Skip to comments.Has Nothing Been Learned Since 2003? Corporate Media Welcome Back Iraq War Hawks To Make Case for Iran
Posted on 01/12/2020 8:18:44 AM PST by davikkm
"No voices calling for peace. No voices critical of empire. Just establishment media and current and former Pentagon officials who feed off the trillion dollar war machine."
As President Donald Trump spent the early days of 2020 instigating and then backing down from a potentially catastrophic confrontation with Iran, corporate media in the U.S. turned to the very same people who promoted the country's worst foreign policy disaster in a generation to advocate for repeating the mistakes of two decades ago.
The decision of networks and cable news outlets like CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News to bring on a stream of past advocates for and architects of the 2003 invasion of Iraq was panned by progressives who watched in horror and frustration as the same arguments were deployed in service of all-out war with Iran.
"It's War Inc. all over again," tweeted The Nation's Dave Zirin.
Trump's ordered assassination of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani on January 3 proved the catalyst for escalated tensions between the U.S. and Iran. It also opened the door for news outlets to welcome back some of the key Bush-era war cheerleaders.
"In a sane and just society, the architects of the nearly 17-year-old war in Iraqwhich is still ongoing and has left an estimated half-million people deadwould face war crimes charges and those who cheered them on would be thoroughly discredited." Jessica Schulberg, HuffPost
The more things change, the more they stay the same, wrote Rolling Stone's Tim Dickinson.
(Excerpt) Read more at investmentwatchblog.com ...
It appears Iran might collapse before the ink is even put to contracts by the multinational security firms that keep the Muslim elites on both sides of the Koran well cared for in their bubbles.
I think the media was SUPRISED by people like Bolton supporting the rub-out. If they knew support for Trump was coming, they would have been kept off the air.
As to policy...Trump simply doesn’t give a crap what the Neocons want, and he didn’t with Salami. He simply saw Americans under attack, and saw a need to put an end to it.
Our wars in the Middle East are not endless. They are days or weeks t most. It is the nation building that is endless.
Ah yes. War is never because half the world’s oil supply is being fought over by Muslims and Socialists. It’s always because the Evil Corporations want it.
We know Iran is willing to launch SAMs with an itch trigger finger. They will certainly do the same with a nuke on a ballistic missile. Once this happens, at Israel most likely, WWIII will begin. They cannot have nukes.
Issue is Iranian expansionism. That general had no business being in Iraq in terms of Bismarckian logic.
The second issue is that when you have the deep state with Pelosi bragging that they do not need to negotiate and have all the cards in hands, we have a case of war by crazies. The same applies to Iranian hubris.
Remains to be seen, but my bet is that Iran will not negotiate and continue its own hubris, while our warhawks will fall in the trap of making it look like the negotiation party.
Oil is the life blood of the world. Only a small percentage of the world thinks like the libs in the USA. Europe and China will be more than willing seize the straits of Hormuz to keep the oil flowing.
The attack on the Baghdad Embassy by Iranian proxies proved the catalyst for escalated tensions between the U.S. and Iran.
There, fixed it.
This article is typical of a certain strand of Trump criticism as it pretends that a bombing campaign (naval, missiles...) equates to a Bush-like ground invasion. It just doesnt. Also, Trump is pressuring Iran but note that he always provides an off-ramp. The anti ground invasion crowd is just knocking down a strawman that clearly the President has no intention of doing. In fact, best of all would he if the Iraqis kicked us out.
Catastrophic for whom? (of course, it would be for Iran, but I don't think that is the author's belief).
Trump's ordered assassination of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani on January 3 proved the catalyst for escalated tensions between the U.S. and Iran
No. The escalation of tension was the attack on our embassy. Why do liberals always get it backward?
And what kind of name is Eoin?
I agree with your point except when you refer to a “bombing campaign.” Clinton, Bush, and Obama all used ongoing bombing campaigns - dozens or even hundreds of missions spread out over weeks, months, or even years. Trump’s bombing missions have been limited - a quick strike on a specific target, then OUT.
This reminds me of the “Cuban Missile Crises” where people start in the middle so that they can have the explanation they want. Here are the true events regarding missiles in Cuba:
1) USA deployed missiles to Turkey;
2) USSR deployed missiles to Cuba;
3) USSR withdrew missiles from Cuba;
4) USA withdrew missiles from Turkey.
People like to think that only 2) and 3) were the “Cuban Missile Crisis” while ignoring that 3) and 4) were per agreement between JFK and Khrushchev.
Although the article is a screed, there is possible truth to it. Presidents are hemmed in by what narrative gets to them through their advisors, the news, and their informal sources.
People who want to go to war can manipulate what the news shows pretty effectively. Right now, I’m seeing stuff that prey’s on patriotic Americans best instincts — crowds in Iran refusing to walk on an American flags, etc.
Maybe this PR campaign represents the best truth en masse about what’s actually going on in Iran today. But maybe it’s just one crowd while the others down the street are viciously anti-american. Maybe it’s completely faked.
We really have no way to assess the truth of these kind of claims in terms of whether the Iranian people en masse are longing for freedom or whether our Deep State, en masse, is longing for a war it can pin to Donald Trump and prevent his election in 2020.
This kind of stuff manipulates Presidents too. And we have a patriotic American president this kind of stuff may be influencing. Or he may be well advised about the real facts on the ground. I just have no idea.
But I’ve gotten very cynical about how we go to war and the public manipulation that paves the way. Gulf of Tonkin (Johnson, Vietnam), Iraqi’s torturing beautiful young Kuwaiti girls (Bush I congressional testimony, Kuwait War), WMD and Iraqi’s longing for freedom (Clinton, Iraq Bombinng campaign, Bush II, Gulf War II), Syrian use of WMD’s (Obama), Turkey’s coming genocide of Kurds (Deep State under Trump) and now Iranians refusing to walk on an American flag (maybe deep state under Trump).
Some of these may have been truth. Some were maybe false but actually believed by our presidents (Iraqi WMD). Others we know were made up.
Another SH*THEAD loudmouth, who knows nothing. Go away!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.