Mission Unaccomplished

It had taken much thought and planning that wartime May Day four years ago when George W. Bush co-piloted an S-3B Viking sub reconnaissance Naval jet onto the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. Scott Sforza, a former ABC producer, had "embedded" himself on that aircraft carrier days before the President landed. Along with Bob DeServi, a former NBC cameraman and lighting specialist, and Greg Jenkins, a former Fox News television producer, he had planned out every detail of the President's arrival -- as Elisabeth Bumiller of the New York Times put it then -- "even down to the members of the Lincoln crew arrayed in coordinated shirt colors over Mr. Bush's right shoulder and the ‘Mission Accomplished' banner placed to perfectly capture the president and the celebratory two words in a single shot. The speech was specifically timed for what image makers call ‘magic hour light,' which cast a golden glow on Mr. Bush."

Before the President could descend jauntily from that plane into the perfect light of a late spring afternoon, and onto what was essentially a movie set, the Abraham Lincoln, which had only recently hit Iraq with 1.6 million pounds of ordnance, had to be stopped just miles short of its home base in San Diego. No one wanted George W. Bush simply to clamber aboard.

Who could forget his Tom-Cruise-style "Top Gun swagger" across that deck -- so much commented on in the media in the following days -- to the carefully positioned podium where he gave his speech? It was to be the exclamation point on his invasion of choice and provide the first fabulous photos for his presidential campaign to come. Only two things about that moment, that speech, are remembered today -- that White House-produced "Mission Accomplished" banner behind him and his announcement, with a flourish, that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended."

If his landing and speech are today remembered as a woeful moment, an embarrassment, if those fabulous photos never made it into campaign 2004, that was, in part, because of another event -- a minor headline -- that very same May day: Halfway around the world, soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division, occupying an elementary school in Fallujah, fired on a crowd of angry Iraqi demonstrators. Perhaps 15 Iraqis died and more were wounded. Two days later, in a second clash, two more Iraqis would die.

On CNN's website the day after the President's landing, the main headline read: "Bush calls end to ‘major combat.'" But there was that smaller, secondary headline as well: "U.S. Central Command: Seven hurt in Fallujah grenade attack." Two grenades had been tossed into a U.S. military compound, leaving seven American soldiers slightly injured.

In the months to follow, those two headlines would jostle for dominance, a struggle now long over. Before May 1, 2004 ever rolled around, "mission accomplished" would be a scarlet phrase of shame, useful only to critics of the administration. By that one-year anniversary, Fallujah had morphed into a resistant city that had withstood an assault by the Marines. In November 2004, it would be largely destroyed by American firepower without ever being subdued. Now, the already failed American method of turning largely destroyed Fallujah into a giant "gated" prison camp for its residents is being applied to the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, where huge walls are slated to rise around 10 or more recalcitrant neighborhoods as part of the President's Baghdad Security Plan, or "surge."

Four years later, casualty figures are so terrible in Iraq that the government, locked inside the Green Zone in the capital, has, for the first time, refused to reveal the monthly figures to the United Nations, though figures do show a continuing epidemic of assassinations of Iraqi academics and of torture of prisoners, a steep rise in deaths among policemen, and a rise in "honor killings" of women by their own families. Four years later, those few "slightly injured" men of the 82nd Airborne Division have morphed into last week's 9 dead and 20 wounded from a double-truck-bomb suicide attack on one of that division's outposts in Diyala Province; over 100 Americans were killed in the month of April alone; 3,350 Americans in all (not including hundreds of "private security contractors").

Four years later, the American military has claimed dramatic success in reducing a wave of sectarian killings in the capital -- but only by leaving out of its count the dead from Sunni car/truck/motorcycle-bomb and other suicide-bomb attacks; with over 100 car bombings last month, and similar figures for this one, Sunni militants are outsurging the U.S. surge in Baghdad, making "a mockery of the US and Iraqi security plan," according to BBC reporter Andrew North.

Four years later, not only has the Bush administration's "reconstruction" of the country been a record of endless uncompleted or ill-completed projects and massive overpayments, not to speak of financial thievery, but even the projects once proclaimed "successes" turn out, according to inspectors from the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, to be disasters "no longer operating as planned"; the biggest business boom in a country in which unemployment is sky-high may be "a run on concrete barriers" for security, which are so in demand that sometimes they "are not fully dry when military engineering units pick them up"; electricity availability and potable water supplies are worse than ever; childhood malnutrition is on the rise; no one even mentions Iraqi oil production which remains well below the worst days of Saddam Hussein and billions of dollars of which are being siphoned off onto the black market.

Four years later, U.S. prisons, one of the few reconstruction success stories in Iraq, are chock-a-block full, holding 18,000 or more Iraqis in what are essentially terrorist-producing factories; Iraq has the worst refugee problem (internal and external) on the planet with perhaps 4 million people in a population of 25 million already displaced from their homes (202 of whom were admitted to the United States in 2006); the Iraqi government inside the Green Zone does not fully control a single province of the country, while its legislators are planning to take a two-month summer "vacation"; a State Department report on terrorism just released shows a rise of 25% in terrorist attacks globally, and 45% of these attacks were in Iraq; 80% of Iraqis oppose the U.S. presence in their country; 64% of Americans now want a timetable for a 2008 withdrawal; and the President's approval rating fell to its lowest point, 28%, in the most recent Harris poll, which had the Vice President at a similarly record-setting 25%.

