portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts united states

9.11 investigation

The $160 Billion war

In 2003, the cost of the war was put at $50 billion and now it is $160 billion and rising -- and this is an unprovoked war of choice.
Iraq is not Bush's Vietnam
The Independent, April 10, 2004

Washington DC -- When George Bush and Tony Blair meet here next week to discuss Iraq, one dark truth will dominate everything: This is not how it was supposed to be.

A year ago, the assumption was that come April 2004, a liberated Iraq would be well on the way to acquiring democracy, freedom, peace and prosperity, and all those other wonderful attributes of civilisation Western armies can bestow. How different today. A year on, an ungrateful Iraq is on the brink of civil war, its factions united only by resentment of the American and allied occupiers, and by the bullets and bombs they use against them.

As one Iraqi city after another erupts in violence, Americans feel less rather than more safe in their own country, 30 months after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. And the President's once seemingly inevitable re-election is now hostage to a dirty, semi-guerrilla war thousands of miles away.

Sound familiar? It should. Almost 36 years ago another President, named Lyndon Johnson, mired in an unwinnable war, announced he was stepping down. George Bush will not. But the political vocabulary of that era is flourishing again. The US again is "trapped in a quagmire".

This President, whose casus belli over weapons of mass destruction (WMD) has proved a fiction, is accused of having his own yawning "credibility gap". Most Iraqis want America to succeed, Donald Rumsfeld, the Defence Secretary, assured the world again on Wednesday. "We haven't lost control," he said. But this was not the grinning, bullying, confident Rumsfeld of a year ago, mocking the fainthearted as US armoured columns roared across Iraq. This time, he was brusque and tight-faced, as he tried to explain dozens of new US casualties.

In 2003, the cost of the war was put at $50bn (27bn). It is $160bn and rising. The troops were promised they would be home within a year. Now the 135,000-strong US deployment will increase to 150,000, confronted by the grim reality of an open-ended stay. Suspicions grow that Iraq, has, in the words of Richard Clarke, White House counter-terrorism chief under President Bush and Bill Clinton, undermined the war on terror. Then there are those missing WMD, in whose name 650-odd Americans and untold thousands of Iraqis have died?Clearly, hell-bent on taking out Saddam Hussein, the Bush team ignored CIA warnings of how difficult post-war reconstruction would be.

In March 2003, three-quarters of Americans backed the invasion. That figure is 57 per cent today. Iraq is not Vietnam. Iraq is an unprovoked war of choice, launched by a US President against a regime that posed no threat to the US, or anyone else.

homepage: homepage: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=510169

Spend, Spend, Spend 09.Apr.2004 17:49

Big Spender Bush

I didn't think Neo-Cons like Bush really believed in sound fiscal policy any more than they believed in compassion, and now I know that I am correct.

That's why anyone who calls themselves a "Conservative" and still votes for Big Spender Bush is a $ucker!

There is a VERY efficient Solution 10.Apr.2004 14:07

Tony Blair's dog

Let the criminals in the Bush administration and the corporations
backing them repay every cent they have stolen from the American
people in the biggest scam in modern history.

Make them pay back every cent.

The wars will not stop! 10.Apr.2004 14:41

Bird dog

Until the truth about who is behind them is shown!

Think about it!
What happens if all the wars stop.
Corporations that build weapons and profit from them will be shut down.

Follow the money trail.
Fix the problem.

The Vietnam Comparison 11.Apr.2004 09:45

Robert Ted Hinds hinds4mayor@hotmail.com

I would draw the following camparisons between Iraq and Vietnam:

The US took on the role of policing a colonial province of a European ally. With Vietnam it was France. With Iraq and the Middle East, it was Great Britain.

The US supported a tyrannical regime that made matters even worse. In Vietnam it was President Diem. In Iraq it was Saddam.

The US puppet regime eventually became such a problem that US officials felt they had to do something about it. In Vietnam, Kennedy supported the bloody coup of Diem and his inner circle (then replaced it with Gen. Duc, who was probably worse, but a good buddy of the CIA going back to WWII). In Iraq, it was Saddam, who even though he didn't have any of the WMD, was influencing OPEC policy in a way that was very disturbing to Bush, D. Rockefeller, etc.

The US President's cabinet went against international law and opinion to initiate military intervention, and tried to do it by misleading other nations and American citizens themselves. In Vietnam, the US violated the Geneva convention (prior to North Vietnam or Russia in Laos) through CIA led 'black ops' and elevating troop levels by calling them "engineers" and "advisors." In Iraq, it was the infamous 'yellow cake' speech and "unaccounted for WMD" BS that was used to justify US pre-emptive action.

The intelligence agencies were sending briefs throughout the escalating Vietnam conflict (that began with Truman, escalated with Eisenhauer, reached crisis proportions under Kennedy, and became total war under Johnson and Nixon) that the situation was far worse than any administration would publicly admit. This speaks for itself with respect to Iraq and Bush.

Those in government who called for economic and humanitarian solutions in both Vietnam and Iraq were largely derided by the war hawks. In Vietnam, not taking a strong hand would lead to the "domino effect" of communism taking over SE Asia. In Iraq, it will lead to a "power vaccuum."

Military intervention only raised the appearance of occupation and colonialism and led to a situation where US troops could not recognize "insurgents" who meant to do harm from those who were simply innocent civilians. This led to innocent slaughter and only increased resentment against the US.

I could go on and on and on. I'll have to find the time to compose a formal essay on the subject and publish it. Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it. How many more presidents will inherit this mess? How many Americans will die? How bad with the slaughter of innocents become if civil war does break out? Will we have another fall of Saigon? This is such fucking madness, especially considering the lessons of Vietnam!


The Vietnam II Preflight Check 11.Apr.2004 22:11

author unknown

1. Cabal of oldsters who won't listen to outside advice? Check.
2. No understanding of ethnicity's of the many locals? Check.
3. National boundaries drawn in Europe, not by the locals? Check.
4. Unshakable faith in our superior technology? Check.
5. France secretly hoping we fall on our asses? Check.
6. Russia secretly hoping we fall on our asses? Check.
7. China secretly hoping we fall on our asses? Check.
8. Enemy supply lines unknown? Check.
9. Sec of Def pushing a conflict the Joint Chiefs never wanted? Check.
10. Fear we'll look bad if we back down now? Check.
11. Corrupt corporate Texan in the White House? Check.
12. Land war in Asia? Check.
13. Right-wing unhappy with outcome of previous war? Check.
14. Enemy easily moves in/out of neighboring countries? Check.
15. Soldiers about to be exposed to our own chemicals? Check.
16. Daily guerrilla attacks that cannot be stopped? Check.
17. Anti-Americanism up sharply in Europe? Check.
18. B-52 bombers? Check.
19. Helicopters that clog up on the local dust? Check.
20. Infighting among the branches of the military? Check.
21. Locals that cheer us by day, hate us by night? Check.
22. Local experts ignored? Check.
23. Local politicians ignored? Check.
24. Local conflicts since before the USA has been a country? Check.
25. Much confusion over who and where the enemy is? Check.
26. Against advice, Prez won't use taxes to pay for war? Check.
27. Blue water navy ships operating in brown water? Check.
28. Use of nukes hinted at if things don't go our way? Check.
29. War unpopular at home? Check.
30. No plan in place to end involvement? Check.

Vietnam II, you are cleared to taxi.

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/08/270864.shtml
(if you know or are the original author please come forward and take a bow!)
http://notonthebox.com/vietnam.htm
http://notonthebox.com/vietnam.htm