Antiwar.com Blog

A video has surfaced of Dick Cheney predicting an invasion of Iraq would lead to a “quagmire.”

In 1994, Cheney explained his reasons for not advocating an invasion of Iraq following the first gulf war:

Q: Do you think the U.S., or U.N. forces, should have moved into Baghdad?

A: No.

Q: Why not?

A: Because if we’d gone to Baghdad we would have been all alone. There wouldn’t have been anybody else with us. There would have been a U.S. occupation of Iraq. None of the Arab forces that were willing to fight with us in Kuwait were willing to invade Iraq.

Once you got to Iraq and took it over, took down Saddam Hussein’s government, then what are you going to put in its place? That’s a very volatile part of the world, and if you take down the central government of Iraq, you could very easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off: part of it, the Syrians would like to have to the west, part of it — eastern Iraq — the Iranians would like to claim, they fought over it for eight years. In the north you’ve got the Kurds, and if the Kurds spin loose and join with the Kurds in Turkey, then you threaten the territorial integrity of Turkey.

It’s a quagmire if you go that far and try to take over Iraq.

The other thing was casualties. Everyone was impressed with the fact we were able to do our job with as few casualties as we had. But for the 146 Americans killed in action, and for their families — it wasn’t a cheap war. And the question for the president, in terms of whether or not we went on to Baghdad, took additional casualties in an effort to get Saddam Hussein, was how many additional dead Americans is Saddam worth? Our judgment was, not very many, and I think we got it right.

Thanks to Grand Theft Country.

Okay folks, this one’s simple: Among Shia in Iraq, the U.S. backs the same folks as the Iranians do: The Da’wa Party and the Supreme Islamic Council.

The Shi’ites who are fighting our guys are nationalists, and so are somewhat down with the Sunni Arab nationalists and opposed to Iran.

Enter Michael R. Gordon of the New York Times, who keeps pushing (without providing evidence) the Vice-President’s propaganda that the new, improved EFP bombs must be coming from Iran.

For those who listen to Antiwar Radio, you know I refute this lie every single day, citing CSM and Reuters’ reports that an EFP factory was found in Iraq in April by troops during “Operation Black Eagle,” according to Army Spokesman Lt. Col Scott Bleichwehl.

Journalist Gareth Porter, whom I often interview, has written extensively on this matter.

Andrew Cockburn took an axe to the lies in this Los Angeles Times article back in February. NBC News and Wired have also run articles casting doubt on the alleged Iranian origin of the bombs. Allisa J. Rubin in the New York Times discusses the discovery of an EFP factory in Iraq (Shhhh! Don’t tell Michael R. Gordon’s editor!) and even the Wall Street Journal has spoken truth to the propaganda.

And so why is this such a big deal?

Well, because Dick Cheney is trying to start a war with Iran and since the president has admitted that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program, the War Party has had to switch gears. Now the excuse for bombing Iran is that they are bombing our guys in Iraq.

The proof? It’s right there, even in the New York Times.

Update: Philip Giraldi debunked Cheney-Gordon’s claims too.

(Comments welcome at Stress.)

[audio:http://dissentradio.com/radio/07_08_10_weller.mp3]

Author and musician Anthony Weller discusses First Into Nagasaki: The Censored Eyewitness Dispatches on Post-Atomic Japan and Its Prisoners of War, the lost articles of his father, Pulitzer Prize winner George Weller, the first American into Nagasaki just a month after the bombing. His stories contained information about the actual effects of nuclear war, “Disease X” – radiation sickness – and the governments unwillingness to provide any type of medical care for its victims. Weller also opened one of the largest of the POW camps, and reported the conditions there.

MP3 here. (42:55)

Born in 1957, Anthony Weller is both a writer (novelist, poet, and journalist) and a musician (jazz & classical guitarist, composer).

[audio:http://dissentradio.com/radio/07_08_10_fiske.mp3]

Los Angeles Times reporter Molly Hennessy-Fiske discusses the U.S. military’s deal with the Sunni insurgency and whether or not Iran is responsible for backing the Shi’ite groups using the new EFP roadside bombs against American forces.

MP3 here. (21:13)

Molly Hennessy-Fiske is a reporter for the Los Angeles Times.

At first I though he was kidding, until I looked at some of his past writings.

Stu Bykofsky, columnist for the Philadelphia Daily News, is hoping for another major terror attack on the US. He lists the likely targets for al-Qaeda, hoping they will take him up on his offerings: “The Golden Gate Bridge. Mount Rushmore. Chicago’s Wrigley Field. The Philadelphia subway system. The U.S. is a target-rich environment for al Qaeda.”

Bykofsky argues that we have lost the will to fight that united us after 9/11. He wants the hawks of the left and right to stop attacking each other and unite for bigger and better wars. And he sees an attack by al-Qaeda as the force that will do it. He is probably correct that such an attack will spur the War Party, but neither such an attack nor the resulting wars are things to hope for.

US officials keep insisting that the Iraqi government pass the laws the US wants. But what would happen if Iraqi legislators pass some of the laws the US has for itself.

Specifically the Third Amendment to the US Constitution: No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

An Associated Press story today highlights a plea by the director of Iraq’s National Library for US soldiers to leave the building:

Saad Eskander, who has overseen the restoration of the library after it was burned and looted following the 2003 invasion, claimed that U.S. and Iraqi soldiers forcibly entered the three-story building earlier this week as part of security preparations for a major Shi’ite pilgrimage.

The presence of foreign forces in the building could make it a target for insurgents, he said. He noted that the library’s collection had not suffered any damage, but said he holds U.S. and Iraqi forces “responsible for any damage inflicted on priceless documents or any human casualties due to this illegal operation. Any damage or theft will represent a cultural catastrophe along the lines of the looting of the Iraqi Museum after the fall of Baghdad in 2003,” he added.

But the most significant point of the article is this:

It is not uncommon for forces to temporarily commandeer houses and buildings as rest stops or lookout posts. (emphasis added)

I wonder how the US occupation forces would feel if the Iraqi government passed a similar law. Would they respect such a law? Perhaps Iraqi legislators will start turning to their actual constituency, the Iraqi people, and start passing laws to protect them, instead of catering to a foreign occupier.