Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Deadly Illusions, Rest in Peace

By Norman Solomon, AlterNet. Posted May 24, 2007.


We won't be able to change the militaristic direction of this country without effectively confronting the congressional Democrats who are fueling the engines of destruction.
Normon Solomon

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Also by Norman Solomon

Obama's Triumph Over Media Frivolity
Obama's Tuesday win represents a victory over a press corps fixated on fluff over substance.
May 7, 2008

Let's Party Like It’s 1932
Obama has the potential to become as great a president as FDR, while activists have the potential to prompt change comparable to the New Deal.
Apr 21, 2008

NPR: National Pentagon Radio?
When even public radio parrots the military's official line on the war in Iraq, what hope is there for unbiased, quality reporting?
Mar 27, 2008

More stories by Norman Solomon

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 

This week's cave-in on Capitol Hill -- supplying a huge new jolt of funds for the horrific war effort in Iraq -- is surprising only to those who haven't grasped our current circumstances.

Public opinion polls aren't the same as political leverage. The Vietnam War went on for years after polling showed that most Americans opposed the war and even saw it as immoral.

Slick phrases about the need to bring our troops home can easily become little more than platitudes on wallpaper in media echo chambers.

No matter how many Democrats are in Congress, they won't end this war unless an antiwar movement develops enough grassroots strength to compel them to do so.

Unfortunately -- and unnecessarily -- for years now the Internet powerhouse MoveOn.org has often functioned as a virtual appendage of the national Democratic Party. That close relationship has largely squandered MoveOn's opportunities to help build strong deep independent activism for the long haul. And, on crucial issues of the Iraq war, MoveOn has failed to back the positions of such gutsy progressive visionaries as Reps. Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey and Maxine Waters.

A statement issued Thursday by the national Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) pointed out that "the approach of the Democratic leadership has utterly failed -- as they now prepare to give President Bush $95 billion more war funding through a bill that no longer has any timelines for troop withdrawal."

Asking a key question -- "How can you oppose a troop escalation while funding it in full?" -- PDA reiterated its longstanding position that Democrats in Congress should be "using the power of the purse to cut off funds to Iraq, except those needed to safely withdraw our troops (and for humanitarian/reconstruction aid to the Iraqi people)." And legislators should be "using their investigative power to probe White House deceptions and distortions that propelled the Iraq invasion and occupation, and to impeach if necessary."

Memorial Day 2007 comes at a disastrous time. Political power brokers and media elites insist on opting for a mix-merge of tragedy and farce. A key reality is that we won't be able to change the militaristic direction of the country without effectively confronting the congressional Democrats who are fueling the engines of destruction.

When considering what to demand now, it's helpful to put the current moment in historical perspective. The same basic arguments for keeping U.S. forces in Iraq have long been presented by reigning politicians and key media outlets as self-evident wisdom.

A cover story in Time magazine laid down the prevailing line: "Foreign policy luminaries from both parties say a precipitous U.S. withdrawal would cripple American credibility, doom reform in the Arab world and turn Iraq into a playground for terrorists and the armies of neighboring states like Iran and Syria." That was in April -- 2004.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: move on, democrats, war in iraq

Norman Solomon is the author of the new book, "War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death."

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
National Defense vs National Offense
Posted by: Michael Boldin on May 24, 2007 11:21 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article is an excellent overview of our problems. We need to strike the root and change direction in this country.

Chalmers Johnson has been quite a leader on this as well - exposing the horrors of militarism in our "foreign policy"

We spend countless billions on National OF-fense, but have very little national defense. We'll only be safe in this country when we stop basing our military in 120+ countries, stop overthrowing governments, staging coups, assassinating people, waging wars and killing millions of innocents.

It's time to scrap the ideals of aggression; stop paying homage to it, stop claiming it works, and stop funding it.

now. not next year. now.

Some further thoughts on this:

"Leaders Don't Kill People..." - click here

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Democrats are not speaking the President's language
Posted by: ibsteve2u on May 24, 2007 12:03 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although this should have been done in "the first 100 hours", it is still a good idea.

