fighting against you, who are trying to destroy you. Is Cuba fighting against America? Is Iran fighting against America? Is Venezuela fighting against America? Syria? China? No. These countries may be rivals, but they are not enemies.

The closest we come to having an actual enemy in today’s world is North Korea, where we are technically still in some kind of truce following a hot war, but of course that war itself has been over for half a frigging century, and nobody has been killing anyone on the Korean Peninsula in decades.

The truth is, America doesn’t have any real enemies, except for the ones it has made for itself in Iraq and Afghanistan, and of course the Al Qaeda organization. But Al Qaeda is a gang of terrorists, not a country, and in Afghanistan it is movement, the Taliban, once the government of that country, which we overthrew. And even there, where we have enemies, talk is better than war. It is obvious that at some point if we are ever to exit from Iraq and Afghanistan, there will have to be talks with the people we are fighting. Afghanistan’s leaders have said this—that there will have to be talks with the Taliban. And Bush’s own “Iraq Study Group,” headed by former Republican Secretary of State James Baker and former Democratic Congressman Lee Hamilton, concluded that the US will have to negotiate to settle the Iraq conflict. Both those processes should be begun immediately, not after more thousands have been killed.

By calling other countries “enemies,” Obama fell into a trap of his own making, though admittedly, he’s not the first to define all these rival nations as enemies. It’s a logical outcome of the Bush/Cheney position that “either you’re with us or you’re against us.”

Instead of buying into that nonsense, Obama should have questioned the premise. Then he wouldn’t be in the mess he’s in now, trying to fine-tune whom he would talk to and whom he wouldn’t talk to. Erstwhile Democratic presidential candidate and former Alaskan Senator Mike Gravel had it right when, during an early TV “debate” before the media decided to black him out, he replied to the moderator’s stupid question to all the candidates of “Who, after Iran, are America’s biggest enemies?” He challenged the premise, asking, “Iran’s not our enemy. Who are we afraid of? We don’t have any enemies.” He got one of the biggest applauses of the evening for that.

As for the basic point—talking with people we have disagreements or rivalries with—it is obvious that not talking is idiotic, and gets you nowhere—or worse, into a war.

Let’s take Cuba. For exactly half a century since its Communist revolution, we have treated Cuba like a mortal enemy, blockading the country, forcing other countries to join us in an embargo (an act of war, by the way), plotting and attempting to assassinate the country’s leader, Fidel Castro, and financing and supporting an obsessed group of dispossessed rich Cubans who want to return the island to its mob-infested, neo-colonial days. In those 50 years, the only thing not talking has accomplished has been the impoverishment of two generations of Cubans. Meanwhile, of course, the US has talked, conceded, caved in, given in, pandered and invested in China, another Communist country that, unlike Cuba, actually has fought against the US (in Korea, by proxy in Vietnam, and against an ally, Taiwan). There is clearly no logical reason for not talking with Cuba, and if we were talking with Cuba, life there would be better, and no doubt, things would be better here, too.

Iran is another example. It is known that when the US invaded Iraq, in 2003, Iran tried desperately to initiate talks with the US. The Bush/Cheney administration didn’t want to talk. It was calling Iran an “Axis of Evil” nation. Had talks begun, there might not even be a nuclear dispute today. Indeed, there might not even have been a rivalry. Instead, we now have the Bush/Cheney administration pushing forward for plans to attack Iran.

We could go back to Iraq, too, of course. Before the US launched its attack, Saddam Hussein was telling the Bush/Cheney administration he was willing to leave the country. All he wanted was a safe haven like Idi Amin got, and a billion dollars. We were not told about this offer until years later. Yet think how much cheaper that solution, arrived at through a little talking, would have been than what we got through not talking. Instead of letting Hussein run off with a billion of his own ill-gotten wealth, we’ve spent close to a trillion dollars, killed upwards of a million innocent Iraqis, destroyed a country, driven four million people in a nation of 24 million into exile, ruined America’s global reputation, and bankrupted the US treasury, not to mention running up the price of oil four-fold.

