The Importance Of Vigilant Discussion
If there is one thing that is routine with regards to the emails in my inbox on a daily basis, it’s accusations that this website does little more than “preach to the choir”. That accusation is then commonly followed by suggestions that information and commentary be presented in a far more fair and balanced fashion (where have you heard that slogan before?), and that I should spend less time focusing on the same themes and more time focusing on others because, as it was put to me this morning, …“constantly talking about the war in Iraq is boring. We get it, now move along!”.
It’s true, and I’ll not deny it, I spend a great deal of time blogging about the war in Iraq, and for obvious reasons. The most important being that it’s a complete disaster that many have turned a blind eye to it because they feel the arguments for and against it have become stale. Added to this is the media fatigue that has caused many to simply not care about it as much as they once did, something that I find incredibly irresponsible.
The real importance of the war in Iraq is what it symbolizes with regards to the foreign policy doctrine adopted by this administration, one of the most dangerous in US history. Its effects are far reaching, and certainly reverberate beyond the borders of Iraq. But Iraq remains the quintessential example of the employment of that doctrine, and is therefore of incredible importance. Added to that is the massive loss of Iraqi lives since 2003, the complete crippling of their economy, and the dissolution of their daily lives.
The figures remain the same. Yesterday 78 Iraqis were killed, 75 more wounded, and 2 US soldier were also killed in action.
Boring - because yesterday, and the day before, the numbers were similar, be they slightly higher or lower. The whole thing’s a mess and it’s best to not think about it - unless you’re able to offer a solution as to how to end the war, what’s the point in constantly talking about it?
How about public discourse?
How can the public form opinions or be moved to examine the realities of such things so that they might be moved to counteract them? The reality of the debacle in Iraq is that it must be examined from the top down. It must start with the Office of the President and from there slip and slide its way through the various agencies and departments that allowed the President to justify the war in the first place. Accountability is everything, and while history cannot be altered, and the situation in Iraq cannot be magically solved, we have a responsibility to constantly examine what is happening there and weigh it against the falsehoods presented with regards to the reasons for going to war in the first place.
With regards to the war’s conclusion, I will say that while many believe that the answer lies in the adoption of a timetable for withdrawal, which I do support, or the redeployment of forces, I believe the first step in the process is the impeachment of the President and the Vice President, who represent the the primary apparatus that ensures the war’s continuation.
There are many who will read that and think it folly. Some will argue that to cause such a disruption in government would only ‘empower the enemy’, as the mantra goes. Others believe that, from a legal standpoint, there are no grounds for it. Interestingly, a new book written by former Congresswomen and Brooklyn District Attorney, Elizabeth Holtzman, and Cynthia Cooper, a journalist and lawyer, details five issues on which the President could legally be impeached. They include…
Deceptions into Taking the Country into War in Iraq
Reckless Indifference to Human Life in Katrina and Iraq
Illegal Wiretapping and Surveillance of Americans
Permitting Torture
Leaking Classified Information
There is little doubt that some of these issues apply to the Office of the Vice President as well, especially the first and fifth.
Were both Bush and Cheney impeached, a process that, given the gravity of those charges, may very well result in their resignations rather than them enduring impeachment proceedings, the speaker of the House would become President, perhaps allowing for a broader spectrum of ideas to be floated in Congress with regards to a solution.
This first step is crucial, because no matter the proposed legislation regarding US involvement in Iraq that is sent from the hill to the White House, the President has the ability to use his veto, as he has in the past without hesitation. Given that his administration is in too deep in Iraq, as has been the case with past administrations, primarily that of Johnson and Nixon, the chances of it admitting the truth about how disastrous the war has become is next to none. This is reflected in the removal of those in military leadership positions that have attempted to flat out tell the administration that Iraq is not only a lost cause, but one that will continue to produce pointless American deaths and increase the likelihood of international terrorism. Thus, the administration appoints new commanders who will, for the most part, tell them what they want to hear, while employing various likeminded think tanks to provide them entirely unrealistic option papers that merely buy into their policy objectives. This phenomenon also occurred at the CIA following 9/11 and during the run up the invasion of Iraq, those veteran voices at the agency largely silenced in favour of tenuous and entirely partisan information being provided by a whole new generation within the agency focused more on appeasing the administration that doing their jobs.
