 |
Week in Review
|
| Click
here for "Week in Review" subscription services
Welcome to Issue 4 of "Week in Review". . . We are nearing the end of "Pledge Week." So if you have not done so already, please pledge a donation (tax-deductible!) and help Antiwar.com continue to provide these services to our readers.
Monday When you can't explain a lie, just pretend that you never said it. President Bush did just that: President George W Bush has retreated from predictions that banned Iraqi weapons would be found, promising only to discover the "true extent" of Saddam Hussein's weapons programmes. Perhaps after Saddam surrenders he will elucidate the "true extent" of his arsenal. Come to think of it, we should ask the Department of Commerce, who approved all the sales of anthrax to Iraq. In a shocker, the US occupation team decided to let the Iraqis do something on their own. What?! Yes, after laid-off Iraqis protested, Paul Bremer decided to create a new Iraqi army. Finally, Matthew Barganier wondered what would come of the possible Al Gore cable network. He was pessimistic: So don't expect much from a Gore News-Fox News dustup. Within a month, it will degenerate into a who-loves-Israel-more contest; the only interesting part will be betting on defectors. I pick Bill O'Reilly for first turncoat. His ego, not to mention his hatred of free enterprise and freedom of association, makes him an ideal partner for the Internet Edison. No, I didn't forget Iran . . .They offered to talk to the IAEA (diplomacy? Never!). Tuesday To six British soldiers, the war in Iraq was far from over. Shocker #2 for the week: "US Changes Story of Convoy Strike: No Saddam, No Syrian Fire." On top of exporting chaos, death and the occasional unexploded ordnance, the US is now shipping in huge barrels of socialism. Next Bremer will demand the Iraqis send 50% of their income to the IRS and send all priority mail USPS. In Asia, the threats of "merciless strikes" came from the North Koreans, who claimed America was impeding on their sovereignty. It seemed that they forgot: neocons don't believe in non-US sovereignty! Lew Rockwell averred that the verdict on Iraq was a solid failure: Of the fire produced by the exploding pipeline, an official told the New York Times: "We couldn't do anything because the fire is bigger than our capabilities." That sums up the entire US experience with this war. Finally (real shocker this time), George Will – quasi-neocon hawk – wondered if the lack of WMD is a cause for concern: To govern is to choose, almost always on the basis of very imperfect information. But preemption presupposes the ability to know things -- to know about threats with a degree of certainty not requisite for decisions less momentous than those for waging war. Wednesday Remember that attack on the supposed "Saddam convoy"? Well, it wasn't. Neologism of the week:
Wolfowitz dreams were fulfilled by Sec. Rumsfeld, who gave the Defense Deputy the "right to set up military tribunals." If that doesn't frighten you, perhaps this will. Finally, Thomas More implored the US occupation administration to take note of history: When the British government put together three provinces from the former Ottoman Empire, Mosul, Baghdad, and Basra, many officials believed that lumping the Kurds with the Sunnis and the Shiites was unworkable. Nevertheless, London decided on including Mosul with the others because it had oil. The U.S. government should consider whether putting asunder what the British put together might make for better governance. Each of these groups by itself has a chance at establishing a working civil or religious government based on participation by its citizens. Together, no such government will work. Thursday Sec. Rumsfeld asked America to suck it up: "Expect more casualties." Why? Well, the war on Iraq is apparently a part of the never-ending war on terror. Bush's credibility gap created by the missing WMD may help prevent further preemptive strikes, the CS Monitor reported. Remember the always-in-denial Iraqi Information minister? Well, he surrendered and was released all in the same day. Either he gave the US some really good info, or his famous rhetoric saved him. Murray Rothbard in 'War, Peace and the State' - an essay which helped intellectually guide the founders of Antiwar.com - describes our ideology towards war: The libertarian must, therefore, conclude that, while some revolutions and some private conflicts may be legitimate, State wars are always to be condemned. Now, how does should a libertarian respond to an ongoing war? Suppose, however, that despite libertarian opposition, war has begun and the warring States are not negotiating a peace. What, then, should be the libertarian position? Clearly, to reduce the scope of assault of innocent civilians as much as possible. He continues: In condemning all wars, regardless of motive, the libertarian knows that there may well be varying degrees of guilt among States for any specific war. But the overriding consideration for the libertarian is the condemnation of any State participation in war. Hence his policy is that of exerting pressure on all States not to start a war, to stop one that has begun and to reduce the scope of any persisting war in injuring civilians of either side or no side. Replace "libertarian" with what you like – it still works!
Friday Peace in the Middle East? Hope lies in the recent truce between Hamas and Israel. Although Sec. Rumsfeld told America to "expect more casualties," no one was ready for four dead, one severely wounded and two abducted soldiers (later found killed Saturday). Check out the Antiwar.com page that will keep track of the human costs of occupation. While on a trip to Poland, President Bush insisted that "we had found the WMD." According to the State Department, "it was premature to conclude that the trailers were evidence of an Iraqi biological weapons program." Finally, Bill Kauffman demanded a distinction between his America and Empire: Empire focuses our attention on matters distant and remote, affairs to which we are mere spectators. You can care about your backyard or Baghdad; you can't tend to both. Under empire, Madonna replaces our mothers, imperial fantasies straight out of Henry Luce's LIFE erase our lower-case lives, and the wolf at the door is named Blitzer. ::Previous
Week in Reviews:: ::DONATE:: We can't let the War Party win...Help keep Antiwar.com alive and donate! |