Gene Lyons

War With Iran: A Very Bad Idea

[audio:http://dissentradio.com/radio/07_10_10_lyons.mp3]

Syndicated columnist Gene Lyons discusses the demonization of Iran’s powerless president, the state of their democracy compared to the neighbors, consequences of recent elections around the Middle East, Bush’s lifelong hostility to learning, the impossibility of the American Empire’s survival of a war in Persia, possible domestic consequences, the neocon “idea” that the Iranians would take our side if we bombed them, the abject ignorance and gullibility of the American population, the rift between the Ayatollahs and al Qaeda, the fact that Iranians are human individuals and Hillary Clinton’s vote for Kyle-Lieberman, dogs, Mike Huckabee, Iran again, and Wesley Clarke’s predictions about what would happen in Iraq back in 2002.

MP3 here. (44:10)

Gene Lyons, National Magazine Award winner and columnist for the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, writes a weekly column for Newspaper Enterprise Association. A Southerner with a liberal viewpoint, Lyons comments on politics and national issues with a distinct voice. Lyons has been a columnist with the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette since 1994. He previously spent five years as general editor at Newsweek, and was associate editor at Texas Monthly for a year. In 1980, he won the National Magazine Award for Public Service for the Texas Monthly article “Why Teachers Can’t Teach.” A prolific author, Lyons has written hundreds of articles, essays and reviews for such magazines as Harper’s, The New York Times Magazine, Entertainment Weekly, Esquire, Slate and Salon. His books include The Higher Illiteracy (University of Arkansas, 1988), Widow’s Web (Simon & Schuster, 1993), Fools for Scandal (Franklin Square, 1996) and, with Joe Conason, The Hunting of the President: The Ten Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton (St. Martin’s, 2000). Mozark Productions’ “The Hunting of the President,” a documentary based on the book of the same title and produced and directed by Harry Thomason, is an official selection of the 2004 Sundance Film Festival. Lyons graduated from Rutgers University and earned a Ph.D. in English from the University of Virginia. He taught at the Universities of Massachusetts, Arkansas and Texas before becoming a full-time writer. A native of New Jersey, Lyons has lived in Little Rock with his wife Diane, an administrative vice president at Arkansas Children’s Hospital, since 1972. They have two sons.

A Journey from Neocon to Antiwar

This poignant story brings home the point of how long the invasion of Iraq has dragged on. In the spring of 2003, this blogger was a sophomore in high school. He writes:

We were supposed to be welcomed as liberators. The war was fast and efficient, the barely existent military forces of Iraq were defeated as the coalition forces made their way to Baghdad. I remember the famous clip on live TV of the Iraqi’s pulling down the statue of Saddam Hussein. Those were the good old days of the war. The years to follow would be slow, painful, and expensive. I supported the war without really giving a second though to why. That’s what all the other ‘conservatives’ were calling for, so it seemed like the right thing to do.

The war continued on into Senior year with no signs of a withdrawal. Every day casualties would be reported, much like they are still. All this while shaky and messy political processes were going on, and alas, to this day, not much progress has really occurred. But the mood switched from watching the events closely, to a sort of disconnection with what was happening. We all knew it was going on, but pushed it to the back of ours minds and just continued on with our daily lives. This was the case for most, especially ignorant high school kids, though of course not for those who were receiving letters, or getting that knock on the door, from the military.

Freshman year came, and despite going to a very liberal college, and the stereotype of college students turning liberal, my thoughts were unchanged on the war. My view on it was tweaked, and followed a lot of mainstream ‘conservatives’. Yes, it wasn’t done well, and we weren’t prepared for the post-Saddam era, but it was worth it to remove that madman, and now we need to clean up the mess.

The next year, sophomore year, which was fall 2006 to spring 2007, this past year, was the most important. Looking at the Republican choices likely to run for president, I quickly became a “Rudy-guy” because he was conservative on many (sort of) issues, from the same state I was, and had a tough stance on terrorism. Then I switched around September to Fred Thompson, even though he wouldn’t declare his candidacy for another year. He was similar to Rudy in regards to Iraq and terrorism, and was well known from movie and TV roles.

From sophomore in high school to sophomore in college, this blogger remained in the neocon prowar camp. So, what happened to change his mind?