That’s not to sat that some haven’t tried to tell the truth. Unfortunately, for the most part, they’ve been quietly removed from their positions for attempting to do so. One of the more important examples of this occurring has to do with the CIA’s initial Baghdad Station Chief who wrote two aardwolfves warning his superiors, and the administration, in 2003 of the growing insurgency and what he viewed as the failures of the invasion and occupation that had to be addressed. After sending his second missive in December of 2003, he was removed from the position.
Like Johnson and Nixon with regards to Vietnam, the United States losing a war is not an option that is on the table. In fact, I believe that it wouldn’t be an option even were a Democrat in the same position right now. It’s important to remember that Johnson was a Democrat and responsible for the escalation of US forces in Vietnam to what, in this day and age, would be viewed as outrageous. In one year alone, 1965, US troop levels went from 3,500 Marines (not including military advisors already in-country) to 200,000 troops. But there again, Johnson was not without his ‘Cheney’s’. In his case it was the Joint Chiefs, who routinely bumped heads with then Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. Even so, at the end of his first full term, I believe that Johnson’s admission that he would not seek re-election spoke directly to the ‘mistake of Vietnam’ and the fact that Robert Kennedy, who was vastly popular, not to mention against the war, would most likely have secured the 37th Presidency for the Democrats, whereas Johnson’s numbers were so dismal that his re-election was a foregone impossibility.
The importance of impeaching the President and Vice President is that it would create leeway with regards to immediate measures being taken rather than waiting out Bush’s term in office and the disaster being handed off to a new administration that would be forced to languish under the weight of trying to go about disengaging in a way that didn’t hurt them politically. The war itself would become the primary issue of the impeachment, I believe, allowing that leeway to exist.
But even then, that supposes that the President would resign rather than wade through the impeachment process, which would surely last until the end of his second term. Were he to do so, the status quo would, obviously, remain, though it may very well help the following administration’s ability to make important changes a reality and certainly aid in the removal of the Republicans from the White House – and perhaps even the House in greater numbers.
The entirely ambiguous context of The War On Terror is the Bush administration’s trump card, and they play it whenever they can. In the case of impeachment, it would certainly be at the forefront of their argument that such proceedings would only hurt the country and embolden those that they routinely point to as threats. The President has made clear that he firmly believes that if the United States were to abandon Iraqi that ‘the enemy’ would simply find its way onto American soil. Unfortunately for the President, recent occurrences in Great Britain prove that theory to be largely inaccurate.
Being that the rest of the world views the United States as a greater threat to global security than terrorism, impeachment might not necessarily be a bad thing. All that stands in the way of it is, in many ways, the insularity of the American people. And that is precisely why blogging about the war in Iraq on a routine basis is important.
Critical Post War Realities
All of that said, and no matter a long term US military footprint, the reality of Iraq’s future, largely because of the invasion and occupation and how poorly they were planned, is most likely a bloody one. At this unfortunate point, that is the harsh reality, and one that I’ll not deny. But that being the case, the continued presence of a foreign occupational force will not, in any way, ensure the pacification of the population. If anything, it will only make matters worse. The need for international interventionism under the strict guidance of the United Nations, with a focus on obtaining the cooperation and/or participation of various militant factions within the country, one that excludes those nations that joined the ‘coalition of the willing’, is, perhaps, the only real vehicle left with which to attempt to contain what might otherwise become one of the most disastrous civil conflicts of our time.
In the end, Iraq may very well return to what it once was under the Ottomans for centuries – three distinct provinces that would, most probably, form nations unto themselves or be annexed, which could very well lead to wider regional conflicts and destabilization. Of course, this too poses problems, the more notable of which involves natural resources, the fact that many parts of central Iraq, and other locations, are inhabited by both Sunnis and Shi’ites, and that the formation of an independent Kurdistan would most likely provide Turkey the justification it so desperately desires to invade it in hopes of deterring any widespread movement calling for the formation of a united Kurdistan.
Want to bookmark or share this entry?
This entry was posted on Friday, July 6th, 2007 at 12:50 pm. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
July 6th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
waaaaaaaaa waaaaaaaaaaa, Matt won’t talk about this, waaaaaaaa waaaaaaa, Matt only talks about that. You know what, I don’t like Friends so when it comes on I change the channel.
