Liberal War Hawks reflect
By John Amato Sunday Mar 23, 2008 1:31pmF*&k Y*& Liberal Hawks. That's right. Hear me loud and clear liberal hawks. Simply put, we had no right as a country to invade another country that didn't do anything to us. The preemptive doctrine of war by BushCo. was another smoke screen created by this administration and lapped up by the media to fulfill the Neocon foreign policy agenda.
More strikingly, not a single one of them appears to have learned the real lesson worth learning from the whole disaster: The U.S. should not -- and has no right to -- invade, bomb and occupy other nations that haven't attacked or even threatened to attack us. None of them say: "Wars that aren't directly in response to an actual or imminent attack shouldn't be commenced because doing so leads to the deaths of hundreds of thousands or millions of human beings for no justifiable reason." Not even the most regretful war advocate seems to have reached that conclusion.
Arthur predicted their response four years ago...
John Cole says he was wrong about everything.
Duncan finds something to give props to.
Login or Register to post comments.
And f*&k Andy Sullivan! What? I'm too late . . ?
Get with the program, dude. Patraeus says the Kutyushas came from Iran. This one won't be "preemptive"; they started it, not us.
I read multiple articles several years ago blasting the people who got it right. They all said the same thing:
They got it right for the wrong reasons!
Seriously! That's what they said!
Mea Culpa = You're still wrong!!!
If only we all had the balls to stand out against this war. I, like many others, believed the tripe the neo-cons and the Bush Administration fed me. Now I feel a terrible guilt. If only I looked further I could of found the truth. I wish our leaders would say the same thing. Only a handful did.
JTM @ 2:
You saying you think Betrayus is telling the truth, THIS TIME?
Preemptive war is and has always been a complete and utter failure. There is not a single time in history that a preemptive war ended with success.
JTM @ 2:
Big deal. Insurgents are using weapons manufactured in Iran. We probably have more evidence that the insurgents are using weapons manufactured in the U.S. than anywhere else.
Hey John, this isn't being snarky and I know you have all said you don't support anyone in the race, but is one to assume that you will not endorse or vote for Hillary? I mean, she is a liberal hawk and has the proven track record.
ConcernedCanuck @ 5:
Yep. And forgive me for not making that clearer the first time. I hurt my arm falling off the turnip truck and it's difficult to type.
JTM @ 2:
Ummm...what?! So...if Petraeus says it's so, it's so? Nothing to do with towin the party line, right? Even though EVERY other general who goes against BushCo's "reality" gets retired real quick-like.
JTM @ 2:
Iran is defending their region of the world. We don't belong in the middle east.....get with the program, dude.
"preemptive war" is a crime against humanity. There is no difference between preemptive war and war of aggression.
JTM @ 9:
Obviously. Does that mean that Russia supports ______ nation because they use Russian weapons? Does that mean the US supports _____ because they all use US weapons?
I'm afraid if the US were being occupied right now, you would find Canadian and Mexican weapons being used by the "insurgents". Would that mean both those countries were involved? No. Do you know how many murders occur in Canada in a year with American made guns? Does that mean that the US supports those murderers?
navyswan @ 12:
"Unprovoked Attack"
JTM @ 9:
Ah...gotcha...shoulda used the *snark* qualifier...
Liberal Hawk is an oxymoron. (Or is that oxycotin induced moronism? Whatever.)
JTM@2 – In the words of your great leader, SO!!!
Isn't the term "Liberal HawkS" an Oxymoron?
liberalHUSSEINmoderation @ 15:
Damn......caught it AFTER I hit submit.........D'oh........I'll wake up eventually today
liberalHUSSEINmoderation @ 15:
Jebus, keep the *snark* threads over at thinkprogress.
Dr. Hussien Matt @ 19:
Sometimes it is SO hard to tell on here.
JTM @ 2:
The Kutyusha rocket has been around since WWII. Hundreds of thousands of them are floating around the Middle East. Most of them owned by PETTY-WARLORDS and LOCAL MILITIAS. The things are so simple to make that any moron with half a brain can manufacture one in his garage.
