Click to see the beacon journal online
Homes   Jobs   Cars   Shopping
Blog of Mass Destruction -- Community Blog

Previous post:

Next post:

"Mission Accomplished", The Sequel

by The Reverend on August 19, 2010

in Barack Obama,Bush White House,disinformation,Iraq,media

While the nation's most intelligent and influential minds are lining up on either side of a non-story, non-issue: whether fee-fees (sensitivities) are more important than the rule of law when deciding whether New York Muslims have guaranteed constitutional rights…..I want to take this time to comment on last night's MSNBC "coverage" of the last American combat troops leaving Iraq.

The words "breaking news" have no meaning anymore……I realize that…..but last night's MSNBC's breaking news-that-wasn't….was a sad reminder of another manufactured and embarassing photo-op moment concerning Iraq.

Yes, it was on May 1, 2003, when George W. Bush had the nation's first Iraq "mission accomplished" national political photo-op moment. Dressed up in his G.I.Joe costume, the draft-dodging Republican president told Americans….

Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.
……
The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001 and still goes on.
……
The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of Al Qaida and cut off a source of terrorist funding.

And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more.

Of the 4400+ U.S. military killed in Iraq, approximately 4275 of them were killed after President Bush's "major combat operations in Iraq have ended" moment.

Mission Accomplished was a cruel Orwellian joke played on Americans as a GOP president looked to polish his codpiece in preparation for his re-election in 2004.

Last night brought us the second Mission Accomplished moment.

Richard Engel was live at the Iraq-Kuwait border last night as what was described as the "last American combat troops" left Iraq. Military vehicle after military vehicle were shown crossing the Kuwait border while breathless and clueless MSNBC talking heads blathered on repeatedly about those "last American combat troops leaving Iraq."

What is the number of American military personnel still remaining inside of Iraq after the "last American combat troops" leave?

50,000.

What will these 50,000 American troops be doing in Iraq…..considering that "all American combat troops are leaving?"

The array of tasks for which American troops are likely to be needed, military experts and some Iraqi officials say, include training Iraqi forces to operate and logistically support new M-1 tanks, artillery and F-16s they intend to acquire from the Americans; protecting Iraq’s airspace until the country can rebuild its air force; and perhaps assisting Iraq’s special operations units in carrying out counterterrorism operations.

Call me crazy….but that sounds like there's a high probability that some of those 50,000 American military personnel will be involved in, you know, combat operations inside Iraq.

Such an arrangement would need to be negotiated with Iraqi officials, who insisted on the 2011 deadline in the agreement with the Bush administration for removing American forces. With the Obama administration in campaign mode for the coming midterm elections and Iraqi politicians yet to form a government, the question of what future military presence might be needed has been all but banished from public discussion.

Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

In my opinion, MSNBC did it's best Obama-lapdog work last night. In so doing they embarassed themselves and, just like with Bush's Mission Accomplished moment, played Americans as chumps.

The truth about Iraq is this: "leaving is losing."

The purpose in attacking and militarily occupying Iraq was to place permanent U.S. military personnel, permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq. That was the goal of the neo-conservative Bushies…..and they won.

The reason neo-conservatives still give for a permanent U.S. military presence in Iraq is "for the purpose of projecting American power throughout the region."

Even in Richard Engel's reporting last night he mentioned our "vital interests" in the region.

The U.S.A. is an empire. A decadent and deteriorating one, to be sure….but still an empire. Empires do whatever they wish to do…..that's the beauty of being an empire.

And as empires are prone to do, the leaders of the U.S. empire must keep it's citizens properly disinformed.

That's what last night's second Mission Accomplished moment was all about.

  • Da King

    "The reason neo-conservatives still give for a permanent U.S. military presence in Iraq is "for the purpose of projecting American power throughout the region.""

    Last time I checked, the neocons were no longer in charge, unless you consider Obama one.

    But you're right. It ain't over until all the troops are home.

  • Andrea

    Well I am not going to say the Iraq war ended but he kept his promise. So 50,000 remain and how many do we have in other countries?
    If this was a republican President you be hearing not only him but the right wing Media and all the supporters including Da king's followers, celebrating the successful end to the Iraq war. Instead MSNBC gave a rather quiet farewell in comparison. There was no "mission accomplished banner" . I think Obama and everyone at MSNBC knows that there still will be fighting, some minor and a few major attacks . The administration has clearly said they are not ending their work in Iraq that there is still a long-term commitment. But if the right can claim they kept America safe when the biggest attack ever occurred under their watch and say the surge was their sucess to the war – then doesn't the President who withdrew the most troops from Iraq get any credit for doing what he said he would ?
    Maybe Gibbs is right – you can never make a lib happy no matter what you do .

  • The Reverend

    I hear what you are saying, Andrea. And, yes, there is no question that Obama gets credit for keeping his promise on getting the combat troops out of Iraq.

    However, at best, we're just about where we started inside Iraq….with 50,000 military personnel.

    Bush was completely absorbed into the neo-conservative-led, military industrial complex mentality. I believe that Obama, rather than being absorbed into the mentality……has been taken hostage by it.

    Think about it. Even you said that there will still be fighting, some minor and a few major attacks in Iraq moving forward. What logical sense does it make to tell Americans that the "last combat troops in Iraq" are leaving when at least some of the remaining U.S. troops in Iraq will be still facing combat in Iraq.