July 6th, 2007 at 1:03 pm
Matt, where could I get that book? I tried looking around for it..can’t seem to find it
July 6th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
Kudos for this post, Matt. I think it might be one of the most articulate and well written that I’ve read. I can’t speak for everyone but I can assure you that I’ve read every one of these ‘war in iraq’ posts and I don’t find them redundant - You’re 100% right, routine posts about this kind of thing may be the difference between apathy and action, and that’s never a bad thing.
July 6th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
[quote comment="18665"]waaaaaaaaa waaaaaaaaaaa, Matt won’t talk about this, waaaaaaaa waaaaaaa, Matt only talks about that. You know what, I don’t like Friends so when it comes on I change the channel.[/quote]
no doubt.
July 6th, 2007 at 1:13 pm
There’s a difference between just posting “the war is bad” everyday, and actually discussing it based on continually unfolding events and facts, the latter of which is done here and done well. So I’m not sure I understand anyones point that the material here is stale or boring. That’s kind of like saying the Sports section of the paper is the same everyday.
As for those who demand answers and solutions on Iraq, especially if they happen to be American readers, I would suggest they contact their local Congressman or woman, and demand answers and solutions from the President - of the unambiguous variety - rather than demand them from Canadian musician/bloggers.
Maybe I’m crazy, but that’s who I’d be demanding “proposed solutions” from.
July 6th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
I think its good that you keep on the subject; that’s exactly what they want people to do (get tired of it). Bloggers who stay on top of it, such as yourself, are sticking it to them.
July 6th, 2007 at 1:36 pm
Anyone know what would be involved in an impeachment? I.e. what is the first step that has to happen? Would congress vote on it, or does the attorney general have to bring up charges against the president?
July 6th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Actually, I seem to have found some info:
From here.
July 6th, 2007 at 1:46 pm
And if you look here , this gives you a bit more history on impeachment in the US.
July 6th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Sorry to threadjack, but if 53% of the visitors are from the U.S., does that hopefully mean there will be some shows in the US or near the border? (still crossing fingers)
July 6th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
I still manage to find it amazing that people would write such sentences as “constantly talking about the war in Iraq is boring. We get it, now move along!”. I bet the human beings who are watching their people, children, mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, neighboors, etc being bombed, shot, raped, tortured on a daily basis wish they could move along. I guess some are more fortunate than others in having the comfort of a safe home and luxury items to write such things without realizing that these people are humans. I hope with all of my heart that, if these lucky ones were to put themselves in the shoes of the people living in a war every day, they could understand why this subject should never be dropped.
July 6th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
Never before have we seen such a conflict in which there are truly no viable solutions in sight.
We cannot simply leave, for many reasons, one of the most important being countries like Saudi Arabia and Syria explicitly telling the U.S. that if they pull their troops out, they will immediately start officially supporting the Sunni insurgency.
At the same time, remaining in Iraq is doing nothing more than installing more hatred towards the U.S., Christianity, and the west.
It’s like some God-awful curse.
July 6th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
As I always say every time this complaint comes up, I’m an American who visits the site daily and I appreciate whole-heartedly the information I glean here and it helps in a very meaningful way. I can’t sift through all the news that Matt does every day because I have a demanding infant and full time job. I think he’s performing a wonderful public service, in my humble opinion. Don’t change a thing.
July 6th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
and as of yesterday 45 perecent of Americans are in favor of impeachment.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070706195925.rdm9h3ci&show_article=1
July 6th, 2007 at 2:45 pm
I agree with KBryce completely. The information that Matt provides allows me to stay up on issues that I may not have time to delve into researching on my own. The passionate insight that he shares about the topics which he discusses are what make a daily visit to the site a must for me.
July 6th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
I think a number of people are afraid of vigilant discussion in re: challenging their world-view, being more accountable to themselves and others, etc. And so they claim “NOTHING TO SEE HERE, MOVE ALONG, MOVE ALONG.”
July 6th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
Matt keep doing what you’re doing. As an American I appreciate it.
Usually the things you blog spark my curiosity and motivate me to research different topics I usually wouldn’t research.
The US medis is so biased it’s nice to get info from an outside source.
Off the topic……………did you see that microsoft is setting up shop in Vancouver?? Initially approx 200 jobs with the potential of 1000 down the road. The US press is calling it an attack on the US middle class———citing, of course, the strict immigration laws and HB-1 work passports that we have in place. (did I say that right?)