I spent the later months of winter wondering “what now?” for what I was to do with my views on politics and candidates. I didn’t agree with the Democrats plans for spending and social programs, and the Republicans proved to be shallow and not even conservative with spending and war. The historic conservative position is to be anti-war. I was hesitant to discuss the war. How can one be a Republican and not be for the war? Who ever heard of such a thing?

Another turning point came in April, and especially May. The first big debate of the 2008 Republican primary season came in May, a debate at the Reagan Library, and it was a big debut for Ron Paul. He had the courage to go on stage in front of a possibly hostile crowd, and proclaim to the country that it was OK to be a conservative and be against this needless war.

So much has happened since then. The election cycle is heating up, and a paradigm shift is now in play. Republicans are coming out in increasing number saying they do not support this war. The success of Ron Paul recently is forcing a shift towards more constitutional and libertarian values. To think, if Paul had said any of these things during the 2002 or 2004 elections, he would’ve been laughed off the stage. Sure, he hasn’t gotten a good reception from the pro-war Republicans, and the process of convincing them will be hard, but the position that you can oppose the war and be a conservative now has grounding, and perhaps that is a reason why so many ‘conservatives’ are now annoyed with him.

Being someone who has seen both sides of the aisle, the “neocons” as many call them, and the anti-war Republicans, I have found that the neocon path was the more mindless one. My views were dominated by what the media was spewing out, and they all wanted this war. I didn’t think for myself much during that time, and when I did I just felt indifferent. This is not an issue one can feel indifferent for.

Now the attention has turned towards Iran. Sean Hannity is giving his list of reasons to attack them nightly on Hannity & Colmes. All the ‘conservatives’ are calling for military action. Whether they get what they want again or not, I will rest knowing that their numbers will be at least one fewer this time.

Read the rest.

Scott Horton Wins Austin Chronicle Award for Antiwar Radio

Our own Scott Horton has won the Austin Chronicle‘s “Best of Austin 2007” award for “Best Iraq War Insight and Play-by-Play.”

Scott won the “Critic’s Choice” award for Antiwar Radio (a division of Antiwar.com), which is based in Austin and broadcast live on KAOS-FM.

The Austin Chronicle is that city’s alternative/entertainment weekly newspaper. Here’s what they said:

Best Iraq War Insight and Play-by-Play: ‘Anti-War Radio,’ 95.9/92.7FM
A locally based program broadcasting in Austin, streaming and podcasting worldwide online, Anti-War Radio offers high-caliber commentary and guest interviews on the ongoing Mideast misadventure. Host Scott Horton, armed to the teeth with little-reported news and info, jettisons the pleasantries and PC radio lingo and tells listeners how it really is. As an added bonus, Horton often verbally lays waste to those seeking to prolong the billion-dollar bloodbath. Anti-War Radio can be heard on local frequency KAOS 95.9 and 92.7 – twice recognized on these very pages for fine iconoclastic broadcasting: Arrrrrrr. http://www.antiwar.com/blog/category/antiwar-radio.

The “Best of Austin” link appears at the top of the paper’s website for the entire year.

Camp Pelosi: Nancy Lashes Out at the Antiwar Movement

The Washington Post‘s Dana Milbank on the only cure for Nancy Pelosi’s rictus “smile”:

“She entered the room beaming and, over the course of an hour, smiled no fewer than 31 times and got off at least 23 laughs. But her spirits soured instantly when somebody asked about the anger of the Democratic ‘base’ over her failure to end the war in Iraq.

“‘Look,’ she said, the chicken breast on her plate untouched. ‘I had, for five months, people sitting outside my home, going into my garden in San Francisco, angering neighbors, hanging their clothes from trees, building all kinds of things — Buddhas? I don’t know what they were — couches, sofas, chairs, permanent living facilities on my front sidewalk.’

“Unsmilingly, she continued: ‘If they were poor and they were sleeping on my sidewalk, they would be arrested for loitering, but because they have ‘Impeach Bush’ across their chest, it’s the First Amendment.’

Poor people do indeed sleep in the streets of San Francisco, as anyone who has ever been to our downtown area will readily attest, and yet isn’t there something a little … scary about Pelosi’s Marie Antoinettish remark that seems to equate the homeless with rubbish that is rightfully swept away? It’s a sensitive subject in San Francisco, where compassionate liberalism — as opposed to Pelosi’s “liberalism” — is part of the City’s culture. 