During this grueling, destructive downward spiral through the very gates of hell, whose end is not faintly in sight, the administration's war words and imagery have, unsurprisingly, undergone continual change as well. In the course of these last years, the "turning points," "tipping points," "milestones," and "landmarks" on the road to Iraqi democracy and freedom have turned into modest marks on surveyor's yardsticks ("benchmarks"), not one of which can be met by the woeful Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The "magic hour light" of May 2003 has disappeared, along with those glorious photos from the deck of the carrier. The sort of descriptions you see today, as in a recent David Ignatius column in the Washington Post, sound more like this: "Republicans voice the bitterness and frustration of people chained to the hull of a sinking ship." (The USS George W. Bush, undoubtedly.) Oh, and the President and what's left of his tattered administration have stopped filming on a Top Gun-style movie set and seem now to be intent on remaking The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

This White House has plunged Iraq and the world into the geopolitical equivalent of a blood-and-gore exploitation film that simply won't end. Call that "Mission Accomplished"!

Comments (68)

1. TOM ENGELHARDT: Four years later,....Four years later,.... Four years later,....

   Actually, since 9/11/01, it's been "5+ years later", and Bush has succeeded in taking the battle to the ME while keeping its homeland free of "Major Combat"!

   Posted by Happy at 05/01/2007 @ 11:46am

2. Happy-So,what you're saying is that you don't care about the innocent humans being slaughtered in the ME as long as you are safe.How are all of these people supposed to get here on order for us to have major combat going on in the United States?Rowboats?Unarmed aircraft?

   Posted by i'm nobody at 05/01/2007 @ 12:00pm

3. Posted by HAPPY 05/01/2007 @ 11:46am

   Englehardt was starting to bum me out.

   Thanks for the comic relief.

   Posted by drhammer at 05/01/2007 @ 12:01pm

4. Read the article, Happy. It's been four years since we invaded Iraq, and it's a total clusterf**k that has had nothing to do with 9/11, except in how the neocons exploited in to justify the invasion.

   Posted by brunowe at 05/01/2007 @ 12:01pm

5. I think Happy has an embedded journalist in his brain. Sean Hannity maybe.

   Posted by MyParadigm at 05/01/2007 @ 12:12pm

6. The biggest problem with Iraq is that bush has no plan to succeed and never has.His plan is nothing more than singing "Kumbaya,why can't these people just get along, kumbaya",but it isn't working because,it appears, that they have no desire to get along and won't anytime soon.I guess centuries of hatred and the hatred caused by one group oppressing the others can't be undone by singing Kumbaya.Sen. Biden has proposed the only solution that stands a chance of working,but bush,being a child,rejects it because he didn't think of it first.At this point it isn't about winning or losing,but who gets the blame for the failure and each side is positioning itself to be the ones who can claim that they weren't responsible for the failure.

   Posted by i'm nobody at 05/01/2007 @ 12:28pm

7. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzz...No Attack on American Soil in Five Years...zzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...must.not.let.conflicting.thought.enter.m y.brain.zzzZZZZZZzzz...that.one.car.bomb.a.day.I.see.on.television.is.en ough.sacrifice.for.me...zzzzZZZZZZZZZzzz

   Posted by nathanhale at 05/01/2007 @ 12:33pm

8. Actually, since 9/11/01, it's been "5+ years later", and Bush has succeeded in taking the battle to the ME while keeping its homeland free of "Major Combat"!

   Clinton had a 5-year run without an Islamist terrorist attack as well, and he didn't lose a single soldier in Iraq and didn't kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. Oh, and he didn't spend 300 billion and chew up the Armed Forces either.

   Bush elected to attack Iraq when he didn't need to, and an unnecessary war is an unjust war.

   Posted by BlueSpark at 05/01/2007 @ 12:36pm

9. Literally now (HAPPY and PONTIFICUS help me out)...literally....

   not a single thing has gone right about this war. Not a single thing SAID about the rationale for this war was true or is, in any way, valid anymore. Not a single estimate of the COST has been proven anything but wildly optimistic or just plain wrong. (Remember Cheney told Stephanopolous that projections of $200 Billion were "baloney" and that it would be "$50 Billion"...it's now upto $430 Billion).

   And the "There've been no more 9/11s" argument defies their own logic, because...if Bush gets credit for the lack of 9/11s since invading Iraq...then he gets the blame for 9/11 BEFORE....yet if an American President had screwed up so badly that 3000 people had died, he should have been voted out of office, no? Yet these same people ENTHUSIASTICALLY voted for Bush in 2004, instead of logically punishing the man who screwed up.

   Posted by Mask at 05/01/2007 @ 12:58pm

10. Geez, 17 posts from RESE...that I'm fortunately not seeing.

    Ya figure that idiot would give up on trying to "educate" us on "the Jesuits/Zionists/Flouridators", but the mentally deranged never do, I guess.

    Posted by Mask at 05/01/2007 @ 1:11pm

11. Geez, 17 posts from RESE...that I'm fortunately not seeing.

    Ya figure that idiot would give up on trying to "educate" us on "the Jesuits/Zionists/Flouridators", but the mentally deranged never do, I guess.