Talk is cheap, I’d say.

Obama should be more forthright and admit that America has no enemies, and that we can talk to anyone.
____________
DAVE LINDORFF is a Philadelphia-based journalist and columnist. His latest book is “The Case for Impeachment” (St. Martin’s Press, 2006 and now available in paperback edition). His work is available at www.thiscantbehappening.net

Mr. and Mrs. America buy a new car, and it's NOT an Augmentation

thepen — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 04:10:13 -0500

Tonight's alert is a little different, in the form of an humorous and entertaining (hopefully) story. If you have already called your members of Congress toll free at 800-828-0498, 800-459-1887 or 800-614-2803, to voice opposition to the Bush/Cheney escalation, please consider forwarding a link to this posting to all your friends.

ACTION PAGE: http://www.peaceteam.net/no_escalation2.php

Late this last fall, as November approached, Mr. and Mrs. America decided to go shopping for a new car. Almost from the day they had bought it six years earlier, their current car, a Liberator model, had been very unreliable. Its instruments were constantly telling them things they knew from their own senses to be untrue. The gas gauge would indicate empty when they had just topped up the tank, or the speedometer would show them at over the speed limit when parked in their driveway.

Worse yet, the only time it seemed to run strong was when headed off at breakneck speed for distant cities. And even there it had proven difficult to control, swerving wildly and always smashing into other cars there. Most of the time it behaved as if someone else were driving it. Repair and insurance costs were becoming shocking, even awesome, with no end in sight. In a word, it was too large, and ill-suited for doing the protection errands they really needed to do closer to home.

So it was that they set out to return to the dealership that sold them their Liberator. The salesman stepped forward as he saw them walking onto the lot. "We just got in all the new models." he enthused. Mr. America interrupted him. "The Liberator you sold us last time has given us nothing but problems . . . we've decided to downsize." The salesman countered, "But the new models are so POWERFUL, the ads are all over the TV newscasts. Take the new Escalation for example, everybody's going to want one." Mr. and Mrs. America both frowned. "The Escalation has a very bad reputation," said Mrs. America. "Our family bought one 40 years ago and it was a total disaster. We lost a family member in that one."

"Never mind," urged the salesman, "take a look at this one. It's another brand-new model called the Surge." The name sounded intriguing, and Mr. and Mrs. America were willing to look. But when they saw it they immediately reacted. "I don't think you're hearing us," spoke Mr. America, "we wanted something smaller, this one looks just like the Escalation to me." "But wait," interjected the salesman, "the deal is, it may LOOK like an increase in size now, but in a couple months when the factory has a smaller replacement vehicle ready, you can trade it in for what you really want." "Gee, I don't know," said Mrs. America hesitantly, "how do we know when the replacement model will actually be ready?"

The salesman seemed a bit less confident now and started to hem and haw. "Well you know, there are always unexpected delays in producing a new product, labor strikes, things like that. But our estimates are it shouldn't be more than a couple months, a year at the outside." Mr. and Mrs. America could not bear the thought of being stuck with an oversized clunker for another year. "No," said Mr. America, "we're definitely not going to go for the Surge."

By now the salesman was starting to sweat profusely. He knew that the boss had already committed the entire capital resources of the dealership to buy a fleet of new Escalations, together with Surges and all its other sub-models. They were taking delivery on them already on the back lot. And the word had come down that any salesman who did not push the new lines would be fired on the spot. So many dedicated, talented, experienced and hard-working career employees had been terminated already. "OK, OK," stammered the salesman. "I've got just the thing for you, here it is, it's called the Augmentation."

Mr. and Mrs. America were becoming increasingly annoyed, even angry. They could not for their lives tell the fundamental difference between this Augmentation and the other models the salesman had already tried to push on them. It was still too big for them and the one thing they knew for sure was that they wanted something smaller that would give them better service at home. They just shook their heads and started to walk off the lot.