July 6th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Being of that 53% and a daily reader, many thanks to you and Dale for the hard work and dedication you put into the site. You really have a good thing going on here.
July 6th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
It boggles my mind how any of my countrymen could spend the time writing a complaint to you about the content of your blog, yet most likely not write a complaint to their representative or president about the war. Or better yet, better inform themselves about what their country has become… Part of me feels I should apologize for their ignorance, another that they should apologize to me and pretty much everyone else in the world.
July 6th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
While I will be the first to admit that if everything is emphasized at a yelling volume then nothing is emphasizedand nothing stands out, I do think that in this case it’s something that should be yelled about over and over.
In our privileged position we can easily call the war in Iraq stale and boring because the American mass media has hammered it at us for years and years. I remember seeing the lies told on the TV and then more lies on TV to overlap the previous. I mean, do you remember the days of the link between Hussein and Bin Laden? Or even the argument about WMDs in Iraq that were never found? The history books will not be kind to Bush and i know that 50 years from now someone like myself will read about all of this and find it way more fascinating and disturbing than the common population living here and now.
Also, we are privileged in our distance from the actual events of this war. The torture? That’s just a word. 50 Iraqis killed daily? They have no faces to us. If the war were happening on American soil, on the other hand, I can assure you that nobody would call it boring or stale. Large geographic gaps are a great buffer to protect our apathy.
Lastly, I think that an impeachment is exactly what the American government needs. Isn’t the original reason why Americans have the right to bear arms exactly for these cases? To get rid of a government in the name of freedom? Instead of playing follow the leader or simon says perhaps a dangerous precident needs to be set up for something like…i don’t know…Democracy.
July 6th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
I really enjoy reading your blog articles.
Although,. some of the language in your articles, .. is ‘opinionated’ rather than “concrete truth”.. in my opinion.
Really enjoy.
And I do see some truth behind this particular article,… it’s rather disappointing that certain individuals whom frequent your blog posts.. are absoulately oblivious of how much you do care about “the word getting out” on basically every subject.
“I think a number of people are afraid of vigilant discussion in re: challenging their world-view, being more accountable to themselves and others, etc. And so they claim “NOTHING TO SEE HERE, MOVE ALONG, MOVE ALONG.”
I agree, brother.
kudos.
July 6th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
It would seem that if someone asks another to kindly shut up then the latter ought not to. It seems to be a recurrent theme that individuals confuse politeness with tact. That is to say, one should not discuss politics in order to be polite as opposed to one should discuss politics politely. What our western nations need is more discourse, not less; and I mean more in both frequency and breadth.
July 7th, 2007 at 4:05 am
Let the discourse begin…..The American military is NOT fighting against the people of Iraq. The United States and its military are not imperialist. Time and again the United States, its military and money have made the attempt to promote democracy in the world. The United States has never occupied or established a government in any nation on any continent in the world except our own. This fact is overlooked when we engage in discussing various conflicts (wars) that the media perceives unfavorable. Since Iraq is the most relevant issue at hand, lets dissect the true essence of what the United States is doing there. First, let’s look at the country of Iraq and why its important. Under the regime of Saddam Hussien, the country flourished socially and somewhat economically. The citizens of Iraq, women included, are the most educated and progressive in the entire middle east region. Iraqis had not been limited by social/religious constraints and were encouraged to seek economic independence/success. Iraqis realize that a true democracy is the only way to foster the free market they desperately desire. The obstacle happens to be the multitude of religious factions that want to suppress the free capitalist market and Iraqi society. Hence, the United States assistance if you will. The Iraqis need money, security and training in order for them to reassert themselves as a formidible sovereign nation. Interestingly enough, the American military can provide these things. Why should we? What’s in it for us? Think about the implications of Iraq being a democratic nation in the Middle East and the far reaching effects that would have. Iraq has the opportunity to become one of the first truly independent democratic nations entrenched amid monarchies, dictatorships etc. They will revolutionize that region of the world not only by their government but economically, scientifically, and socially. Of course all this will lead to a somewhat peaceful existence within the confines of the country. And you know what? The contemporaries in neighboring countries are going to see what Iraq has and want a little of that for themselves. Iraq is going to be the example of freedom in the Middle East. The possibilities are endless.