    Posted by Mask at 05/01/2007 @ 1:11pm

12. She's suffering more than the parents of sons and daughters killed in Iraq, even while their own daughters party hardy. Posted by FRANKGRITS

    Last week I listened to an interview with a sociologist that is studying similarities and differences between Iraq and Vietnam. The discussion included the lack of a draft and the measures the armed forces are taking to find new recruits. The sociologist told the story of him talking to Army brass about their recruitment woes. He asked if they would prefer to have their budget tripled or have Jenna Bush sign up. They all agreed they would rather have Jenna volunteer; one Lt. Col. raised his hand and said: "We'll have to get her a waiver, though."

    Posted by mtspence05 at 05/01/2007 @ 1:41pm

13. Bluespark,

    No no you don't get it!

    In Clinton's years when Islamic terrorists attacked the USS Cole in Yemen or US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania treating those instances as criminal acts was wrong.

    Now that we're being atacked more than a thousand times more often by Islamic terrorists it's OK....because it's a war zone.

    See, all Clinton had to do was put troops in Yemen (oh he did do that I guess) or declare a battle in Kenya and Tanzania and the apologists would be fine with it.

    Of course, for some reason the apologists were incensed when Clinton bombed a terrorist weapons depot in Sudan that was posing as an aspirin factory.....but it's not like the right wing zealots were trying to tie Clinton in knots or anything!!

    Posted by freedomplease at 05/01/2007 @ 1:53pm

14. Didn't some sort of baby formula plant get hit?

    Posted by mtspence05 at 05/01/2007 @ 1:57pm

15. Maybe you're thinking of the "baby milk factory" from the first Gulf War. Propaganda has improved greatly since then.

    Posted by MyParadigm at 05/01/2007 @ 2:04pm

16. No, there was a plant that was hit with cruise missles while Clinton was in office. They thought it was producing something dangerous, but it turned out to be innocuous.

    Posted by mtspence05 at 05/01/2007 @ 2:12pm

17. Posted by MYPARADIGM 05/01/2007 @ 12:12pm

    How dare you impugn Sean Hannity by calling him a journalist.

    Posted by canaar at 05/01/2007 @ 2:21pm

18. Posted by MTSPENCE05 05/01/2007 @ 2:12pm

    a suspect pharmaceutical factory in Sudan in 1998 [en.wikipedia.org]

    Posted by Mask at 05/01/2007 @ 2:23pm

19. In Clinton's years when Islamic terrorists attacked the USS Cole in Yemen or US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania treating those instances as criminal acts was wrong.

    Actually, it has been law enforcement and intelligence operations that have done the most to thwart terrorist attacks. And that's my point: thinking of our struggle against the crime of terrorism as a "war" (1) elevates terrorists to a status they do not deserve, (2) inclines policymakers' minds towards military approaches first rather than last, which has proven to be counter-effective, and (3) diverts resources away from approaches that might actually make us safer.

    There were a lot of mistakes made in the response to the Yemen and embassy attacks, but they were mistakes involving the culture of the CIA/FBI (infighting, lack of communication) not mistakes involving the basic approach of considering terrorism to be a crime.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 05/01/2007 @ 2:24pm

20. ...not a single thing has gone right about this war. Not a single thing SAID about the rationale for this war was true or is, in any way, valid anymore. Not a single estimate of the COST has been proven anything but wildly optimistic or just plain wrong....

    Posted by MASK 05/01/2007 @ 12:58pm

    I'll just list "a single thing has gone right" as a direct result of the Iraq War: Libya's coming clean with its WMD program which was, heavens, farther advanced than our `Intelegence' had indicated! This alone, is worth, say ~$100 Billion!

    I'll also list a "single" rationale that has been proved: Saddam (nor his charming sons) is no longer a threat to his neigbors (bonus: nor a WMD threat to the world)!

    On "COST", I'll give you this one! Sigh.....Military is part of the Federal Government and when was the last time any Fed program came in as `estimated'! Even on the upside, they missed (underestimated) the pouring in of tax revenues due to the economy and capital gains receipt (a subject I know well since we pay more in this tax than regular income tax)!

    Posted by Happy at 05/01/2007 @ 2:54pm

21. Posted by HAPPY 05/01/2007 @ 2:54pm

    1. Can you PROVE that Libya "came clean" on the WMDs, BECAUSE we invaded Iraq? And why, in they anticipated that, wasn't THAT mentioned as a rationale for invading Iraq?

    2. No Saddam isn't a threat to his neighbor....that would be IRAN. Now, we have a Shiite government that will work with Iran and there is no longer a Sunni buffer to the Iranians. On that "bonus" of "no WMD threat"....as we learned, we had that BEFORE the invasion, because they were destroyed.

    3. Let's see how honest you are. Suppose a LIBERAL had devised a "poverty program" and said it would cost "only $50 Billion" and it came out at $450 Billion (and more needed) and produced more suffering, more poverty, and likely created a situation where the poor couldn't get out of poverty for DECADES?

    Would you vote for that liberal's re-election and say "Keep going, only surrender monkeys would stop this 'Global War on Poverty' just as we are winning!"?

    Hmm?