The salesman came running after them in a panic. "How about a Boost? It's just a little Boost." he pleaded. "Is it smaller than the car we have now?", asked Mrs. America. "No," admitted the salesman, as his face turned increasingly red, "but the Boost is only a SUBCOMPACT increase in size." "We're not interested in anything you've got," asserted Mr. America firmly as Mrs. America also shook her head.

It was then that they noticed another dealership across the street, so they thought they'd give them a chance. They told the salesman there, "we are interested in a new car, something less unwieldy than what we have now, and everything we've seen so far has been just the opposite" "Yes, I know," said the salesman, "a lot of people are coming over to us for our flagship model, the Direction." On first glance the Direction appeared to be much more like what they were looking for. It was at least somewhat smaller, but they remained skeptical.

ACTION PAGE: http://www.peaceteam.net/no_escalation2.php

Mr. America asked, "If we buy this new Direction, do you promise to give us responsive service, and that it won't turn out to be the same kind of trouble we have now." "I promise," assured the salesman. "OK," sighed Mr. America, "we'll take the new Direction, but you better be telling us the truth." "Or else, we'll bring it right back again this time," added Mrs. America. And that's the story of how Mr. and Mrs. America bought a new car.

Please take action NOW, so we can win all victories that are supposed to be ours.

To be added to the list go to http://www.peaceteam.net/in.htm

Iraq War Hearings Start Tomorrow

Bob Geiger — Mon, 08 Jan 2007 13:39:06 -0500

Senator Joe Biden (D-DE), the new Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has announced a tentative schedule for hearings to investigate the Bush administration's conduct of the Iraq war and to examine further options to free the United States from that quagmire.

“The purpose of these hearings will be to seek an answer to the question currently dominating the national debate: what options remain to secure America’s interests in Iraq? Where do we go from here?” said Biden.

Biden, who just yesterday announced that he will seek the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination, will be surveying a wide range of opinions on how to move forward in Iraq and has summoned Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to testify about the conduct of the war until now.

The Delaware Senator has already said that he is opposed to the idea of a "troop surge," which the White House is expected to announce this week and that he believes escalating U.S. presence in Iraq will do nothing to end America's disastrous involvement there.

"We should be drawing down troops gradually, forcing the Iraqis to meet their own needs to end this civil war by a political agreement," Biden said recently.

And, while Richard Lugar (R-IN), the ranking Republican member of the Foreign Relations Committee, says he is in favor of the hearings, it's important to remember that Lugar chaired that committee for two years in the do-nothing Republican Congress and did little to question why the war was going from bad to worse.

In contrast, Biden has been clamoring for such hearings for a long time and insists that he will show the leadership that's been missing on the committee. He also believes oversight has become even more important now that the White House appears unwilling to admit what a mess Iraq has become and Bush gives clear signs that he is simply biding his time until he leaves in January of 2009.

"I have reached the tentative conclusion that a significant portion of this administration, maybe even including the vice president, believes Iraq is lost," Biden said last week. "They have no answer to deal with how badly they have screwed it up. I am not being facetious now. Therefore, the best thing to do is keep it from totally collapsing on your watch and hand it off to the next guy -- literally, not figuratively."

The Foreign Relations Committee has already begun assembling quite a roster of witnesses to join Rice, including former national security advisers and secretaries of state, Brent Scowcroft, Sandy Berger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Henry Kissinger, Madeleine Albright and George Shultz.

And, as if these hearings don’t already provide enough basis for drama, two other factors may make them even more compelling.

The first is the fact that the Foreign Relations Committee just happens to be stacked with people who may also be seeking the presidency in 2008. Also involved in these hearings with Biden will be John Kerry (D-MA), Barack Obama (D-IL), Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE). All of them -- in addition to Biden -- are against any escalation of U.S. involvement in Iraq and may also use the hearings as a high-profile springboard to their own presidential campaigns. Throw in freshman Senator (and highly-decorated Veteran) Jim Webb (D-VA) who has also been assigned to the committee, Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and there may be even more potential for some fiery rhetoric.

The other interesting dynamic is the timing of the hearings as they will coincide with both Bush's speech this week -- in which he is expected to announce the ill-advised Iraq escalation -- and his State of the Union Address at the end of the month.

