Departments
Mr. President, surge this
by David Swanson
January 10, 2007
Here's a statement that's blasphemy both in the peace movement and in the halls of the warmongers:
Whether we escalate the war or not is unimportant.
Here's the situation we're in. President Bush and his gang lied us into a war. The occupation of Iraq has nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction or 9-11 or Saddam Hussein or democracy or making Americans more safe. There is no reason for this war respectable enough to discuss in public. And so, the U.S. corporate media does not discuss the reason, or absence of any reason, for the war. Instead we're treated to endless debates over whether the war is a civil war, or we're given hundreds of hours of coverage of a report that has no legal force and no coherent point to it. Or we learn all about new appointees and how their personalities differ from those of the outgoing war-makers. Or we learn about new committee chairs and power-shifts in Congress. Or we hear about polls and surveys on the war. Or media coverage focuses on whether to escalate the war by sending in an additional number of troops that is small relative to the number already there.
All of these stories, including the story of Bush's expected proposal for escalation of the occupation, serve the same purpose: they allow the U.S. media to claim to be covering the war without actually discussing what purpose the war serves and without showing us what the war is doing to people.
Now, in one sense, an escalation of the war is important. Every single person criminally ordered to ship out to kill and risk death is important. Every person they kill or injure or traumatize is important. And an escalation moves us in the wrong direction.
But the possible outcomes of the current debate range from continuing this illegal war using 10 or 20 percent more troops, to continuing this illegal war using the current number of troops. Should Congress find the decency to block an escalation, that will be important, but its importance will lie in its potential to lead to further action. The debate we need to be having is over defunding and ending the war.
Once again, the White House has gone on the offensive from its weakest position and managed to move the full range of debate into the pro-war camp. This could not be done were it not for media outlets that pretend to cover the war without mentioning what the war is about.
If mention were made of what the war is about, Americans would learn about the permanent military bases their tax dollars are building all over Iraq, not to mention the world's largest embassy. And pundits would be forced to stop pretending that the war can ever be brought to a close without completely overturning the operations of the warmongers. "Redeployment" wouldn't cut it. Only honesty would work. Saying "No!" to an escalation, as many peace groups are now focused on doing, completely avoids the topic at hand and defines as victory achieving the status quo, the same status quo that led to the November 7th electoral mandate for peace and accountability.
The insanity of this has penetrated the corporate media only to the extent of putting the word "surge" in quotation marks, a practice that newspapers do not apply to most nonsense terms. "Department of Defense," for example, still appears with no quotation marks. Following the quotation mark policy consistently would mean having to put over half the words in a Bush speech in quotation marks. I expect, rather, that newspapers will soon drop the quotation marks around "surge."
The insanity of the current debate would become clearer if we could see the war. Short of that, we can substitute the term "child abuse" for the term "war". After all, the war is killing and injuring children and their parents by the hundreds of thousands. Surely any conclusions we reach regarding child abuse must be even worse regarding this war. Now, imagine this piece of news:
The White House is expected to announce on Wednesday its long-awaited plan to recruit 20,000 more pedophiles to give a quick boost to project Child Torture. Currently 140,000 child abusers are serving their country in the four-year mission in California, but experts agree that there remain children in the southern part of the state who have not yet been abused at all.
Now, do two things to that piece of news. First, make it worse by adding murder to it. Second, make it totally acceptable by moving it from California to Iraq. But why should that make it acceptable?
Mike Ferner [ http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/17047 ] recently calculated what the murder we are engaged in in Iraq would look like in the United States:
"Last fall the British medical journal 'Lancet' published a study done by researchers from Johns Hopkins University estimating that the midrange number of Iraqis dead 'as a consequence of the war' was about 2.5 percent of that country's population, or roughly 655,000 people. Over 90 percent of those died from violence. Comparable casualties in our country would mean that every person in Atlanta, Denver, Boston, Seattle, Milwaukee, Fort Worth, Baltimore, San Francisco, Dallas and Philadelphia would be dead. Every. Single. Person. And we are just now getting serious about cutting off money for this war?
"Besides that unimaginable death toll, every person in Vermont, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Nebraska, Nevada, Kansas, Mississippi, Iowa, Oregon, South Carolina, and Colorado would be wounded. Every. Single. Person. Would that be the point we stopped politely asking our Congress members to please end the war, and began taking over their offices in every state in the union?"
Terry Jones, writing in The Guardian [ http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/17056 ], recently calculated what Americans are paying in dollars for all this murder and injury:
"Early this year the Bush administration is to ask Congress to approve an additional $100bn for the onerous task of making life intolerable for the Iraqis. This will bring the total spent on the White House's current obsession with war to almost $500bn - enough to have given every US citizen $1,600 each. I wonder which the voters would have gone for if given the choice: shall we (a) give every American $1,600 or (b) spend the money on bombing a country in the Middle East that doesn't use lavatory paper?
"Of course, there's another thing that George Bush could have done with the money: he could have given every Iraqi $18,700. I imagine that would have reduced the threat of international terrorism somewhat. Call me old-fashioned, but I can't help thinking that giving someone $18,700 brings them round to your side more quickly than bombing the hell out of them. They could certainly buy a lot of lavatory paper with it.
"In 2002 the house budget committee and the congressional budget office both guesstimated the cost of invading Iraq at approximately $50bn; $500bn seems a bit wide of the mark. What's more, with over half a million dead, it means that the world's greatest military superpower has spent a million dollars for every Iraqi killed. That can't be value for money!"
But we don't see film or photos of the dead [ http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/image ]. We don't think of killing people as a central part of this occupation, even though intellectually we understand that it must be. Now is a moment to do more than understand this. Now is a moment to demand more than a stop to the "surge." Now our chant must be: De-Escalate! Investigate! Troops Home Now! And the specific demands we make of Congress [ http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/16562 ] must reflect that.