The Iranians have a very modern defense industry that manufactures modern thermobaric rockets such as the RPG 29. According to the DOD; only one RPG 29 has ever been used in Iraq and it took out an Abrams Tank. That happened about 4 years ago.
Now tell me something genious; what makes you think the Iranian Government is shipping arms into Iraq?
You guys helped to make my point. Thanks.
React only to the sound-byte. Never consider an alternative interpretation. Rely on such things as /labels to tell you what to think. Vote for war.
'Not a single one of them appears to have learned the real lesson worth learning from this whole desaster'.... No, and they never will... The whole lot of them and their mindset is best personified by Dick Cheney and his vapid, callous 'so' comment when questioned regarding the fact that a majority of the population are against the continuation of this catastrophe.....
Cheney and people like him are never going to change their opinions and worldview now. They have been nurturing this festering ideology of hate, greed and ego since Nam and watergate... Sometimes, if you have a rabid dog, all you can do is just put em down and be done with it. Ya can't cure em, ya can't fix em, and ya can't leave em to run wide. I ain't advocating putting him down in that same way, although I wouldn't cry tear one if his ticker just up and exploded on him...
But, the only we are going to get rid of this rabid ideology and the advocates of it is to 'politically put them down'. Once and for all... And, sorry, but just electing them out of office by choosing dems in november isn't going to be enough to keep them from coming back in four or eight years like some bad periodic STD... Nope, only impeachment followed by criminal charges and incarceration if convicted or worse, if warrented, along with airing all their dirty laundry and making them pay for it financially is the only way to eradicate this neocon disease now. Cheney and his ilk are like tics, burrowed deep into the heart of this nation and they must be removed!.....JD
IRAN is a forgone conclusion: Scott Ritter On Iran
Now just to find (or cause) the 'Tonkin Incident' to set it in motion.
Follow the dots: US deploys nuclear sub to Persian Gulf
navyswan @ 12:
Very well said, which violates the UN Charter, the Geneva Convention and the U.S. Constitution. Have any of the presidential candidates advocated that the United States join the International Criminal Court or are they all believers that international law should not pertain to the United States? I suspect that they all fall on the side of the latter.
Chuck @ 21:
gen·ious adj. showing marked wisdom, but an equally strong dislike for the prefix "in"
JTM @ 2:
You sir are insane. If anything - to a rational person - we are and have been threatening Iran. In case you hadnt noticed we invaded their neighbor - they didnt invade Canada.
We are talking about IRAQ not Kansas. You seem to think that there is nowhere we can go and nothing that we can do that justifies an armed response. You are wrong. We are the aggressor. We are NOT innocents being attacked, we are aggressors being repelled.
Acting Patriotic @ 24:
They aren't attacking. They are just beating their chests like they did to North Korea. They do not have the manpower to try and fight two wars. Nor the money. Nope this is just more of the same tired old rhetorical "do as I say, not as I do" political doublespeak.
Fire it up John. You are dealing with thugs on both sides of the isle. Speak the truth.
P.S.
JTM - if you were being sarcastic, I missed it and appologize, If not - you are still insane.
I question the sanity of anyone who didn't realize somthing was very wrong by 2004.
ConcernedCanuck @ 20:
Yeah, it is sad that it's so bloody easy to imitate some denigrate from the reich-wing party.
When Bush attacked the Taliban (with as Al Franken said, Bill Clinton's military) I cheered. Each time they showed more pictures of New Yorkers searching for traces of loved-ones, I said drop more bombs. I didn't care what they did to Afghanistan. But just as soon as the story line abruptly shifted to Iraq, I, to borrow Patrick Henry's line, "smelled a rat." When the slimey reptiles of the neocon cabal started their bizarre tribal war dance, the odor became overpowering. Was it safety and security for America or Israel? For Bush's part, here at long last this dry-drunk, bullying failure could prove to the world he could succeed in something. Aided by a suborned media and end-times christianist lunatics, the hysterical rush to war was on. Liberal Hawk? An oxymoron.
anon @ 27:
A guy I used to lived with said the same thing. I countered that I was merely "calm and sensible." We argued a lot while living together. It was annoying, but he paid his rent on time, so, all in all, I'd say that he was a great Rumi.