Simply fully fund the President's war, but include language in the bill that rolls back all corporate tax cuts as well as those for Americans whose income falls within the top 10% that were enacted since 2000 for as long as we are at war.

This provides us with a means of paying for this war and for the care of those Americans who have been and are being crippled in this war - and further provides an incentive for the President and the neocons to get us out of this war in the only language they really understand - their money.

I think you'll hear a sonic boom as the President leaves his boxers jumping to get us out of this war.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...and One Nation under a Military Offense at all times
Posted by: brasilaron on May 24, 2007 6:40 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Totally true, anyone who has been to a Latin American country (other than Cancun or Acapulco or other authorized resort territories) has experienced what US military/foreign policy does to the other 6 billion people on this earth. Sometimes it's vey subtle like in Brazil where people will tell you stories that the national folk dance Forro' was named after dances that were held at the US Air Force base in Salvador that had signs saying "For all". The base lingered for years after WWII ended, and then we helped them set up their military dictatorship. There was even an airforce base in my teeny tiny research town in the deep campo of Para' near the Amazon. In Bolivia you read stories in the El Diario of the DEA helicopters carrying soldiers into the Chapare' to eradicate coca or how they overran Trinidad and got evicted from there forever. Need i mention our participation in Plan Condor which set Hugo Banzer as dictator of the country for years? How bout our help with dictatorships in Chile, Argentina and Panama? How bout our on-going military support of Colombia's cocaine-fueled civil war? How bout our attempts to subvert Venezuela's democratically elected president? How bout our attempts to militarily subvert Ortega in Nicaragua? Or our military support of Noriega and military control of the Panama Canal? Or our military support for the dictatorship over El Salvador in the 80s? Granada? Republica Dominicana? Puerto Rico? Cuba? Philipines? Hawai'i?
Apparently Americans are an intensely blood-thirsty people who are deeply satisfied with going on the offensive against people who look differnt 'n us and who live in their own countries. Being Xians though, they don't want to trouble their beautiful minds with ugly thoughts of killing and how it is that they got all those cheap and fantastic trinkets that fill their houses yet do not fill the vaccuous void called their souls. They'd rather not know how much blood is on their hands while they play on the graves of the vanquished.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No easy ways to get out of Iraq.
Posted by: Sojourner on May 24, 2007 7:07 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am still bewildered by the fact that 25 years after getting out of Vietnam we got ourselves into Iraq. That is evidence to me that we need a permanent effort to put this nation on the path of peace.

That means we need to establish and fund a cabinet level Secretary of Peace. The best defense is an aggressive policy for achieving and maintaining peace. That should have been done after Ike warned us about the military-industrial complex.

Yes, the Secretary of State could have been doing that job. Instead, they all have to act "tough." No one has the job to act "smart." Getting into Iraq was the dumbest thing we've done (since Vietnam).

And all the bitching about how the Demos in Congress "coulda, shoulda, woulda" may make the journalists who write such stuff feel better. We need an institutional change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

marylou
Posted by: ericksonml@sbcglobal.net on May 25, 2007 5:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"without effectively confronting the congressional Democrats who are fueling the engines of destruction."

Will you please NAME NAMES - and supply addresses and phone numbers and church membership affiliations!

There can be no more hiding behind vague associations. I want these 'congressional democrats' KIDS to know what their parent are doing and how many Iraqi deaths they are responsible for! Instituitons don't do things. People do. Identify the people by name - and address.

NAME NAMES and associations and supporters. WHO is paying Ben Nelson's bills???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: marylou Posted by: nancylou
WHAT is going on here?
Posted by: WitchyNy on May 25, 2007 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Democrats sold us out to Bush-and the next day this is not even the lead story on Alternet? I expected a special news Alternet news alert!!!!

Instead yesterday I get some weird letter about censoring and rating other readers comments!