    Posted by Mask at 05/01/2007 @ 3:06pm

22. Happy-The neighbor that Saddam was the biggest threat to was Iran.I do believe that Bush included Iran in his axis of evil speech yet you people want to fight for them.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 05/01/2007 @ 3:10pm

23. Posted by MASK

    Great retort.

    Posted by mtspence05 at 05/01/2007 @ 3:51pm

24. Posted by MTSPENCE05 05/01/2007 @ 3:51pm

    Thanks...but remember what Dr. Asimov said..."It's a poor blaster that doesn't point both ways!"

    Posted by Mask at 05/01/2007 @ 4:35pm

25. Actually, I think that there is a 3rd aspect of that day 4 years ago that is still remembered, or at least speculated upon:

    The bulging of the flight suit in the presidential crotch region. Most seem to think that Chimpy had a codpiece shoved down his drawers; some ascribe the phenomenon to over zealous tailoring, but all are clear that this was part of the pageantry of the day.

    How pathetically typical of Dubya - leaving it to others to enhance his manhood.

    I wonder if they even wore jockstraps on the cheerleading squad.

    Posted by skeletonman at 05/01/2007 @ 4:40pm

26. My fellow Americans,

    As a lameduck president, I can do what I want. On the four year anniversary of "Mission Accomplished", I am releasing this 5-minute footage of a party I attended. Use this footage to impeach me, I dare you (heh-heh).

    Justice Accomplished [youtube.com] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrSssTL_c5c

    -George "Dubya" Bush

    Posted by simple310 at 05/01/2007 @ 4:56pm

27. MASK,

    when you get all heated up about Iraq these days, you actually sound like someone who CARES about the state of the world--articulate, passionate, well-informed--rathter than the cynical, arm-chair quarterback you often come off as.

    Backhanded as it may be, that's meant as a compliment. Keep it up.

    Posted by Rintrah at 05/01/2007 @ 5:04pm

28. In 1993, Sen. John McCain led an effort to cut off funds immediately for military operations in Somalia after a firefight in Mogadishu killed 18 U.S. troops. The former prisoner of war in Vietnam brought a hush to the chamber floor when he asked what would happen if Congress failed to act and more Americans died.

    "On whose hands rest the blood of American troops? Ask yourself this question," said McCain, R-Arizona.

    Congress ultimately agreed to back President Clinton's request to give him until March 1994 to get troops out, with funding denied after that date.

    Spin THAT, you Repug cowards.

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 05/01/2007 @ 5:10pm

29. Gee, no takers. How predictable.

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 05/01/2007 @ 5:30pm

30. bush fucks usa http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha5SmzH01SE

    I'm not sure that's right. Funny stuff, folks.

    Posted by mtspence05 at 05/01/2007 @ 5:41pm

31. Posted by Leefeller at 05/01/2007 @ 7:14pm

32. Hey, some good posts, As the bumper sticker says: "Bush can use the same exit strategy he used for Vietnam" . I received an email that Speaker of the House is taking phone calls on folks that want to Impeach the Arse's in the White House. Anyone else heard? I was afraid to call the number, thought it would be another toll call to "Hot Hilda", those darn calls are too expensive. Sounds more like a chain letter? Hope it is not a problem posting the below information, it reads below as: Speaker is taking tally for IMPEACHMENT:

    :

    "PLEASE CALL Nancy Pelosi's office right now. Here's the deal as forwarded to me:

    House Speaker Pelosi's office is taking calls voting for Impeachment of Bush/Cheney at 202-225-0100.

    Folks, each of you who have been wanting Impeachment, need to commit right now to ask at least 10 others to call and ask each person to commit to asking 10 others to call and so on. It needs to happen fast and NOW. Let's BLITZKREIG the Speaker's office with demands for Impeachment of Bush AND Cheney.

    Please make a call, and thanks so very much."

    Posted by Leefeller at 05/01/2007 @ 7:27pm

33. While I do believe that Bush was premature in proclaiming Mission Accomplished, I also think that it would be foolish to pull out of Iraq without thinking about the repercussions and alternatives for this war. I think that for Iraq to escape chaos insitutions and funding need to be in place to address and prevent further poverty.

    If the original principle of why we are fighting this war is as important as Bush claims, the $340 billion already spent and the further $100+ billion to be spent should be redirected toward plans to fight poverty and develop the country to prevent another Afghanistan. According to the Borgen Project, just $19 billion annually can end starvation and $15 billion provides water and sanitation all over the world. If ending terror is the goal, the Millennium Development Goals to end poverty is the way to to go for our leaders.

    Posted by elc at 05/01/2007 @ 8:11pm

34. Posted by RINTRAH 05/01/2007 @ 5:04pm

    RIN, thanks for the compliment, but please remember that that stuff you think I'm "cynical" about...I feel just as passionately about.

    I don't trust the neo-cons...or Bush...on their use of our forces and money in Iraq. But I don't trust the liberals when it comes to government programs any more than that.

    Ideologues in general worry me, because they never (as seen by the 30% club and the neo-cons on Iraq) rarely admit mistakes, rarely correct their mistakes, and almost never admit their ideas were flawed.

    And that applies to flawed wars...or flawed attempts to "help people".