Should Bush make any provocative or questionable statements in either speech -- as we know he has certainly done in the past -- Biden and Senate Democrats can use these hearings as a huge platform on which to express their disagreement and to launch immediate investigations on any suspicious White House assertions.

Biden has been around this block once or twice, understands he's in a good position to make some noise and recently told Bush at the White House "Mr. President, this is your war." He also believes that, politically speaking, Democrats have very little to lose.

Said Biden: "I think we'll only have to accept responsibility for the war if we remain silent."

Stay tuned, folks.

You can read more from Bob at BobGeiger.com.

I Feel Atrios' Pain

Bob Fertik — Tue, 19 Dec 2006 10:12:41 -0500

Atrios is screaming, but no one at the top of the Democratic Party seems to be listening when he says repeatedly - and utterly correctly - that Bush will never leave Iraq, no matter how many members of the James Baker/Leon Panetta/David Broder WiseOldMenOfWashington Party ask him.

How is that little old me, one of the blogosphere's most disreputable rabid lambs, understands what's going a hell of a lot better than The Wise Old Men of Washington? Really, I'm just aghast at this. Bush has made it quite clear for months and years that leaving is losing. My brilliant insight isn't based on my ability to look deep into his soul, it is based on my ability to hear what he has said over and over again. It's possible the ISG could've provided cover for Bush to shift from "stay the course!" to something slightly different, but only if that slightly different thing didn't involve, you know, leaving. Bush has made that perfectly clear repeatedly. Leaving is losing. Staying is winning. It's that simple.

Atrios is exactly right with his diagnosis. For those of us who think the continued occupation of Iraq is a catastrophe, the question is: what is the solution?

It's idiotic to try to find a way to change his mind. Bush doesn't have a mind. He's the Decider, and That's That.

(And that's why his approval rating is down to 30% - because the 70% of Americans who do have minds have finally figured out that Bush doesn't have one.)

There are only two ways to get the U.S. out of Iraq.

1. Get Bush and Cheney out of the White House through impeachment, as advocated by ImpeachForChange.org

2. Vote down this spring's $160 billion appropriation to fund the occupation, as advocated by Progressive Democrats of America

Here at Democrats.com, we're putting all of our efforts into both of these solutions.

Atrios, are you with us - or are we just Dirty F*in Hippies?

Humpty Bushty Has Had a Great Fall

CactusPat — Sat, 16 Dec 2006 15:25:21 -0500

It took nine months for Poppy's wise men (Iraq Study Group) to come to conclusions on Smirk's IraqNam Quagmire. A hundred pages of BS, recommending everything, including the kitchen sink, to try and fix Jr.'s FU. What it boils down to is a twist on an old time riddle and rhyme -

Humpty Bushty sat on Iraq.

Humpty Bushty's Iraq suffered great attacks.

All of Poppy's wisemen and all Junior's yes-men

Can't put Humpty Bushty's IraqNam together again.

(more)

A perusal of the report and various news and commentary leads to no other conclusion, Iraq is FUBAR and a simplistic Mother Goose analogy is as good as any...

Speaking of falling.... If you hadn't noticed all the major polls of late have had Smirk's #'s in the toilet. Specifically Zogby's latest with Dear MisLeader at an all time low of 30% job approval, with 68% rating fair to poor.

Last week's monthly AP/IPSOS poll revealed even bigger trouble for the Smirkmeister. 33% job approval, tying for the lowest rating ever in that poll. But more ominous for Bush fans, only 14% strong approval, the lowest ever "strong" approval in the AP poll. His handling of the economy tied for second lowest at 38% approval. Plus lowest approval ever for domestic issues at 33%, lowest approval ever on foreign policy and the GWOT (Global War on Terror) at 35%, and lowest approval ever for handling of IraqNam Quagmire at 27% - w/71% disapproval.