The National Conference for Media Reform [ http://www.freepress.net/conference ], which will be held this coming weekend in Memphis, couldn't come at a better time. Let's hope that, coming out of it, we can create media that report on war as war.
|
 |
Recent War Articles
Pentagon cover up: 15,000 or more US deaths in Iraq war? December 17, 2007 Mike Whitney
Iraq's million December 6, 2007 Robert C. Koehler
Talking with two who walk the walk November 29, 2007 David Swanson
Baghdad in middle America November 15, 2007 Robert C. Koehler
Understanding the next war money vote November 10, 2007 David Swanson
Jonesborough justice October 31, 2007 David Swanson
Ann Wright’s conscience: former colonel and diplomat against Iraq war October 29, 2007 Seth Sandronsky
Open letter to the government from an AWOL soldier October 21, 2007 James Circello, Iraq Veterans Against The War
Constitution, flag, and leaving Iraq October 7, 2007 David Swanson
Whistleblowers on tape September 30, 2007 David Swanson
Observing our government through Blackwater September 26, 2007 David Swanson
"Funding the war is killing the troops": interrupting the empire 30 seconds at a time September 26, 2007 Mike Ferner
We have nothing but fear itself September 24, 2007 David Swanson
Sanity in tiny nibbles September 21, 2007 Robert C. Koehler
Can we talk? Day one of IVAW's "Truth in Recruiting" campaign September 20, 2007 Mike Ferner
New day in the anti-war movement? September 19, 2007 Mike Ferner
Bush’s fake sheik whacked: the Surge and the Al Qaeda bunny September 18, 2007 Greg Palast
Iraq: the people's report September 11, 2007 Sue Udry
Questions for General Petraeus September 10, 2007 David Swanson
My son, back from Iraq, lives on tower on National Mall September 1, 2007 Mary Hanna
Creative destruction August 16, 2007 Robert C. Koehler
300 towns, cities, states oppose Iraq occupation August 1, 2007 David Swanson
Reparations July 30, 2007 David Swanson
Democrats as Leviathan: another step toward war with Iran July 23, 2007 Joshua Frank
We will sit in for impeachment July 5, 2007 David Swanson
Gorilla suit July 3, 2007 Robert C. Koehler
Peace movement comes to US Social Forum June 29, 2007 David Swanson
The hearts of all sane men June 21, 2007 Robert C. Koehler
Belief and doubt June 15, 2007 Robert C. Koehler
Sen. Clinton wants troops in Iraq for at least 10 years June 13, 2007 David Swanson
This is not a story about Cindy Sheehan June 5, 2007 Sunsara Taylor
The holy occupation of Iraq May 29, 2007 David Swanson
Why I voted "no" May 27, 2007 Sen. Barbara Boxer
For five years we've called it blood for oil May 16, 2007 David Swanson
Collateral genocide May 12, 2007 Mike Ferner
Please don’t throw me in that veto patch May 7, 2007 Mike Ferner
Anti-U.S. uproar sweeps Italy May 5, 2007 David Swanson
Knee-deep blood in the land of make-believe April 26, 2007 Carla Binion
Tax day protests and refusing to pay for war April 16, 2007 Ruth Benn
You can't hurt a troop by defunding a war April 12, 2007 David Swanson
Iraq veterans speak in Columbus, OH 3-17-07 April 11, 2007 Veterans
Iraq @ 4: It's Not About the Troops - Either Way March 26, 2007 David Caploe
Progressives stand strong against funding war March 23, 2007 David Swanson
No mo money for war March 16, 2007 David Swanson
Sacrificing our children on the altar of corporate greed March 15, 2007 David E. Washburn
Only nonviolence will end the war March 14, 2007 David Swanson
The war money can be stopped March 10, 2007 David Swanson
How will you end this war? March 10, 2007 Tina Richards
Congressman Obey says "Idiot Liberals" need to support war money March 9, 2007 David Swanson
Former Pentagon staff speaks out on crimes of Doug Feith, Dick Cheney, and planning of Iran War March 6, 2007 David Swanson
I'm more pro-troop than you are March 3, 2007 David Swanson
Only nonviolence will end the war February 28, 2007 David Swanson
Cindy Sheehan, George Will, and loving your enemies February 26, 2007 David Swanson
No, seriously, why did we invade Iraq? February 22, 2007 David E. Washburn
Lord knows we've suffered enough already: keep them out of Ohio! February 18, 2007 Mike Ferner
Murtha only intends to undo the escalation February 17, 2007 David Swanson
Shut up and stop the war February 14, 2007 David Swanson
100 Senators quietly vote: majority oppose escalation February 10, 2007 David Swanson
Dems change the gas and claim it's a new car February 9, 2007 David Swanson
A world that works for everybody February 7, 2007 Robert C. Koehler
D.C. demonstration January 30, 2007 John Conyers, Jr.
How we can end the occupation of Iraq January 23, 2007 David Swanson
Dear Mr. President: Send Even MORE Troops (and you go, too!) ...from Michael Moore January 22, 2007 Michael Moore
The Kucinich Plan for Iraq January 17, 2007 Dennis J. Kucinich
An Iraq jobs program? January 16, 2007 Seth Sandronsky
Waist deep in the big muddy January 12, 2007 Greg Palast
Out of Iraq and back to the American city January 11, 2007 Dennis J. Kucinich
If not now, when? January 10, 2007 Mike Ferner
Mr. President, surge this January 10, 2007 David Swanson
3,000 lights delivered to Rep. Marcy Kaptur January 5, 2007 Northwest Ohio Peace Coalition
3,000 lights for 3,000 killed in Iraq January 1, 2007 Peggy Daly-Masternak
Read War Articles by Year: 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 |