    Posted by Mask at 05/01/2007 @ 9:03pm

35. Actually, since 9/11/01, it's been "5+ years later", and Bush has succeeded in taking the battle to the ME while keeping its homeland free of "Major Combat"!

    Posted by HAPPY 05/01/2007 @ 11:46am

    ARE YOU HAPPY? WELL, SNOW WHITE'S LOOKIN' FER YA!

    (But don't you think your "dwarf name" should really be "Dopey"?)

    Posted by w_m_bear at 05/01/2007 @ 9:09pm

36. Posted by RESE 05/01/2007 @ 12:53pm

    Knew you wouldn't be able to stick to one- and two-liners for long!

    Posted by w_m_bear at 05/01/2007 @ 9:12pm

37. I think that for Iraq to escape chaos insitutions and funding need to be in place to address and prevent further poverty.

    If the original principle of why we are fighting this war is as important as Bush claims, the $340 billion already spent and the further $100+ billion to be spent should be redirected toward plans to fight poverty and develop the country to prevent another Afghanistan. According to the Borgen Project, just $19 billion annually can end starvation and $15 billion provides water and sanitation all over the world. If ending terror is the goal, the Millennium Development Goals to end poverty is the way to to go for our leaders.

    Posted by ELC 05/01/2007 @ 8:11pm

    Iraq is in chaos now. Iraq will be in chaos if we leave, you're right. However, based on past and current experience, Iraq will also be in chaos if we continue to occupy it. We can throw worse money after bad down this particular shithole if we like but, to me, it doesn't take a lot of brains to make the better choice.

    Posted by w_m_bear at 05/01/2007 @ 9:23pm

38. I wonder if they even wore jockstraps on the cheerleading squad.

    Posted by SKELETONMAN 05/01/2007 @ 4:40pm

    Your should see old pix of our Fearless Leader in his cute little cheerleader mini....

    Posted by w_m_bear at 05/01/2007 @ 9:37pm

39. Actually, since 9/11/01, it's been "5+ years later", and Bush has succeeded in taking the battle to the ME while keeping its homeland free of "Major Combat"!

    Posted by HAPPY 05/01/2007 @ 11:46am

    ARE YOU HAPPY? WELL, SNOW WHITE'S LOOKIN' FER YA!

    (But don't you think your "dwarf name" should really be "Dopey"?)

    Posted by W_M_BEAR 05/01/2007 @ 9:09pm

    I believe this is your comment to me! Waste of my reading time! You are on my warning list for screen out!

    Posted by Happy at 05/01/2007 @ 11:06pm

40. Hmm?

    Posted by MASK 05/01/2007 @ 3:06pm

    1) "PROVE" Libya came clean due to the Iraq War? Eminently logical...but, IF you want to believe it's not related, fine! Certainly jives w/your opposition to the IW and belief NOTHING good came of it! Generally, when one undertakes a difficult task with potentially wide-ranging repercussions, it's not wise to disclose all your goals since not all folks want to see ya succeed! Specifically for Libya, would've been downright DUMB! Much better that Libya did it its way, alone!

    2) I believe in the Death Penalty for a huge reason that the executed can never kill again. Saddam did much worse....he had the nerve to use, hmmm, nerve gas...With his record of actually having used WMD, I take his bluffing deadly serious!

    3) Right off the bat, you made a huge assumption that I had voted for your LIBERAL....I wouldn't have (voted for) even if he/she guaranteed to limit the spending to $50 Billion.

    Posted by Happy at 05/01/2007 @ 11:40pm

41. Posted by W_M_BEAR 05/01/2007 @ 9:09pm

    I believe this is your FIRSTcomment to me! Waste of my reading time! You are on my warning list for screen out!

    Posted by HAPPY 05/01/2007 @ 11:06pm

    Posted by Happy at 05/01/2007 @ 11:42pm

42. No, the mission isn't accomplished yet. For all the rhetoric that this administration has been bombarding us with for the last for years it comes down to just this. Oil, plain and simple. 9/11, "War on Terror", WMD's, Saddam Hussein the evil dictator, Iraqi people liberated, bringing democracy to the Middle East, all just a crock of shit.

    If this administration had been truthful from the start and said we're going to invade Iraq to steal their oil and the American people will have to pay for it with the lives of their sons and daughters and with hundreds of thousands of millions of American taxpayer dollars, they would have been run out of Washington so fast they would have left their shadows behind. So, what did the fools from PNAC do? They tried to fool the American people with smoke and mirrors by appealing to our American sprite to fight the bad guys, to be the US Calvary riding into Iraq to save those poor women and children from the evil despot that just happen to be sitting on top of all OUR oil.

    In case you haven't been following it, there is a bill before the Iraqi Parliament call among other things The Iraqi Oil and Gas Bill, or the Iraqi Hydrocarbons Bill of some other name. The thrust of the bill, written primarily by the British and American BIG oil companies and spoon feed to the "government" of Iraq to pass allows these BIG oil companies to control the Iraqi oil for decades to come and only requires the BIG oil companies to throw the Iraqi people a bone in payment over these decades.

    Follow this story, it is what it is all about. Google "Iraqi Oil and Gas Bill" and read the stories yourself.

    Here it is in a nutshell.