ConcernedCanuck @ 20:
LOL!!! It's ok CC...it is really hard to tell sometimes, for sure.
CD @ 30:
I became hysterical in 1999 - literally screaming in the faces of people I had known and been friends with since the late 60's that something horrible was on its way.
I agree - and I wish I didnt have to.
c&l: can we get a post on kwame? maybe some video of the indictments and his response? i believe he counts as a crook. and a liar.
-former detroiter
JTM: That was so amazing. At least a third of these comments were directed at you for just telling a joke!
I guess the old play book is back in action. Start a war and if that doesn't seem to be working out for you, start another one in another country to take the spotlight off of the failing one. Let's see this would be the second time this has happened, wouldn't it?
If anyone thinks a few bombing strikes over Iran will do the trick, think twice. Our tired soldiers are just across the border from Iran's rested soldiers. Messing with Iran right now would not be a wise idea. But this administration will never be remembered for their wise ideas.
I can only say that I too believed much of the propaganda I was hearing about Iraq and WMDs. I never believed the talking heads that were saying that we needed to invade and remove Saddam from power. I was happy with the vote to use force in order to get the inspectors in Iraq and get all of these WMD found and destroyed. The inspectors were in and I was hearing them say they had full cooperation from Saddam's people. But then Bush ordered the inspectors out and I remember screaming at my TV "WAIT, WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON?!!" The US was invading Iraq for no reason at all as far as I could see. I thought then that the war was going to last 2 or 3 weeks and we would set up some puppet dictator like we did in Iran with the shah and sooner or later that would blowup in our faces but maybe 15 or 20 years down the road. I was terribly, horribly WRONG and I freely admit it.
Obviously the "Liberal Hawks" could have learned that lesson by studying the rather recent American Invasion And Devastation of VietNam and Adjacent Nations ..
Or by studying the Nazi's Invasion of Poland ..
So OBVIOUSLY they are not about to "learn that lesson" ..
They are CORPORATE CRIMINALS who believe in the RIGHT of the USA to PILLAGE PLUNDER RAPE MURDER AND ROB.
OUR GOD TOLD US THE EARTH BELONGS TO US
that's all we need to know
With the unprovoked war in Iraq rapidly bankrupting the U.S., why are these war hawks even taken seriously? This is the lesson the U.S. needs to learn as quickly as possible. And all snark aside, how many soldiers have died after they left Iraq and aren't counted as war dead by the Bush Administrations math? If you read news sources outside of the U.S. you learn that about 1 million Iraqis, mostly women and children have lost their lives in the war zone. No one is arguing that Saddam Hussein was a very bad man, but the U.S. has caused the loss of so many lives and spent a trillion dollars and what have we gained? Politicians and pundits like William "Napoleonic Complex" Kristol who call for more bloodshed while our infrastructure goes to hell and Americans are losing their jobs and homes in droves.
RayC Hussein @ 39:
I was against it when it was just "bombing runs" and proven that the targets were not what the military said they were. I was against Afghanistan from day 1, knowing how easy throughout it's history powers have used it for target practice and knowing that they are tribal, therefore not supportive of a terrorist org. But, I had no problem with them hunting down these supposed terrorists, with permission from foreign nations. The first person's opinion I listened to when this crapshoot started was Noam Chomsky and he has been ridiculed and called a wingnut for getting everything right.
As an aside, do you know how many Canadians spout the same WMD/Al Qaeda bogus lies from the Bush regime? I know of many that to this day still believe everything the US media has told them.
I never bought any of it. I listened to each of the weapons inspectors reports and the final touch was the talk Powell gave at the UN. His evidence was pathetic and compared to what the weapons inspectors had said, there was no doubt in my mind that bush had other reasons for invading Iraq and no matter what, he was going to do it.