In other words, the bastard pResidency George the Lesser is at it weakest, most vulnerable moment as the new democratic Congress is on the verge of assuming the reigns of power with intentions to investigate the myriad malfeasance of the Bush MisAdministration.

Let the hearings commence and IMPEACHMENT follow shortly thereafter!

The First Catastrophic President In American History

Fri, 08 Dec 2006 09:23:02 -0500

From the Huffington Post:

The First Catastrophic President In American History Says: "Not Satisfied With The Pace Of Progress In Iraq"

By Brent Budowsky

It was genuinely sad to see George Herbert Walker Bush cry, not out of pride for Jeb Bush, but out of horror for what has become of the George W. Bush Presidency.

It is even more sad to see American Gold Star mothers, with sons and daughters who pay the price for his extremism, ignorance and vanity.

MORE MORE MORE

Today, with Messrs. Baker and Hamilton before the Congress almost desperately looking for a way out of a war they believe is catastrophic, dire and deteriorating President Bush told the Nation: he is not satisifed with the pace of progress in Iraq.

Not satisfied with the pace of progress?...

I would put before the house this proposition: that George W. Bush is the first catastrophic President in American history. Even Richard Nixon at his worst, was a capable foreign policy President who opened the door to China, made negotiating progress with the Soviet Union, and with his many crimes and failures did not endanger world security.

America today stands on the brink of an arc of chaos, crisis, bloodshed and religious war that not only engulfs Iraq but could engulf the entire Middle East. For the first time in history our President cannot credibly be called the leader of the free world; in fact he has angered and alienated the overwhelming majority of people throughout the free world.

Not satisfied with the pace of progress in Iraq?.

The truth about official Washington is this: the one area of bipartisan consensus is that people across the aisles ask whether this President is dangerously close to crossing a Captain Queeg line as a leader who sails further and further away from a rational and sane understanding of the damage he does…

People must understand this: the issue is not merely whether President Bush is the worst President in history, it is whether he is the first truly catastrophic President in history…

I repeat my call: the President and Democratic Leaders should return to active duty the living former Presidents of the United States, most especially George Herbert Walker Bush and William Jefferson Clinton, to work with leaders throughout the free world for a new policy that can lead where there is now catastrophe, that can bring light where there is now darkness, that can bring hope where there is now death and despair that is dire and deteriorating…

Ladies and gentlemen, we have entered some very dangerous waters, and something that is profoundly different is urgently needed.

Brent Budowsky served as Legislative Assistant to U.S. Senator Lloyd Bentsen, responsible for commerce and intelligence matters, including one of the core drafters of the CIA Identities Law. Served as Legislative Director to Congressman Bill Alexander, then Chief Deputy Whip, House of Representatives. Currently a member of the International Advisory Council of the Intelligence Summit. Left government in 1990 for marketing and public affairs business including major corporate entertainment and talent management. He can be reached at brentbbi@webtv.net.

Click the title of the article, above, to read more.

Posted by Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

Senate Democrats on Iraq Study Group Report

Bob Geiger — Thu, 07 Dec 2006 08:43:23 -0500

Here's some reaction from leading Senate Democrats on the findings of the Iraq Study Group released yesterday. Note especially that Senators Feingold and Boxer believe that to some extent the Baker-Hamilton panel missed the real point underlying our current non-strategy in Iraq:

Incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV)

“Each day the situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate. Yesterday, Defense Secretary Nominee Robert Gates said ‘we’re not winning.’ Today, the Iraq Study Group said Iraq is ‘grave and deteriorating.’ Like the Iraq Study Group, I urge the President to change course."

Russ Feingold (D-WI)

"Unfortunately, the Iraq Study Group report does too little to change the flawed mind-set that led to the misguided war in Iraq. Maybe there are still people in Washington who need a study group to tell them that the policy in Iraq isn't working, but the American people are way ahead of this report.

"While the report has regenerated a few good ideas, it doesn't adequately put Iraq in the context of a broader national security strategy. We need an Iraq policy that is guided by our top national security priority – defeating the terrorist network that attacked us on 9/11 and its allies. We can't continue to just look at Iraq in isolation. Unless we set a serious timetable for redeploying our troops from Iraq, we will be unable to effectively address these global threats. In the end, this report is a regrettable example of 'official Washington' missing the point."