    "The exploration and production contracts give firms exclusive control of fields for up to 35 years, including contracts that guarantee profits for 25 years. A foreign company, if hired, is not required to partner with an Iraqi company or reinvest any of its money in the Iraqi economy. It's not obligated to hire Iraqi workers, train Iraqi workers or transfer technology.

    The current law remains silent on the type of contracts that the Iraqi government can use. The law establishes a new Iraqi Federal Oil and Gas Council with ultimate decision-making authority over the types of contracts that will be employed. This council will include, among others, "executive managers from important related petroleum companies". Thus it is possible that foreign oil-company executives could sit on the council. It would be unprecedented for a sovereign country to have, for instance, an executive of ExxonMobil on the board of its key oil-and-gas decision-making body."

    So, Operation Iraqi Liberation (OIL for short) remains unaccomplished.

    This all fits nicely with Bush's veto of "The Iraq Accountability Act". Bush wouldn't want to put his signature on anything with "Accountability" in its title. But there is one provision that is very important to him and that is the supplemental appropriation package requires the Iraqi government to meet a series of "benchmarks" president Bush established in his speech to the nation on January 10 This is how the president described it: "To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis." A seemingly decent, even noble concession.

    You can be sure that the "benchmark" of passing the Oil and Gas Bill will be in what ever bill Bush does sign. It's very, very important. It is the reason for the war, and the deaths of 3,350 American servicemen and women and the deaths of over 600,000 Iraqis and the destruction of their country and the cost of nearly 500 thousand million dollars that you and your children and your grandchildren will have to pay back to China, with interest!

    "All in all, the framers would probably agree that it's better to impeach too often than too seldom. If presidents can't be virtuous, they should at least be nervous."

    Joseph Sobran

    itmfa

    Posted by COProgressive at 05/01/2007 @ 11:44pm

43. Posted by FRANKGRITS 05/01/2007 @ 11:24pm

    What was the lie? and the question the little girl asked is a relevant question.

    Posted by john maasch at 05/02/2007 @ 12:14am

44. Will somebody start impeaching this guy already?

    Posted by wgmadden at 05/02/2007 @ 01:14am

45. 3) Right off the bat, you made a huge assumption that I had voted for your LIBERAL....I wouldn't have (voted for) even if he/she guaranteed to limit the spending to $50 Billion.

    Posted by HAPPY 05/01/2007 @ 11:40pm

    So you've just admitted to voting strictly along party lines. In other words, no matter what one does, that person has your vote because they wear the right uniform. In a world like that, who needs morals? What does right/wrong matter? Who needs to justify thier actions? Next election I'm going to stick a carrot up my rear, wipe boogers on small children, say I'm republican and run for office. Your other remarks don't need any more comments. Mask seems to be doing fine.

    Posted by Litz at 05/02/2007 @ 02:42am

46. Posted by HAPPY 05/01/2007 @ 11:40pm

    So you've just admitted to voting strictly along party lines....

    Posted by LITZ 05/02/2007 @ 02:42am

    LITZ,

    You made an even Bigger assumption based on what? I won't vote for a LIBERAL? I think you suffer from brain `gap'! I voted for John Anderson (remember him?) and rooted (but didn't vote for him) for Ross Perot...I also contributed $$ to ex-Dem Jo Lieberman's Senatorial campaign last year! So, there!

    You, on the other hand, sound like a typical...............

    Posted by Happy at 05/02/2007 @ 08:54am

47. Democrats Win!!! Hurray!!!!

    Mask to the rescue with an incomprehensible culture war attack against "liberals". Liberals cant be trusted as much as Bush with 500 Billion Dollars, Liberals cant be trusted as much as Bush with 1000 Billion Dollars. Why, if Liberals get their hands on $500 Billion Dollars - they'd use it to try and help Americans instead of hurt Iraqis. That would be a disaster. Whatever Mask.

    Conservative = Loot the Taxpayer

    Posted by conshame at 05/02/2007 @ 09:32am

48. Posted by FRANKGRITS 05/01/2007 @ 11:24pm

    What was the lie? and the question the little girl asked is a relevant question.

    Posted by JOHN MAASCH

    The poor old fool must have Alzheimers.

    Posted by mtspence05 at 05/02/2007 @ 10:00am

49. March of the Parrots

    Rice: U.S. Progressing in War on Terror Wednesday, May 2nd, 2007 at 6:53am

    Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice claimed "considerable progress" in the global fight against terrorism as she prepared Tuesday to ask skeptical Arab governments to do more and to underwrite democracy in Iraq.

    "There's been some real progress on some fronts and in other places the terrorists have continued to challenge democratic governments," Rice said when asked about a State Department report showing terrorist attacks worldwide shot up more than 25 percent last year.

    "We'll continue to fight that war. We're making considerable progress," Rice said.

    Awwwwk....making progress. Making progress. Condi wants a cracker!

    Posted by leftofcenter at 05/02/2007 @ 10:03am

50. Happy, From what I have read of your post's you should put everyone on your ignore list. As Gravel said the lives that died in Vietnam died in vain. The lives that are dying in Iraq are dyeing in vain. I will say it stronger, they all were wasted, for what? So that special interests can make money. Oil? Our main media is pablum, Bush has disregarded and is destroying the Constitution the same one he is supposed uphold and honor. Our leaders, not the people have been meddling in other countries for years, by force if necessary to get other countries to follow an agenda set by special interests in the USA. Bush and company by ignoring and disregarding the people, Congress and our crumbling nation to support a war that should have never happened is totally insane. We need to impeach Bush and cronies and never let this happen again.

