jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (39 posts)

KUCINICH'S OPINION ON IRAQ. FINALLY THE TRUTH.

  1. maxoxam41 profile image79
    maxoxam41posted 2 years ago

    As Iraq descends into chaos again, more than a decade after "Mission Accomplished," media commentators and politicians have mostly agreed upon calling the war a "mistake." But the "mistake" rhetoric is the language of denial, not contrition: it minimizes the Iraq War’s disastrous consequences, removes blame, and deprives Americans of any chance to learn from our generation’s foreign policy disaster. The Iraq War was not a "mistake" — it resulted from calculated deception. The painful, unvarnished fact is that we were lied to. Now is the time to have the willingness to say that.

    In fact, the truth about Iraq was widely available, but it was ignored. There were no WMD. Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. The war wasn’t about liberating the Iraqi people. I said this in Congress in 2002. Millions of people who marched in America in protest of the war knew the truth, but were maligned by members of both parties for opposing the president in a time of war — and even leveled with the spurious charge of "not supporting the troops."

    I’ve written and spoken widely about this topic, so today I offer two ways we can begin to address our role:

    1) President Obama must tell us the truth about Iraq and the false scenario that caused us to go to war. When Obama took office in 2008, he announced that his administration would not investigate or prosecute the architects of the Iraq War. Essentially, he suspended public debate about the war. That may have felt good in the short term for those who wanted to move on, but when you’re talking about a war initiated through lies, bygones can’t be bygones.

    The unwillingness to confront the truth about the Iraq War has induced a form of amnesia which is hazardous to our nation’s health. Willful forgetting doesn’t heal, it opens the door to more lying. As today’s debate ensues about new potential military "solutions" to stem violence in Iraq, let’s remember how and why we intervened in Iraq in 2003.

    2) Journalists and media commentators should stop giving inordinate air and print time to people who were either utterly wrong in their support of the war or willful in their calculations to make war.

    By and large, our Fourth Estate accepted uncritically the imperative for war described by top administration officials and congressional leaders. The media fanned the flames of war by not giving adequate coverage to the arguments against military intervention.

    President Obama didn’t start the Iraq War, but he has the opportunity now to tell the truth. That we were wrong to go in. That the cause of war was unjust. That more problems were created by military intervention than solved. That the present violence and chaos in Iraq derives from the decision which took America to war in 2003. More than a decade later, it should not take courage to point out the Iraq war was based on lies.

    Dennis Kucinich

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
      Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Maxoxmam41
      All we can do is tend to our little realities. We know we don't have much say in anything any more. We even wonder if our vote counts. With so many corrupting influences in politics what are we supposed to do with this sudden honesty?
      Really... what are we supposed to think anymore. It just adds to our frustration, so we ignore it.
      Its better that way. At least we can get through another day.
      Well, speaking for myself, anyway.

      1. rhamson profile image77
        rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        The act of turning away from the problem does not lessen nor make it go away. Usually it festers someplace else and returns worse than when it first appeared.

        After the 911 attacks the country was first stunned and then angered by what had happened. Bush easily made the case to chase Al Qaeda into Afghanistan and I believe rightly so. But the honeymoon was soon over when Al Qaeda was driven into the mountains and neighboring Pakistan. The oil was in Iraq and Cheney and his cronies saw a way to continue war (which so happened to be up Halliburton's ally) and pick up some stray oil wells at the same time. This war in Iraq was about greed and conquest with a complicit news media feeding us the "facts"

        This latest ploy to get us into a war with ISIS is just another step to crank up the war machine and line some congressmen's pockets again. Let them fight their way through this. We left Iran alone and the only thing we hear are occasional rumblings of uranium enrichment no one has yet to prove. As usual we are scared into decisions that impact many and enrich a few.

        What can we do? Keep talking and not lecturing each other. To have any lecturing on a subject you have to trust the source. To have a constructive conversation you have to respect the other persons opinion while discerning its validity. We are the problem as we have elected many times over the people that perpetuate the same old garbage. And guess what? Nothing changes. We are the problem.

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
          Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          - we ARE the problem? We HAVE BEEN the problem… What if we choose not to be the problem…?
          Is it too late? Is the damage done? Does our vote count?
          - can you give a for instance regarding "lecturing"?
          Apathy is a way of life now…
          We are tired. We are messed up. We are starting not to care.
          I mean, has it gotten to that point as far as We The People?
          I hope not.
          Yet we will probably have only the second Clinton or the third Bush to vote for. Isn't it pretty much over?