I think Alternet is just a front for the Democratic party-which is just a front for the same... old... system.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

it isn't suprising
Posted by: xenacat on May 25, 2007 7:21 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that the democratic leadership rolled over and played dead for the Bush regime on the Iraq timeline - a piss poor way to end the war in anycase. Why are we shocked? This kind of betrayal has happened time and time again since Bush seized the government several years ago. The question is "what can we do about it?" Well, we can quit being surprised and use some common sense about reforming elections and paying attention to the quality of the candidates. It has been obvious for some time that the Democratic leadership has been cut from the same cloth as much of the Republican leadership. Sweeping the corporate shills from office and effective real change through grassroots activism is the only real means for change. Unfortunately, I'm pretty pessimistic about whether or not the majority of the U.S public well get off their backsides and really demand change. "Oh, no! not during American Idol...and I can't miss desperate housewives - maybe later" . I think it is too late...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who's ACTUALLY running the show?
Posted by: willymack on May 25, 2007 7:35 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's a cinch it isn't bush. His mentality centers around fart jokes and derisive shots aimed at those he fears, namely anyone with BRAINS. It isn't cheney, although he's the channel through which the shadow government operates. What we seem to have here are phantoms, unseen and unchecked by those elected to protect us from the very evils that our Constitution mandates they do. How it got that way is moot at this point. How to reverse it and take action to ensure it never happens again is all-important.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

NOW!
Posted by: dsahadi on May 25, 2007 10:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What is congress doing and who are they collectively paying attention to?.......not the people who helped create this new majority, that is for sure. In the House, the Democrat's big victory came at the hands of people wanting an end to the occupation of Iraq, ending of the the death of our troops and the ending of death in the streets in Baghdad. What we are getting is a sell out, a wholesale sell out to the President by the same congress just placed in office. 

Waiting to gather political steam is just not a valid excuse. It puts the deaths of our dedicated and patriotic troops squarely in the hands of the civilian government who's policy has directed them there. Outside of the criminality of that policy, does anyone stop to think what this is doing to the moral of our military establishment......pursuing a course that is not the will of the people, that they will need to divorce themselves from Iraq in what will be perceived to be a failed mission, and have  justify the deaths of the their comrades in arms in that failed mission. This will make Vietnam look like a joy ride.

The election last November made this statement loud and clear......the PEOPLE want this government out of Iraq. Do the people's business and get the troops out. Now. Not tomorrow, not the next day, NOW. 

Remember officeholders......their are others who will support traditional Democrat values that are willing to put their proverbial balls on the line and do the right thing. DO IT. Ms Polosi and Mr. Reid, you can be defeated in a primary without our losing the Congress.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Business as usual
Posted by: Ellen Remore on May 25, 2007 4:10 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Then by all means, let us confront them. Let us announce to any Democrats who refuse to cease toadying to Bush that they are losing legions of votes by doing so. Because there's a good chance that they actually do not grasp that simple proposition. After all, these are doubtlessly the same people who for years have signed off on our famously phantasmagorical defense budgets because of the inherent pork for their constituents. So keeping Bush's war machine rolling makes the same sort of Faustian sense for the folks back home (to say nothing of the odd bit of bacon in their own pockets from the boys on K Street.)

Considering the militaristic aura which has enveloped this country for at least half a century, with congressional aid and approval, it's really rather naive to expect Congress to summarily put an end to a war that is, if ethically repugnant, simultaneously making a great deal of money for a great many select people. In this regard, there's very little difference between sides of the aisle. Nor are a great many politicians concerned that this militarism has been and continues to be the cause of untold harm domestically, and unthinkable agony globally. Because it can also be very, very lucrative politically.