Statistically, the American military is enduring the lowest number of casualties during what they consider “peace time” in over 200 years. Any branch of the military will confirm this. When “Iraq:Operation Freedom” begun, it was a well known fact there would be casualties on both sides. The estimates provided to Congress/Senate and the American people were huge. Right now, the casualties haven’t hit a significant percentage of the projected amount from 2003. Here’s OUR problem: instant gratification. We want what we want when we want it. Without inconvenience, without having to think, without being concerned about our neighbor or future. I can not even believe I have witnessed the evolution of narcissism AND apathy in only one generation. I didn’t think it was possible to be both, but I see it everyday. It is a global sickness not merely confined to the western hemisphere.
I love my country, I love my constitution and I love my freedom. Maybe its because my parents belonged to “the greatest generation”. A generation that fought daily for EVERYTHING I have RIGHT NOW! Knowing what my parents and mostly everyone else’s grandparents did for me, the country I live in, the community I reside, the ongoing debates are embarassing. I am hard pressed to find one american citizen born here that is grateful on a daily basis to live in a free society. I sometimes have more in common with a recent immigrant than my own community. THAT frustrates me. Don’t talk to me about accountability within the government until you show me strong examples of accountability within anytown, USA. My government is accountable, the most recent Senate elections prove such things. However, my federal government is NOT responsible for what happens in MY state or MY county or MY town. I AM! The Federal Government is a reflection of local american communities. It is truly disturbing to hear and see how the world views the United States. Even within my own country, there is disgust.
My father used to say “Show me your friends and I will show you who you are” but I see his wisdom can be replaced with any word. Show me your government and I will show you who you are, Show me your passion and I will show you who you are, Show me your parents and I will show you who you are……
July 7th, 2007 at 10:03 am
[quote comment="18765"]Time and again the United States, its military and money have made the attempt to promote democracy in the world[/quote]
how good is democracy anyhow?
:p
July 7th, 2007 at 10:40 am
[quote comment="18765"]Let the discourse begin…..The American military is NOT fighting against the people of Iraq. The United States and its military are not imperialist. Time and again the United States, its military and money have made the attempt to promote democracy in the world. The United States has never occupied or established a government in any nation on any continent in the world except our own. This fact is overlooked when we engage in discussing various conflicts (wars) that the media perceives unfavorable. Since Iraq is the most relevant issue at hand, lets dissect the true essence of what the United States is doing there. First, let’s look at the country of Iraq and why its important.
…
My father used to say “Show me your friends and I will show you who you are” but I see his wisdom can be replaced with any word. Show me your government and I will show you who you are, Show me your passion and I will show you who you are, Show me your parents and I will show you who you are……[/quote]
Holy crap that was obnoxious.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:19 am
Coming from one that would originally have to claim ignorance on many of the topics you discussed in that blog, I thought it was very informative. I also agree that that was one of your most well-written entries. Thanks for continuing to share your knowledge with the world-wide-web. In all actuality it doesn’t really matter if you speak of the war in Iraq until you’re blue in the face because there are still many individuals that do not understand the protest against it. After all education is the key to our survival as a species, and I think I speak for most when I say your words are aiding and molding many fine “troops” of your own. KUDOS :)
July 7th, 2007 at 4:03 pm
[quote comment="18780"][quote comment="18765"]
Holy crap that was obnoxious.[/quote]
No, that comment was. Very constructive…anything else enlightening you’d like to add.
July 8th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
Thanks Matt!
July 9th, 2007 at 10:10 am
To uberadtx:
I think some of the topics you brought to light are important and require a great deal of scrutiny, most importantly what seems to be the overtone of your discourse, namely the greed inherent in our expectations of the war in Iraq.
As you say, “Here’s OUR problem: instant gratification”. I’d argue that the time has passed where the use of words like “instant” or “immediate” can be justified. It’s not simply that we are hungry for results, we’re starved for signs that we are not at a stalemate and that there is a reason to continue this fight. It’s as if we are in line at the market and, instead of getting closer to the till, we move further away with every passing customer.
As a final note, you mentioned that “the United States has never occupied or established a government in any nation on any continent in the world except our own.” Not for lack of trying though, eh?
July 10th, 2007 at 4:06 am
Uberadtx,
you are the epitome of brainwashing as an art form at it’s best.