    Bush had a tremendous credibility problem. He had that problem because his explanations,…the stuff he said…..lacked credibility. Most of the stuff he said was mixed with deception and lies. Obama doesn't lie or try to deceive…..but he risks losing credibility when he features the last U.S. combat troops leaving Iraq…when we know that remaining U.S. troops will still encounter combat in Iraq.

    And yes, I'm being harsh towards Obama. Maybe because I'm still angry over his Saturday walkback comment over the Islamic Center. Obama had no justification for saying he didn't and won't comment on the wisdom of whether the Islamic Center should be built in NY. That was a stupid wishy-washy, defeatist thing to say, especially after the spot-on stuff he said Friday. Then what happened? Reid followed with his nonsense…and now Howard Dean. Spineless stupidity.

    Thanks for being candid with me, Andrea. I appreciate it coming from you.

  • frank

    Reading comprehension check—The Rev used the word "was", as in past tense.

  • frank

    It is certainly good news for the soldiers and their families. But it is disingenuous to declare the remaining troops as non combatants. They will remain as targets and will no doubt see further combat. I simply wonder how many of the newly removed soldiers will be sent to Afghanistan after a short respite. Obama's only accomplishment was to adhere to the agreement Bush signed. The real test will be removing the remaining troops within the next year. But hopefully, the PNAC dream of installing permanent military bases in Iraq as a staging area for future empire building exercises is over.

  • {SS} Buoy

    I agree with you on the back tracking of Obama's words. Reid is obviously pandering votes BUT, with the possibility of his opponent being in D.C., I'll give Reid a pass.

    Dean? Condsider the source.

  • {SS} Buoy

    Iraq will be the buffer zone between Israel and Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and China? Maybe? Afghanistan will be the buffer of Russia invading the Southwestern Asian continent.

    But, relying on Turkey to protect the northern boundaries for Israel is really shaky and very fragile. You know, Cypress could easily trigger the third world war or dare I say, the Christians versus the Muslims versus the Jews?

    THe pawns are definitely in place except for the instability of Afghanistan.

  • Andrea

    I thought it was quite something that the troops left in a brigade without incident, Do you recall all the republicans scare tactics that if he announced a pull out date all H#ll would break out over there. Holding my breath but so far – didn't happen.

    I think Obama is being very hesitant he knows the situation is like walking on egg shells – but do we really want our guys to stay there ? Let Iraq pull up their game. Time will tell who was right – Mccain- remember his words that a troop withdrawal was “delusional” and such a step would amount to “giving Iraq to Iran…and al Qaeda. That’s who would own it.”
    lets see – I think the world is turning against al qaeda.

  • Bubba

    So I guess 57 Iraqi army recruits and soliders getting blown up is no big deal.

  • Da King

    If the neocon plan "was" for permanent military bases, why did the SOFA agreement Bush signed with Iraq call for ALL American troops to be out of Iraq by december 2011 ? Were we going to run military bases without troops ?
    In 2008, why did Defense Secretary Gates say the US wasn't interested in permanent military bases in Iraq ?

  • Da King

    Bush announced a pullout date, Andrea, but he didn't do it until AFTER the majority of the violence was quelled and the Iraqi government could start to secure their own country. The Dems wanted to pull out earlier at a time when Iraq would have descended into full-fledged civil war. That is a huge difference.

  • Da King

    Rev says, "Obama doesn't lie or try to deceive"

    That may be your funniest statement yet. Bravo. I nearly fell off my chair.

  • frank

    The neo-con architects of this war, PNAC, did indeed plan to build permanent military bases in Iraq. It was in their manifesto. Bush was not a PNAC member, but members Cheney and Rumsfeld made sure that the administration's foreign policy team was dominated by fellow PNAC'ers. I believe that Bush's motivations were different. He simply wanted to outdo/avenge his father and secure the power of a "war president". By the time he signed the SOFA, he had already achieved his goals.

  • The Reverend

    Let me give you an encore laugh…..but please…..fasten your seatbelt, I don't want you getting hurt.

    Obama doesn't lie or try to deceive.

    Unlike W…..Obama is a very intelligent politician.

  • frank

    Mr. {SS} Buoy,
    I disagree. I'd bet that the Shiite government of Iraq will become closely allied with the Shiite government of Iran. I am not aware of any Russian desires to invade SW Asia. Could you explain? At any rate, I see no reason to believe that Afghanistan will be ever be stable, whether we stay or go. The most likely scenario causing a war of Christians vs. Muslims vs. Jews would be an Israeli attack on Iran.

  • The Reverend

    You make a very good point, Bubba.

    If U.S. combat troops are leaving Iraq because it's now stable…..then what the heck is all the violence about?

  • Da King

    Crash ! Bam ! Owww !!! You forgot to tell me to install airbags before your followup comment :-)

    I assume by "very intelligent politician," you mean Obama is a semi-gifted orator with a particular talent for partisan bs, evasion, and half-truths.

    Not that he's the only one. There are a boatload of them in D.C.

  • Da King

    I'd suggest that the permanent military bases theory started long, long before Iraq, and long before Cheney/Rumsfeld/PNAC. We have about 900 bases around the world already.

    But what you are saying is that PNAC never had the power to construct permanent military bases in Iraq without Bush's approval, which he did not give. That's a different way of reaching the same conclusion I reached.

Previous post:

Next post:

 

© The Akron Beacon Journal • 44 E. Exchange Street, Akron, Ohio 44308

Powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).