Words cannot express the contempt I have for these people, since idiots such as Richard Cohen still claims he was wrong for the right reasons and while war opponents were right for the wrong reasons. I'm so sick of these vain, arrogant wankers. The only two things necessary to oppose invading Iraq were a high threshold for war and a decent bullshit detector. But when idiocy and chickenhawk fervor are the social norms, the voices of sane adults who have studied some basic history or have some common sense tend to get dismissed. The biggest problem is they're still in positions of power and influence and they'll do the same thing all over again. Their egos depend not only on being right, but on having been right. Kristol being hired by the NYT is similarly, however unconsciously, an attempt to validate all of the NYT's crappy coverage leading up to the war.
Chris H. @ 37:
Better they are angry at me than thinking through the question of who would benefit the most if Iran were blamed for a failure of the surge.
Better they are angry at me than wondering whether a gaff by a candidate could actually cause a shift in the released "information" such that the gaff might become true.
Better they are angry at me than mobilizing against "liberal hawks."
Better they are angry at me than talking to other people face-to-face.
#28 ConcernedCanuck Says:
I predict a year from now ConcernedCanuck will be posting his own "How did I get Iran wrong?"
Just sayin': http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/03/12/BL200803120...
THANKS JA
Only someone wholly unfamiliar with history or 'The Princess Bride,' would ever have entertained the notion that invading Iraq was a good idea. I'm NOT a history major or a politician, but I knew this was a bad idea from the start, and I knew the Bush Administration was lying us into war in Iraq. And I'm no philosopher, but I knew from the start that one can never, ever win a war that is undertaken on behalf of a lie.
pissed off patricia @ 43:
A former college friend and I watched that display on CNN and were literally yelling at the tv before my wife walked in and turned it off on us. We just couldn't believe that anyone in the US, much less the media, would believe such an obvious dog and pony show. My friend said, "there is no way Americans are going to fall for that shit"..........well, just about that time, the polls showed overwhelming support for Bush and his "let's kill 'em all" cowboy ideas.
Acting Patriotic @ 46:
I just hope you are wrong. Enough have been killed for nothing more than greed.
This is precisely why my heart fell when I read Joseph Wilson's essay disparaging Obama and lauding those who believed the "intelligence." I would think a former ambassador, a diplomat for God's sake, would recognize John's quote which not only speaks to what is right, but also to what is legal. America broke its own laws and international laws with the Iraq invasion.
The ONLY way the unrepentant liberal AND conservative hawks will learn anything about setting illegal wars into motion is if they personally pay the consequences, are tried for war-crimes, are convicted, and sentenced to the appropriate consequences.
Nothing else will do it.
It's like murder -- Hell, it IS murder -- if someone crosses that line and is not forced to pay the consequences, it becomes easier next time. And there is always a next time.
Dr. Hussien Matt @ 6:
I have to disagree. Look at Texas.
Oh yeah, maybe you've got a point.
its about realpolitik, forget international law and all of that, if its in our interest its in our interest, we need that oil. Do you guys want $10 gallon gas? how about heating and electric bill? You want China to take oveR?
ConcernedCanuck @ 49:
Yeah...I was screamin at the teevee that day too...and was called unpatriotic, among other things for not buyin into it...
ConcernedCanuck @ 42:
I was never for invading Afghanistan I thought that 9/11 should have been treated as a crime and I had heard that the Taliban was willing to turn over Osama to a 3rd country for trial. I didn't hold out much hope that the US was going to take them up on the offer but I held out hope until we actually invaded. By the way if anyone is interested Sam Seder is in for Randi Rhodes all this week.
chris @ 54:
Yep. Yep. And Yep.
liberalHUSSEINmoderation @ 55:
All the lies that have been proven lies for these invasions? I was called a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist for daring to even mention the complete fabrications. That's why I never call anyone a conspiracy theorist. There is no such thing.