          PS Some one called to ask me for $ support for Ben Carson for President… just another greedy u know what…
          - they know it could never happen in a million years.

          1. rhamson profile image77
            rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Many issues have been taken care of by the elected elite. We now have a all voluntary military. This assures that their children will never be called upon to serve in the military. It also makes the wars very antiseptic because the ones fighting want to be there so the blood is not on the politicians hands. Foreign policy changes with every administration. No consistency provides no trust from our allies. How is representation in congress achieved when they can manipulate the vote at will. They can change the regions and even elect candidates that never lived in the area they are representing. Hillary Clinton moved to New York for a short time before she was elected to become a Senator from that State. How do you get elected to the top congressional office in such a short time. Elitism and favor is how.

            These and too many to mention issues have been the normal decay in what used to be a country that was involved in its' own affairs that impact all of us. We have a professional political industry that sells favor for money and worries little of the consequences. The Tea Party has had some affect of getting some out (Eric Cantor who will now lobby on Wall Street) but the slime bags continue in their favor for hire criminal acts away from our eyes and deaf ears. You can't trust the media as it sells us controversy and scandal to make a buck while ignoring the more prescient issues that affect us all.

            There is a way but the American electorate is so polarized by the misinformation and party politics that we have to have a fresh start. There are three things I have found many on both sides of the isle will agree on. Term Limits, Publicly Funded Campaigns and Lobby Reform. These three things can work if we talk about them. But many think they have the Silver Bullet. One man cannot make a difference as proven by Obama. But the American electorate can make a difference if they have the will.

            1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
              Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Yes, the only way We The People will have an influence is to find common ground and reflect a position of being on the same page. Thank you for offering ideas we can agree on! "Term Limits, Publicly Funded Campaigns and Lobby Reform."
              We also need to be able to identify the politicians who are obviously indoctrinated with greed, desire for more power and money and those who seem to be puppets of u know what/who.
              And vote them out.
              If it becomes obvious our vote does not count, it would be nice if the unified WE would not vote at all. But then the bad guys would vote. (darn. If we need a revolution we need a revolution.) Another way to revolutionize is to refuse to pay taxes. But we would really have to be on the same page there!
              I wonder if it would ever come to the point of the electorate against the elected in battle. LOL.
              After all, If you hand someone power, you must also watch to see the power is not misused/abused.

              1. rhamson profile image77
                rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Agreed on all accounts. The only problem as you state is if we refuse to vote (which many do) they win.

                The inherent cause of term limits is to make it less profitable for the slime to get a long term foothold as they would be mandatorily made to leave. This would open the door for those who truly want what is best for the country to govern as career politicians goals of perpetuity would not pay off.

                The biggest issue is the electorate that wish to act as mobs overcoming others with their numbers rather than dissecting issues. If we were less judgmental and more open to compromise this could be achieved. But how do you start that conversation is the $100,000 question.

                1. GA Anderson profile image87
                  GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  The correct phrase is "...the $64,000 question" which originated from a 1950s game show by the same name smile

                  As for term limits... do you really think there is any chance Congress would make a real effort to pass term-limit legislation that would end their careers?

                  Even with a demanding electorate, how many election cycles do you think it would take to get enough Honest Joes in office to get it done?

                  GA

                  1. rhamson profile image77
                    rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    .....The correct phrase is "...the $64,000 question" which originated from a 1950s game show by the same name

                    Thank you I thought there was a more recent iteration of that show. "Give the man a cookie". Who said that?

                    ....smile You have to use a semi colon and a un-parenthesis to make a smile. smile

                    ....As for term limits... do you really think there is any chance Congress would make a real effort to pass term-limit legislation that would end their careers?

                    We don't need them. It is in the Constitution to boot them out if "WE" wish.

                    http://www.termlimitsforuscongress.com/


                    ....Even with a demanding electorate, how many election cycles do you think it would take to get enough Honest Joes in office to get it done?

                    You want expediency? How long did it take for the slime bags to get this just right for them? There is no magic wave of the hand. You are right about one thing. The attention span of the electorate and the equally lazy attitude towards anything that is not quickly rewarding is a great hurdle.

                    But the curmungeonality  (if that is a word) of the comment is well noted. smile

            2. maxoxam41 profile image79
              maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

              If the act of voting wasn't at the elite's advantage do you think that we would be voting?