    Posted by Leefeller at 05/02/2007 @ 10:52am

51. Frankgrits: Great satire, at least I hope it was satire. But, what do I know, I used to believe Russ Limbaugh was a comic. Now that we are turning the corner and making progress, we can all go shopping and let Decorated King George run the country.

    Posted by Leefeller at 05/02/2007 @ 11:12am

52. Posted by HAPPY 05/01/2007 @ 11:46am

    Ignorance is bliss (or HAPPY)

    Libya blew up an airliner, they had no nukes. Now they get millions of your tax dollars, and Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi, still runs the country with an iron fist. He is a dictator.

    Iraq was NO threat to ANY of it's neighbors at the time of our invasion. Removing him has actually caused more mayhem than he was causing in his country.

    I heard an interview with an iraqi last week, he said when Saddam was in power the people had one enemy, the State. Now everyone is the enemy. Way to go HAPPY. good Plan! Good execution!

    Don't forget that after it was shown that the mission was not accomplished, ChimpCO tried to blame the troops for the sign!!! They said the Navy boys had made and installed the sign. Pure BS. Like when Chimpy flew to Iraq to parade his plastic turkey and they claimed British Airways had spotted Airforce One. Pure BS. Like when Chimpy said we found the wmd's. Pure BS.

    I guess if one is going to continue to be an Apologist, one needs hip waders as well as the ability to grasp jingoism as fact.

    here are the facts, HAPPY, Iraq was no threat to you, Iraq had no wmd's, Iraq had no working relationship with the group that attacked the US on 9/11, Iraq was no threat to its neighbors, international law should prohibit attacks on sovereign lands, the constitution says the interntional treaties are US law ("supreme law of the land"), Iraq is in chaos now because you and Chimpy had no plan, just theories.2 million Iraqis have fled your liberation, maybe 4 million more are internally displaced. Terrorism has increased. Just in the last year it is up 25% over last year, when it was up over the previous year, when it was up over the year before that. George Bushes GWOT has increased terrorism!!!

    You are an ideologue ideologue: noun an adherent of an ideology, esp. one who is uncompromising and dogmatic : You have theories. Theories that do not reflect reality. In that, you are just like your crotch packin', ex-cheerleader, draft dodging hero, 2 war losing Chimpy McFlightsuit.

    Ignorance is bliss.

    Posted by crabwalk at 05/02/2007 @ 11:47am

53. When Chimpy took his oath of office (with his fingers crossed) gas was $1.42/gal. I paid $3.03 yesterday. Exxon/Mobil has record profits, their execs get tax breaks.

    that is all that Chimpy has accomplished, other than to bring more chaos to the ME.

    Posted by crabwalk at 05/02/2007 @ 11:50am

54. "The war was the hard part. The hard part was putting together a coalition, getting 300,000 troops over there and all their equipment and winning. And it gets easier. I mean, setting up a democracy is hard, but it is not as hard as winning a war." (Fox News Channel's Fred Barnes, 4/10/03)

    "The war winds down, politics heats up.... Picture perfect. Part Spider-Man, part Tom Cruise, part Ronald Reagan. The president seizes the moment on an aircraft carrier in the Pacific." (PBS's Gwen Ifill, 5/2/03, on George W. Bush's "Mission Accomplished" speech)

    "We're proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical, who's not a complicated guy like Clinton or even like Dukakis or Mondale, all those guys, McGovern. They want a guy who's president. Women like a guy who's president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. It's simple. We're not like the Brits." (MSNBC's Chris Matthews, 5/1/03)

    "He looked like an alternatively commander in chief, rock star, movie star, and one of the guys." (CNN's Lou Dobbs, on Bush's 'Mission Accomplished' speech, 5/1/03)

    "He looked like a swaggering, ignorant, pompous ass"- CRABWALK, everyday since .

    Posted by crabwalk at 05/02/2007 @ 11:53am

55. Posted by CONSHAME 05/02/2007 @ 09:32am

    CS, when I wrote this....

    "Ideologues in general worry me, because they never (as seen by the 30% club and the neo-cons on Iraq) rarely admit mistakes, rarely correct their mistakes, and almost never admit their ideas were flawed." ----Posted by MASK 05/01/2007 @ 9:03pm

    I had guys like HAPPY, PONTIFICUS, RIO BRAVO...and YOU in mind.

    Like them, you'd never admit that your precious liberalism has EVER made a mistake, rarely correct it, and never admit that an idea was flawed.

    hence, like them, you can't be trusted.

    Posted by Mask at 05/02/2007 @ 12:10pm

56. Crabwalk, you should not insult chimpanzee's by association like that. They were, the better actors in the Ronald Regain movies. Regain, must have learned something from the chimps. According to some people in power, R. R. was the greatest president of all time. Just like Russ Limbaugh is best Political commentary of all time.

    Posted by Leefeller at 05/02/2007 @ 12:11pm

57. I'll just list "a single thing has gone right" as a direct result of the Iraq War: Libya's coming clean with its WMD program which was, heavens, farther advanced than our `Intelegence' had indicated! This alone, is worth, say ~$100 Billion!

