That Nir Rosen article is the best response I've seen yet to the argument that "we're over there preventing a civil war." Thanks for posting it.

The telltale paragraph:

In Bremer's mind, the way to occupy Iraq was not to view it as a nation but as a group of minorities. So he pitted the minority that was not benefiting from the system against the minority that was, and then expected them both to be grateful to him. Bremer ruled Iraq as if it were already undergoing a civil war, helping the Shiites by punishing the Sunnis. He did not see his job as managing the country; he saw it as managing a civil war. So I accuse him of causing one.

Just like the Brits did in India, just like the Belgians did in Rwanda, with the same tragic results. And, to add to the tragedy, watch as people like Bremer try to shift the blame to the "primitive" Iraqis who "couldn't handle democracy."

ONLY YOU, THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER, CAN FORCE CONGRESS TO IMPEACH DEADEYE DicTRAITOR AND THE COMANDER GUY TOGETHER. Pelosi isn't so bad a choice for President, she's not George Bush, Dick Cheney, or Hillary Clinton, and that's a plus. Due to LACK of motivation toward peace in our nation we will be in Iraq many years more and the struggle to NOT GO INTO IRAN will continue for about as long. We need a new phylosophy in D.C.

And, yeah, that Cliff Kincaid piece is a real head-exploder. My favorite passage: "But Giuliani's assault, assisted by Fox News, which co-sponsored the debate, goes so far over the line that an honest media watchdog has to say something."

And thus Ron Paul's willingness to tell the truth from the platform of a presidential candidate -- and to pay the price for it -- contributes to wider recognition of Fox as a scummy propaganda machine. It actually compels Cliff Kincaid to live up to his role... This truth stuff is powerful!

Arthur Silber is correct in his evaluation of congress. They have done nothing. They not only don’t want to cut off their cash cows but they do not wish to pay the political price either. And frankly I am not terribly impressed with Ron Paul or Mike Gravel because it is way too late. Iraq as a country is destroyed so what do we do, say we are sorry? Oh gee we are so sorry we murdered over half of a million of you and sent millions of you to flee for their lives, so sorry but we know better now and we promise not to do it again, scouts honor.

Nothing has changed, and nothing will change as long as America is stuck in its cultural rut of American exceptionalism and that includes the liberals who can work themselves into a snit over Bush and the neocons but the fact remains that the political candidates they support are just as much at fault as Bush is.

All of the major democrat presidential candidates have said that where Iran is concerned that nothing should be taken off the table meaning of course the use of military force against Iran because we are all supposed to crap in our pants if Iran develops a couple nukes. That is where America is today, that is where it will be tomorrow. That a majority of Americans think we are headed in the wrong direction is beside the point because many of them are upset that our imperial efforts are a failure not because we should not be imposing our will on the rest of the world. Nothing has changed.

From reading several of these links, I understand that if Iran gets a nuke, they will force us to install feet-washing facilities for cab drivers, and that the Rev. Moon will take possession of Liberty University as a private college for his own vast numbers of offspring. If George Kennan were still alive, he might be able to create a strategy to prevent this (even at age 103), but no one would listen to him -- certainly not Paul Bremer.

Maybe I shouldn't read too many of these links at one time.

Rob Payne:
a majority of Americans... are upset that our imperial efforts are a failure not because we should not be imposing our will on the rest of the world.

And it was ever thus. The Brits didn't leave India because they all suddenly realized that imperialism was wrong; they left because they were exhausted and bankrupted after five years of war and the mere thought of trying to keep a few hundred million restive Indians under control was more than they could handle. And when they finally did leave, most Brits probably still felt they had done the Indians a favor by colonizing them and building them such a damn fine railroad system.

Expect the same in Iraq. We will leave because the Iraqis force us to leave, not because Americans suddenly discover the immorality of Empire. Years later, if people like you and me all work like hell to make our fellow Americans learn some lessons from this misbegotten war, then maybe most Americans will decide that invading and occupying other peoples contries is something we shouldn't do. With Iraq, Bush has handed us what educators call a teachable moment. Whether anyone learns anything from it is up to us.

Years later, if people like you and me all work like hell to make our fellow Americans learn some lessons from this misbegotten war, then maybe most Americans will decide that invading and occupying other peoples contries is something we shouldn't do.

No, I don't think so.

They had 30 years to learn the lessons of Vietnam, and a lot of people worked like hell to teach them something, and it failed utterly.

After Iraq, they will have learned nothing.

I've come to the belief that only a massive catastrophe, of the magnitude of the Great Depression or the Civil War or worse, will do the job. The US has to be shaken to its very foundations before any lessons will be learned — if then.

So, while Arthur Silber and other people are working really hard to avoid catastrophe, I think I'm actually counting on it. I may or may not survive what follows, but I really am beginning to think it's the only way.

SteveB, Mike, you took the words out of my mouth, I was going to leave this comment but I guess I don’t have to:

Agreed that it was ever so but considering the Brits did not learn a bloody thing (Margaret “Big balls” Thatcher, Tony “Lap dog” Blair) I am not terribly optimistic about the future as far as Americans are concerned. How long ago was Vietnam? It did not take us long to forget that even if we learned anything. I wonder what the new PM will be like. Brown has already said England and America share the same values, ugh.

I also believe that it is entirely possible that the people of Iraq will force us to leave. Juan Cole has discussed that not too long ago. But if they actually do and when they do who can say. And it won’t be pretty when it happens.

And when they finally did leave, most Brits probably still felt they had done the Indians a favor by colonizing them and building them such a damn fine railroad system.

And indeed, many Brits apparently still do... Imperial hagiography is back in fashion again. It's getting so you can barely turn the TV on without being confronted by some Oxbridge-type going on about the wonderful achievements of the Empire.

One of the most interesting things I've read this year is an observation that most Empires that are also Democracies are eventually forced to choose between these inherently contradictory systems. Usually Empires give up Democracy (see: Rome), but the British chose to give up Empire and keep Democracy (relatively minor excursions re: the Falklands, or even their current participation in Iraq, are the exceptions that prove the rule).

So there is hope, and SteveB is right on track. We haven't lost Democracy yet, so there's hope we can cut back on the Empire.

Thanks for the link. I'm glad people are realizing that by thinking, cohabiting, acknowledging other's existence, taking public transportation, and eating organic food, they are contributing to terrorism. Because when we aren't busy killing terrorists, we are turning fruity and susceptible to our numerous anonymous brown enemies.