I smelled a rat during Powell's presentation of "evidence" to the UN - bird's eye views of covered trucks that contained WMDs?.... uh... yeah...
chris @ 54:
Gas is $4/gallon in some places, and expected to hit five soon, so you're halfway there. How's that Realpolitik working for you?
chris @ 54:
Sweet lawd on a pogo stick Chris! You have totally bought into the boogeyman that faux noose beats its viewers over the head with 24-7, haven't you?
So, according to you, breaking international law is fine, no need to even bother with alternative fuels, conservation, etc.? Just keep on drivin that gas hog SUV until the planet chokes. Just keep on runnin that A/C when it's only 80 outside, god forbid some fat-ass American break a god-damn sweat while watching American Idol....
Someone needs to read posts 15 and 34.
Packaging this war as "preemptive" was part of "catapulting the propaganda." This wasn't a preemptive war, because there was nothing to preempt. Iraq wasn't a threat and the Bushies knew it. Both Condi and Powell said as much months before we invaded. They knew there were no WMD, they knew Saddam had no intention of attacking [which he couldn't even if he'd wanted to]. It had nothing to do with al Qaeda, which didn't exist in Iraq until after we invaded.
We invaded and occupy Iraq for geostrategic reasons: to control Iraq's oil. Even our resident Bushie, Chris, admits as much: "chris @ 54:
its about realpolitik, forget international law and all of that, if its in our interest its in our interest, we need that oil. Do you guys want $10 gallon gas? how about heating and electric bill? You want China to take oveR?"
liberalHUSSEINmoderation @ 61:
NNoooo, I'm saying its going to take YEARS to change over our energy supply, probably decades if we keep fighting Nuclear energy, but anyway, we don't have a plan to get off oil, from the drawing board to you car is going to take a long time. So that means we still need oil, while we still have the worlds best military we should use it to secure ours now. International Law does not mean shit, its written by us and can be broken by us, thats what I mean by realpolitik, the UN is a joke...
JTM @ 62:
I hear ya JTM...lol! But I don't think Chris is being snarky...
chris @ 54:
first off, you have proven time and time again you don't know your ass from your elbow.
and i should resist responding to your naive comments, but here go...
we went in to iraq and how much was oil? what is it now? yet, somehow you think going to war with iran will, somehow, reduce the cost of gas?
ya see my C&L friends this comment is at the root of the answer to the question: 'what causes terrorism' and 'why do they hate us'
i guess we can sleep better at night knowing that this myopic individual doesn't control our foreign policy, the bad news is that dick cheney thinks the exact same way.
Hopefully, this will put to rest the notion that Slate is some kind of liberal site. It's essentially the on-line twin of The New Republic.
you said it jon. f-yeah!
Bud @ 59:
This is what got me; they were talking about WMD that were manufactured during the 1980s. Anyone who has spent a day in the Army knows that 20 year old artillery rounds are so unstable that they will explode just by touching them. They also know that ALL FORMS of chemical weapons are highly acidic. They will actually carode holes in stainless steal. The shelf life of a chemical round is maybe at most 6 months. The idea that Iraq had been holding these weapons for 20 years was completely absurd. Yet, the media chose to completely ignore the physical IMPOSSIBLITY of bush's claim.
Constitutional Amendement: The United States has no responsibility to serve as policemen of the world. Any leader who believes that we must serve as the policemen of the world is unfit to be Commander-in-Chief. If we choose at some point to engage in humanitarian efforts, then that is our choice, but we have no responsibility to do so. The will of the people must always be paramount to any military action. During a military action, a Congressional vote will be taken once a year that will determine whether or not the action shall continue. If the Congress votes nay on the motion, the war is over, and the Commander-in-Chief's wartime powers are rescinded. If the Commander-in-Chief refuses to obey the will of the Congress, his actions shall be considered treasonous and he shall be publicly hung until he is dead, dead, dead, along with any in his administration who stand by his anti-Constitutional position. If the vice president happens to be so fat as to require an upgrade of the executive gallows, such an upgrade shall be performed prior to the public hanging.
This is just one step in the neoconservatives' attempts at historical revisionism. 10+ years after the war ends they will try and rewrite the history books, as well as their boy-king's legacy.