Herb Kohl (D-WI)

"I'm pleased that the Baker report has come to the same conclusions that many of us in the Senate reached last year -- we must begin a phased redeployment of troops as a way to both encourage the Iraqis to take more responsibility for their own security and also to reduce the extent to which a large U.S. footprint is fueling the insurgency."

Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)

"Finally some candor has broken through the fog with the Iraq Study Group's report. We hope this advice will convince the President to change course. The actions necessary to begin bringing our troops home, to take our brave men and women out of harms way, and to reduce the huge financial burden should commence as quickly as possible."

Patrick Leahy (D-VT)

"This report is another strong signal that consensus has emerged in this country, across the political spectrum, that ‘stay the course’ proved its failure as a strategy in Iraq long ago… In the meantime, while the President’s strategy seems to be little more than repeating the word ‘victory,’ our troops are stuck in the middle of a civil war and thousands of Iraqi civilians live under the specter of suicide bombings and ethnic cleansing.

"I suspect no one will be satisfied with every aspect of these recommendations, and I worry most of all that the President may simply be unwilling to accept the reality of a very dire situation and take the necessary steps to bring our troops home."

Carl Levin (D-MI)

"The Iraq Study Group report represents another blow at the policy of 'stay the course' that this administration has followed. Hopefully, this will be the end of that stay-the-course policy.

"The elections in November were the first major blow at that policy. The American people rose up against staying the course in Iraq, because the course is not working. The testimony of Dr. Gates, the next Secretary of Defense, yesterday represented another significant blow to that stay-the-course policy. Clearly, Dr. Gates does not believe we should stay the course. He agrees that only a political settlement by the Iraqis can end the violence in Iraq, and that the military force that we have there cannot do that for the Iraqis."

Robert Menendez (D-NJ)

“It is critical to note how far the discussion on the Iraq War has shifted in such a short period of time. It was only several months ago that those of us who called for a gradual redeployment of U.S. troops were criticized for not fully understanding the global challenges Americans face in the War on Terror. Yet today we hear from a bipartisan commission of distinguished Americans that, barring drastic unforeseen circumstances, American troops can indeed be out of Iraq by the first quarter of 2008 – a goal not too far from the one I’ve advocated for several months."

Ted Kennedy (D-MA)

"The verdict is in. There can no longer be any doubt that the violence and chaos in Iraq are getting worse, that our current strategy is failing, and that we need to work together on a new strategy that will make it possible for us to bring our troops home. The only question is whether the White House will heed this clarion call and agree to change the perilous course we have been on in Iraq since Saddam Hussein fell and the chaos began.

"More of the same failed policy that depends on an open-ended commitment of our military will not bring America closer to success. It will not stop the violence. It will only continue to undermine our own national security interests."

Evan Bayh (D-IN)

"The Administration's continued insistence to stay the course has produced few results in the past three years and is weakening our overall national security. We need to try a different approach, one that puts pressure on the Iraqi people to make the tough decisions that only they can make if they are to succeed."

Barbara Boxer (D-CA)

“Today’s long-awaited report by the Iraq Study Group tells the truth about the current situation in Iraq– that the situation is grave and deteriorating– which is all the more reason that I hope the President takes this report to heart. Like last month's midterm election, the report is a clear repudiation of the President's 'stay the course' policy.

“However, I am disappointed that the report failed to endorse a clear timetable and end date for the redeployment of U.S. troops from Iraq and rejected the idea of creating semi-autonomous regions in Iraq. Above all, I hope that this report will remind the President that the American people are demanding change in our policy in Iraq.”

Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY)

"The American people have spoken. The Iraq Study Group has spoken. Experts across the political spectrum have spoken. Even the President’s nominee for Defense Secretary has spoken. Now it’s time for the President to listen and change the course in Iraq.”

Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)

"In all of the last three and a half years, this is the first time that I have seen the opportunity for a new path to be paved in Iraq . It is such an opportunity, and I truly hope that the President seizes this opportunity.”

Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)

“The report essentially says the Bush Administration’s current policies in Iraq and the Middle East are not working. It also makes clear that no matter what steps we take to extricate ourselves from this situation, it will continue to be at a great cost to our country – both in lives and resources."

Tom Harkin (D-IA)

"It is my sincere hope that this is the end of failed stay-the-course rhetoric and the beginning of a real solution to bringing our troops home. The findings are an indictment of the President’s failed policies in the Middle East. The report clearly acknowledges that the situation in Iraq is grave and deteriorating. The report rightfully calls for a new and enhanced diplomatic effort in the region to include dialogue with Iran and Syria, additional focus on Afghanistan, and a renewed and sustained commitment by the U.S. to a comprehensive approach to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

“The President owes it to the brave members of the military to find a way out of the mess he’s made. Our troops have preformed brilliantly and accomplished their task. Our troops achieved their goals despite a series of disastrous decisions by their civilian leaders here in Washington. But there is little left our military can do. It is time to bring the troops home and concentrate on finding a political solution to the crisis in Iraq.”

You can read more from Bob at BobGeiger.com.

Iraq Study Group Report A Coverup?

fast2write — Thu, 07 Dec 2006 00:40:20 -0500

The Iraq study group report, which dominated the news on Wednesday with the alleged revelation that the politics of George W. Bush in the Middle East are not working, just as the day before Robert Gates' Senate confirmation hearings dominated the news with his admission that the U.S. is losing the war in Iraq, are both part of an orchestrated campaign to provide political cover for one of the most corrupt governments in the history of democracy and to keep public interest and media coverage away from key issues that face the planet.

And once again, the complete lack of understanding of the issues on the part of the U.S. news media is part of the problem, not the solution.

The Locust Fork Journal

Iraq Study Group Report A Coverup?

Alternate Tiny URL

A Historic Middle East Peace Initiative

Wed, 06 Dec 2006 12:15:55 -0500

From the Washington Note:

The POTUS Plan: Mobilize All Living Former Presidents For A Historic Middle East Peace Initiative

by Brent Budowsky

At this moment of crisis and chaos, it is time for American leaders to lead and lift this land we love, to rally what Thomas Jefferson called the decent opinion of mankind, and to inspire young generations everywhere with a panoramic vision for a lasting peace in the Middle East.

The real America is never a choice between the arrogance of power and the fear of failure, it is the sustenance of military and economic power put in the service of great aspirations of good and decent people everywhere.

President George W. Bush, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Minority Leader John Boehner should announce together that the United States is undertaking a great mission to achieve a lasting peace in the Middle East, with the active involvement of every living former American President.

They should announce a formal Presidential Council of Advisors that will include regular, hands-on advice and action from former Presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, George Herbert Walker Bush, and Bill Clinton.

They should announce that the four former Presidents will travel together on a global head of state mission to obtain commitments for a five year, trillion dollar economic, hope and reconstruction program that would become available to all in the Middle East when (and only when) they reach formal peace accords and implement cease fires.

They should issue an open public appeal to leaders and believers of the great religions and the generation of young people throughout the Middle East.

The unity and stature of bringing together our former Presidents will send this powerful signal to the world: the United States will put the full force and power of our country behind a historic search for peace, justice, security and a better life as America's answer to poverty, bloodshed, hopelessness, and despair…

Brent Budowsky served as Legislative Assistant to U.S. Senator Lloyd Bentsen, responsible for commerce and intelligence matters, including one of the core drafters of the CIA Identities Law. Served as Legislative Director to Congressman Bill Alexander, then Chief Deputy Whip, House of Representatives. Currently a member of the International Advisory Council of the Intelligence Summit. Left government in 1990 for marketing and public affairs business including major corporate entertainment and talent management. He can be reached at brentbbi@webtv.net.

Click the title of the article, above, to read more of this inspiring essay.

Posted by Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com