Support the troops. Contain the Red Menace. Remember Pearl Harbor. Make the World Safe For Democracy. Remember the Maine. God Bless America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Business as usual Posted by: TassieDevil
2008
Posted by: Slmncty on May 25, 2007 11:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remove the DOLLARS, retain the SENSE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Before...
Posted by: mommy64 on May 26, 2007 9:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Before this Time Magazine column was written, other caring American citizens, as evidenced within this fora, illustrated what was the Iraq war outcome. They were demonized. A Bush II promise was that oil-to-Americnas would outshine the cost of war, when, in fact, his consideration was oil industry profiteering, his constituency. But there's more. Iraqi people were poor as illustrated in a BusinessWeek publication, desperately poor, with the failed Oil-for-Food Sanction Program. What they owned, their national treasury, was oil! Oil that Bush II coveted militarily. During WWII Hitler financed his operations with other promise, the combined wealth of the Jewish people. Only a fourth of that wealth is restored. He robbed them; he murdered them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Before... Posted by: mommy64
Something happenin' here........
Posted by: ekipnrut on May 26, 2007 4:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[From wsws.org Bill Van Auken article of 26 May 2007]:
The transfer of congressional leadership to the Democrats may have failed to stop the war or produce any significant changes for the masses of working people in America, but it has yielded definite benefits for the privileged layer of upper-middle-class “left” liberals for whom the Nation speaks. Many of them have filled coveted staff positions on Capitol Hill or seen the fortunes of the liberal think tanks with which they are associated rise. The Nation’s editor, Katrina vanden Heuvel, has with increasing frequency been admitted to the ranks of pundits appearing on television talk shows.
This left wing of the US political establishment is being promoted for definite political purposes. America’s ruling elite fears the eruption of mass movements of social protest and, above all, the emergence of a genuinely independent political movement of the working class in opposition to the two-party system and the profit interests it defends.
The job of these “left” PR agents for the Democratic Party is to politically suffocate any such movement and to contain social protest, diverting it back into the harmless confines of the Democratic Party.

This political task, however, is growing increasingly difficult. The war-funding vote, notwithstanding the Nation’s advice to wait for the Democrats’ “next chance” to vote against the war, marks a definite turning point in American political life, and one from which the Democratic Party’s credibility may never recover.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

NATIONAL BLOOD MONEY CON
Posted by: Hal on May 26, 2007 8:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
“No matter how many Democrats are in Congress, they won't end this war unless an antiwar movement develops enough grassroots strength to compel them to do so.”

This is a telling statement. Read it carefully.

Solomon tells us that we could have an entire government by democrats and it wouldn’t matter outside a strong “antiwar movement” that we’ve had since before the first bomb drop over Iraq War Inc. Clearly Solomon’s limited hangout worldview doesn’t allow for the truth behind a DC and corporate media farce.

The most lethal of “deadly illusions” is taking our puppet government as “democracy” when it is a sordid shell game in the pocket of a Fascist corporate monopoly. Put another way, an organized corporate crime state. And the drumbeat of phony “democracy” is pounded out of a grotesque Washington and MSM brothel by democrats and republicans alike. Such is the status quo.

Barring possible exceptions in Mike Gravel, Kucinich, and a handful others, so-called “democrats” are no better than “republican” prostitutes. The mandate that democrats were handed at the national election for change was turned to a blood money joke where real change was never available.

And to pretend as many do (including a poster on this thread) that…

“How it [i.e. the prevailing system] got that way is moot at this point. How to reverse it and take action to ensure it never happens again is all-important.”

…is an idea doomed at the starting gate.

Item:

You cannot “reverse” a de facto Fascist corporate monopoly state this grotesque until and unless you ID it to the core. It’s called accountability. And to suggest that “how it got that way” is some side issue is well beyond absurd.

“How it got that way” is the very root of the cancer from Freedom to Fascism .

As Satayana said, “Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it” . And I don’t mean the cartoon history recycled out of a cooked MSM and “education” status quo.




“The ruling class has the schools and press under its thumb. This enables it to sway the emotions of the masses.” .
DOCTOR ALBERT EINSTEIN (Nobel Laureate and refugee from Nazi fascism. 1879-1955)

“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.” .
PRESIDENT FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT (on oligarch rule in a letter to handler “Colonel” Edward M. House, confidence man for the cartel and founder of the Council on Foreign Relations. House also handled President Wilson in the foisting of a private and unconstitutional “Federal Reserve” Corporation sham with its IRS in 1913. FDR speaks of monopolists at cartel centers of New York & London that own the U.S. Government. November 21st, l933)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: NATIONAL BLOOD MONEY CON... Posted by: NumberSix
jai
Posted by: jai on Jun 3, 2007 10:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remember Pelosi's pledge about what great bills they would pass the first hundred hours, what was done in the first three months?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]