              1. rhamson profile image77
                rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I am not so pessimistic. I agree it has been in development for over two hundred years but they still have to deal with it. Too few of the electorate are apathetic and allow the whole mess to get worse. The voter doesn't get it that when they don't participate or participate half heartedly the politicians win every time. We tried an insurrection with the Civil War so we know they won't let us go our separate way so the vote is still the best way to oust them.

                We can change it if we can agree with each other long enough to get it done. The best part is that we don't need their approval.    http://www.termlimitsforuscongress.com/

                1. maxoxam41 profile image79
                  maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  So far I've noticed that the citizenry is regressing concerning all the advantages (collective bargaining to name one) harvested along our history. Our freedom, social rights are diminishing. Again, if we had something to gain don't you think that the elite would have had its hands on already?
                  The only pacific solution is to refuse to vote. Several times I asked on the platform what would happen during an election if the majority of the electorate didn't vote, democrats and republicans included?

                  1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    The ones in office would be overjoyed.
                    I guess.

                  2. Quilligrapher profile image90
                    Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Good evening, Max.

                    If the majority of the electorate did not vote, the votes of the minority of the electorate would determine the outcome.

                    On the other hand, in case of a tie in Electoral College votes or a failure to capture a majority, the House of Representatives would determine the President as prescribed in the 12th Amendment of the Constitution. {1}

                    I hope this helps, Max.
                    http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
                    {1} http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2014 … lection-2/

                  3. rhamson profile image77
                    rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    They win what they have been working for all these years.

          2. maxoxam41 profile image79
            maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

            You seem to be quite naive, reassure me.

        2. maxoxam41 profile image79
          maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I am currently reading Jeremy Scahill's "Blackwater" but I can't help making the connection between the rise of domestic and international terrorism and the rise of Blackwater. It is interesting to know that our government spends more than a thousand dollars per day to have one Blackwater's guard protecting a member of our government abroad versus using an army man for $300.
          It is interesting to know that those mercenaries, at least 100 different companies in Iraq, for instance, committed and commit crimes disregarding the rule of Law.
          It is also interesting to see the tight connection between CIA, Halliburton (and other private arm dealers) and Blackwater.
          By perpetuating the elections of puppets, WE ARE THE PROBLEM.

  2. maxoxam41 profile image79
    maxoxam41posted 2 years ago

    You know that we are forcing Russia to enter war with Ukraine. And if they do, America will receive the first nuclear bomb. Or better, we'll launch a nuclear warhead somewhere someone will tend to their realities as you explicitly said it and pretend that it was Russia (we master false flag operations) and, third world war won't be a fantasy anymore. Does anybody measure the seriousness and the danger of the situation?

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
      Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      14. We are forcing war with Ukraine.
      15. We will be responsible for either a nuclear bomb or warhead.
      16. We will falsely accuse Russia for being responsible.
      17. The reality of the third world war is at hand, thanks to the US.

      So far you have given us 17 reasons to not listen to the news, research the news in the internet, or read newspapers.
      If you are trying to say that is America is B A D,
      that is is even more reason to bury our heads in the sands…
      of our our own homeland.
      yikes
      ( Unless you have another suggestion, Max. )

      1. maxoxam41 profile image79
        maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Am I the one stating it or independent news? Since the subject interests you why not starting by awareness? Then action will follow?

  3. Dr Billy Kidd profile image92
    Dr Billy Kiddposted 2 years ago

    This is an amazing discussion. There are two true points of view here.

    The citizens of the U.S. were lied too. And, in fact, Bush's first national security council meeting in 2001 dealt with how to start a war with Iraq, not with bin Laden. And immediately on 9/11, the discussion continued on how to blame it on Iraq. These facts have been documented.

    The other discussion here is that Americans are tuned out and just don't seem to care anymore. This is unfortunate. When the Roman's tuned out the empire ended. That was because they tuned out so much that they refused to pay the mercenaries who fought their wars. This caused the mercenaries to sack Rome. And people still didn't tune in.

    Today, it seems like facts don't matter and people have tuned out to a high degree. Football seems to be more important than war! I do not have an answer for this.

    1. maxoxam41 profile image79
      maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Didn't our mercenaries launch attacks on Bostonians during the CIA bombing of the marathon?

  4. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    18. The government aspires to eradicate the people.
    (!)

    1. maxoxam41 profile image79
      maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

      No it doesn't it aspires to your prosperity, does it? Inflation is at its lowest, as is unemployment, as the debt... isn't it?

 
working