When the Soviet Union went into Hungary in 1956, we condemned the invasion as an affront to Hungarian sovereignty. When they went into Afghanistan in 1980, we pulled out of the Olympics in protest. Whenever a foreign power acts aggressively toward a neighbor, e.g. China vs. Tibet, we're the first to criticize. And we're right to do so.
But we have blinders over our eyes when it comes to our own government's conduct. When we invade Vietnam, or Iraq, we're defending "freedom." This is our attitude, whether the indigenous population wants us to defend them or not. It's called arrogance, and the reason many Democrats don't call it that publicly is that they're afraid of being labeled "unpatriotic" by the militant right wing and the military-industrial complex, which Eisenhower warned us about in 1961 in his valedictory address.
chris @ 54:
Gas was < 2 dollar/gallon before dubyah invaded and occupied Iraq.....so, it appears YOU DO support $10/gallon gas.
chris Hate fighting @ 64:
Wrong. OPEC has already said they would consider increasing supply depending on the outcome of November's elections.
JTM @ 2:
"They" started nothing, you airhead! Bush and the liars you're listening to started it all and are keeping it going. Fuck! crawl back under that rock, fucktard!
The U.S. should not — and has no right to — invade, bomb and occupy other nations that haven’t attacked or even threatened to attack us.
The US has occupied the Nation of Hawai'i for 114 years, and overthrew the rightful Government with which it had treaties. As for the Stathood vote...you only had to be here one year for residency and then you could vote for Statehood....can we say military personel and big business?...also, the islands of Ni'ihau and Lana'i voted "NO" but were they heard? No! The US has consistantly betrayed a peaceful and welcoming people....what hippocrites on July 4th to celebrate their freedom from England and then steal Hawai'i's freedom!...
chris Hate fighting @ 64:
Ok I see your point Chris. My point is this. We'd be OFF of fossil fuels years ago, but the oil companies, car companies and the chemical companies are entirely dependant on it, and aren't going to let go of it without a fight. There are patents that these three industries have bought and buried, so they could keep the profits flowing, environment be damned.
And the line that it will take along time is BS, brought to you by Shell corp. It won't happen overnight, but neither will it take 50 years.
And I think the rest of the world would take issue with your thoughts on international law. This country calls other countries out for breaking international law, your idea of breaking international law when it suits us, is a prime example of BushCo's cowboy/idiotic "diplomacy"...which I fuckin hate btw...
Here in Texas we have a board for textbook approval that was so over-zealous in refusing books for having their facts right, but not Right, the Texas Legislature had to pass laws restricting their ability.
They've already succeeded in using the rules in the most general sense to get around them, and this November we'll be heading into a Science vs fairy tales controversy of biology textbooks.
Who's to say they don't do that with history books of the future?
54 chris
Constant war disrupts trade routes. Even the rumor of war sends our oil prices soaring.
Additionally, you're presenting a false-dilemma argument.
Dr. Hussien Matt @ 72:
What is all this talk of "rights"? How about addressing the cold, hard reality of what's happening? This preemptive war is destroying us. Our economy is collapsing largely on the debt incurred to pay for this war-estimated to cost in the trillions (not millions, not billions, that's TRILLIONS) of tax-payer dollars plus interest. Our own generals have called our military "broken", "overstretched", and "unable to respond to emergencies at home." Bin Laden openly stated that his intention was to bankrupt the U.S. as he did the Soviet Union by provoking them into a costly overseas occupation. And Bush (and McCain) stupidly and blusteringly walked right into the trap. Only through such dumbfounding incompetence could a few thousand terrorists with guns, IEDs, camels, and a little imagination hope to do the amount of damage they have to what was once the most powerful military machine in the history of the world. Fortunately for them, they were facing morons for it's leaders. Way to go, Neocons.
We can always maintain an emergency presence in the middle east to respond to the worst should Al-Qaeda actually establish a base in Iraq. (Not holding my breath.) Until then, we must end this occupation for our own survival.