I live in Nancy’s neighborhood, and we’ve bumped into each other, although not much. Having run against her (as the Republican nominee) in 1996, I had a bit of trouble getting her into a face-to-face: she refused to debate, and this imperious attitude evoked not a murmur of comment on the local political scene. I ran as the antiwar candidate, but since the war I was protesting back then was the Kosovo war, Bay Area liberals weren’t interested. Now, of course, there are people camped out on her lawn, trying to get an audience with Her Imperial(ist) Majesty, to no avail.

 Milbank continues:

“Though opposed to the war herself, Pelosi has for months been a target of an antiwar movement that believes she hasn’t done enough. Cindy Sheehan has announced a symbolic challenge to Pelosi in California’s 8th Congressional District. And the speaker is seething.

“‘We have to make responsible decisions in the Congress that are not driven by the dissatisfaction of anybody who wants the war to end tomorrow,’ Pelosi told the gathering at the Sofitel, arranged by the Christian Science Monitor. Though crediting activists for their ‘passion,’ Pelosi called it ‘a waste of time’ for them to target Democrats. ‘They are advocates,’ she said. ‘We are leaders.'”

Well then why doesn’t she start leading? Instead, she’s following the advice of Democratic spin-doctors who would much rather have the war as an issue in the upcoming presidential election than make any “risky” political move to actually bring our troops home. “We don’t have the votes,” they whine, but they’re lying: if the House, where they have a majority, votes down war funding, then the money can’t be spent. Period. The Democratic leadership rules this course out altogether, because they claim they’re frightened to death of being blamed for the defeat of our forces. Who lost Iraq? is not a question they feel prepared to answer under those circumstances. 

Better Iraqis and Americans should continue to die than the Democrats should have to get up off their knees, and rise to the occasion like real leaders, instead of craven opportunists. Aside from which, their opportunism is seriously misplaced: over 70 percent of the American people have had it up to here with this rotten war.  

Why are those people camped out in La Pelosi’s meticulously-manicured yard? Well, maybe because of this.

Yes, Nancy, it’s the First Amendment, and I hope every homeless person in town scoots on over to your digs with an “Impeach Bush” sign on the back of his cardboard placard imploring “Will Work for an End to the War — but I’ll settle for a square meal.”  

I like Milbank’s take on it:

“It was a rather fierce response to the party’s liberal base, which frightens many a congressional Democrat. But it wasn’t out of character for the new speaker. Pelosi’s fixed and constant smile makes her appear as if she is cutting an ad for a whitening toothpaste. But when you listen to the words that come from her grinning maw, the smile seems more akin to that of a barracuda.”

He got that right.

Bush Stands up for Genocide

Bush today vigorously opposed a congressional resolution to finally recognize as genocide the Turkish slaughter of more than a million Armenian Christians.  Bush declared: “We all deeply regret the tragic suffering of the Armenian people that began in 1915. This resolution is not the right response to these historic mass killings, and its passage would do great harm to our relations with a key ally in NATO and in the global war on terror.”

It’s a helluva thing when a war on terror supposedly requires the U.S. Congress to pretend that genocide didn’t occur.  Bush’s assertion that “we all deeply regret the tragic suffering of the Armenian people” is a lie.   Most people either don’t know or don’t care about the carnage.  And Bush apparently wants to keep it that way.

The Washington Post editorial page was even more contemptible than Bush. They railed this morning that the resolution “endangers present-day U.S. security.”  The Post states, “The subject is a serious one — more than 1 million Armenians may have died at the hands of the Young Turk regime between 1915 and the early 1920s.”

May have?  Oh.  Perhaps it was all a misundertanding.

Ironically, Bush and the Washington Post editorial page are gung-ho on threatening massive bombing of Iran in part because the Iranian president is  seen as denying the Nazi Holocaust.

The U.S. government is supposedly obliged to help the Turkish government cover up its sordid past, and is also entitled to kill thousands or millions of Iranians because of that country’s figurehead’s denials of past atrocities.

All Is Forgiven

I have consistently criticized Americans Against Escalation in Iraq — an antiwar group that has been running antiwar ads and doing grassroots political work – for what I viewed as their partisan strategy in pursuing an end to our involvement in Iraq, particularly their tactic of going after pro-war (or fence-sitting) Republicans in Congress and leaving pro-war Democrats alone. However, the following more than makes up for their past transgressions:

At last, the antiwar movement is waking up. Only a coalition of antiwar Democrats, Republicans, and independents can beat the War Party.