The War Debate Reopens

The War Debate Reopens

America has reached a turning point in its debate on the Iraq war.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

Vice President Cheney insists that he has not read what he refers to as “the so-called Downing Street memo”–the memo that says that British officials thought that “intelligence and facts were being fixed” in Washington in 2002 to justify a war with Iraq. And despite the stream of revelations in the British press about conversations between Prime Minister Tony Blair and aides who said President George W. Bush “was determined” to attack Iraq long before going to Congress or the United Nations, Cheney again insisted during a National Press Club appearance that “any suggestion that we did not exhaust all alternatives before we got to that point [of launching the invasion], I think, is inaccurate.”

An expanding number of Americans, and their elected officials, think differently. More than 500,000 people have signed a petition generated by Representative John Conyers that demands answers from the White House regarding allegations that “fixed” intelligence was used to coerce the country into a war that has cost more than 1,700 American lives and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. Almost 100 members of the House have signed on to a letter from Conyers containing a similar demand, and a number of senators, including John Kerry and Edward Kennedy, have taken up the issue.

The Downing Street revelations come at a time when support for the war is in rapid decline. New polls show that nearly six in ten Americans now believe the war was not worth its human and economic cost, and for the first time since the war began, more than half say it has not contributed to the long-term security of the United States. A growing number of members of Congress, back from their Memorial Day break with questions about Downing Street echoing in their ears or with recollections of funerals for soldiers in their hometowns, are starting to talk about setting a timeline for bringing the troops home.

On June 14, Senator Russ Feingold introduced a resolution calling on the President and his Administration to “report to Congress with a plan and timetable for the subsequent withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.” In the House, 128 members, including five Republicans, voted in May for a similar resolution, sponsored by Representative Lynn Woolsey. Republicans Walter Jones and Ron Paul were among those set to reintroduce the resolution as a bipartisan measure. Jones is the conservative firebrand who coined the phrase “freedom fries” because of his anger at the French, two years ago, for slowing the rush to war. Now, Jones says, “Congress must be told the truth.”

If the freedom-fries guy can be brought around to questioning the war, we’ve certainly reached a turning point. Congressman Conyers and his allies in groups like Progressive Democrats of America have reopened the debate about who is responsible for the illegal war in Iraq and what should be done now. Calls for impeachment are beginning to be heard at the grassroots–as, for example, the Wisconsin Democratic Party’s passage of an impeachment resolution at its recent state convention. AfterDowningStreet.org, an activist coalition, is spearheading a call for a resolution of inquiry by the full House, which would require a Judiciary Committee investigation. We recognize how improbable impeachment is at this time. But the space that has been opened up by the Downing Street memo allows for conversations that were unimaginable a few months ago. Congress may not be talking impeachment, but members’ calls for withdrawal are now seen as far from radical. And the momentum is on their side.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x