    Posted by HAPPY 05/01/2007 @ 2:54pm

    Other smart people here have already performed the necessary task of taking the hapless CRAPPY to school on the topic of how exceptionally devastated, weak and isolated Iraq was by 2003 before the Cheerleader launched VanityWar.

    I will just add that CRAPPY's brain-washing in whatever musty basement re-education camp he has been confined to was so complete that he does not even recongize that Qudafi of Libya was ... you guessed it! ... playing the "global evil villian asshole" role in the 1980s (blew up a few civilian planes, as I recall) at the very same time that bloodthirsty Saddam was exchanging rimjobs with Rummy on behalf of Reagan. By the 1990s, 4 months after rightwing boner-deficient cadaver Bob Dole visited Baghdad to give bithday cuddles to the war criminal Butcher of Baghdad, Saddam had a new role from central casting. This is the role that CRAPPY barks about on cue (all the while pretending he thought of it himself, rather than repeating what he has submitted to believing while annulling any brain activity he may have once possessed).

    Can you feel the orgasmic surge of ... rightwing rrrreeeelllllattttiiiivvviiissssmmmm??? Orwell famously had a few things to say, too, about this degraded type of disgusting servility to authority revealed by CRAPPY-style inept, indignant renditions of the manifestly and pathetically stupid party line; a party line that even a moments reflection demonstrates to be a cover for a gruesome and failed VanityWar authored by the Barstool Bombadier and his goonsquad.

    Posted by Glenn Lemon at 05/02/2007 @ 12:35pm

58. Mask-No one likes to admit to flaws and mistakes so I guess no one can be trusted and we may as well give up and drink the kool aid.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 05/02/2007 @ 1:00pm

59. No one likes to admit to flaws and mistakes....

    Posted by I'M NOBODY 05/02/2007 @ 1:00pm

    Whoa, there! I make mistakes everyday but I'm sure you all don't want to hear about it! But, let's all stay HAPPY! The world has far too many problems and causes....take care of your family and like I said, be HAPPY!

    Posted by Happy at 05/02/2007 @ 1:15pm

60. Posted by I'M NOBODY 05/02/2007 @ 1:00pm

    Hey, the Cynic's job has already been filled...back off, pal.

    hehe

    Posted by Mask at 05/02/2007 @ 1:16pm

61. And today, is so far, and hope by 4 PM EST, will still be, a HAPPY Capitalist Day! IF this grates you, well, hehehe! You all spend your day here and I, playing the Wall St. game!

    Posted by Happy at 05/02/2007 @ 1:18pm

62. Happy-I'm almost too happy and calm of a person,but was joking with Mask to let him know that I may go for the job of board cynic even though that goes against my nature.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 05/02/2007 @ 1:23pm

63. Mask-You shouldn't have a monopoly on being the board cynic.I don't like the idea of a one party system or monopolies so I must campaign for the job,at least when it's raining.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 05/02/2007 @ 1:26pm

64. Great posts and lots of food for thought, it is raining here and enjoying this! You know, making mistakes and having flaws are two different things. It would be a flaw not admit making a mistake, it would also be a flaw not to learn from mistakes made. Ideologues, like organized religion worry me because they are flawed cannot and never admit mistakes. ! Let's face it, the White House in their mind will not admit making a mistake. They are way beyond flawed. We have already touched on that. Rusty abstract thought, dragging through the cob webs of yee old mind.

    Posted by Leefeller at 05/02/2007 @ 1:29pm

65. Posted by I'M NOBODY 05/02/2007 @ 1:26pm

    Now, wait a minute, I'M. Not all monopolies are bad....remember when they broke up Ma Bell. Then for YEARS afterwards, our supper time was interupted by idiots trying to get us to switch our long distance carriers!....hehe

    Besides, it's not really a true monopoly since I come at it from a libertarian/Right Cynicism and you come at it from a "progressive"/Left Cynicism. Sort of like Apple and Windows.

    (I call "Apple"!)

    Posted by Mask at 05/02/2007 @ 4:25pm

66. MASK,

    don't know if you're still reading this thread. The thrust of my post is not that you criticize the left--I haven't a problem with that, think they often deserve it, and when you, rarely, criticize based on logic, passion, reason, I often agree with you. Or at least respect where you're coming from.

    It just seems that with the wit and intelligence you have, it's too bad you spend sooooo much time trying to poke holes in interesting, thoughtful ideas based on politics, before they are even allowed to see the light of day.

    It's kind of like you're some sort of schizo John Lennon vs. WF Buckley jr. Strange to witness . . .

    -R

    Posted by Rintrah at 05/02/2007 @ 5:00pm

67. It's kind of like you're some sort of schizo John Lennon vs. WF Buckley jr. Strange to witness . . .

    -R

    Posted by RINTRAH 05/02/2007 @ 5:00pm

    Damn, son.....gonna give me the big head with THAT company!

    Posted by Mask at 05/02/2007 @ 8:57pm

68. Actually Oil is worth fighting for. The Japanese thought so and attacked Pearl Harbor. What do you think would happen if we had no oil?

    Posted by abell12ct at 05/04/2007 @ 09:12am