Funny how so many Americans feel incredibly ill-served by both the government - in all its branches - and the media.  You know what they say, If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, ....

The "unspoken" dynamic at play here is that the colorful protesters have been right all along.  In many ways, this war has been about oil. 

More specifically, the President's goal in Iraq is to have more than a dozen permanent US bases on the territory holding the second largest oil repository in the world.

Until the President comes to the conclusion that fessing up may do him more good than running a sham (and I'm not so sure it wouldn't), or the Dems, or the Press find some backbone or independence (our Press really needs to be lots of small independent outlets, not this industrial morass), the cunundrum Constance cites in this article will remain baffling.

by Mark-MyWords (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments) on Sunday, Apr 22, 2007 at 7:02:34 AM

  (0+)

OpEdNews does a really good job of filling in the cracks between the corporate and conservative media....that's a win-win situation for a country based on freedom of assembly, press, and speech.

by Constance Lavender (90 articles, 0 quicklinks, 86 diaries, 217 comments) on Sunday, Apr 22, 2007 at 11:41:03 AM

  (0+)

The 'civil war' in Iraq was deliberately incited by false-flag operations setting the various factions at each others' throats.  Apart from the oil, the intention is to fragment Iraq and as much of the Middle East as is possible to enable Israel to dominate a mosaic of weaklings.

You're doing a fine job, Dubbya - for Israel.  By the way, whose President are you supposed to be? And just for curiosity, how are you going to breathe life back into those brave dead Americans you misled to fight Israel's war?

by amazin (34 articles, 0 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 400 comments [12 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Apr 22, 2007 at 1:27:20 PM

  (0+)

You should read more news edited by the Iraqis themselves. They say the civil war is just a massive covert operation by the CIA and MOSSAD agents and the special forces. You know, blow up a bomb in Sunni district and then sponsor a Sunni group of people who think it was the Shias. It's so goddamn easy, it's called Balkanisation BTW.

by Han (0 articles, 2 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 228 comments [6 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Apr 22, 2007 at 3:02:26 PM

  (0+)

Great use of boldface; wish our "opposition" spokespeople could emphasize the long-and-short of it, so to speak, so well. Yes it's ruinous, although I doubt if the invasion was invented by the atrocious Israeli leadership, although YES, the government of Israel has every reason, both sinister and logical, for supporting the official American position. Note, I really like to refer to the government of the dubious nation rather than the nation, i.e. its people, itself. I would hope that while the world is hating America, it would give us anti-current-US-government crowd--we're the majority!--a little of that sort of courtesy, and hate the real perpetrators of this hideous war, and not the rest of us. But I've digressed. The writer who blames it all on 'Israel' makes me, just another NYC liberal Jew, who's neither a Zionist nor an anti-Zionist, feel as if the Protocols of the Elders of Zion were in full use once more. Our country and that country are governed by a piggish throng at this awful moment; let's hope the moment passes for us all, and we survive.

By the way, I never knew that the newly-born United States of America got immersed in the "middle of a foreign civil war," such as the French Revolution!! I didn't know America was immersed in it, or that it was a true civil war, in fact. But I like the idea of"The Scarlett Pimpernell," for example, rescuing worthy ducs and comtes from The Terror? Did we do that? I don't think so, but if we did, it must have been because of Benjamin Franklin, the most amazing of the Founding Fathers, who was so lionized by the Parisian nobility, while they still had heads. Franklin and the French could agree, to mutual advantage they hoped, that they both hated the Hanoverian monarchy across the channel, and could bond in their shared fear and loathing of the British war-machine.

And where does this non-immersion preference leave the legacy of our glorious lefty ancestors, who went to Spain to fight in a genuine civil war, on the side of the Loyalists? Like Gary Cooper, all alone between the boulders, firing his machine gun at the oncoming and clearly overpowering Nationalist forces, and...fade to The End.

by Dan'l (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments) on Sunday, Apr 22, 2007 at 3:18:21 PM

  (0+)

I did not mean to imply that the USA was involved in the French Revolution. I am referring to the First and Second Coalitions (of European governments) and Great Britain and their wars with revolutionary France.

Thanks for the opportunity to clarify.

by Constance Lavender (90 articles, 0 quicklinks, 86 diaries, 217 comments) on Sunday, Apr 22, 2007 at 3:30:54 PM

  (0+)

Yeah -- it's not really a civil war. We should be reading things very skeptically, and constantly asking at each meme: "is that true?".

Is this a "war for oil"? Yes but it is more: it is profit for the warmongers, an excuse for the adminstation to violate law and civil liberties here, a foot print for the military, a way to get support and money from the zionists (Jewish and Christian), and undoubtedly a few more things for other factions and reasons.

"Democratic Iraq" -- what's democracy if not rule by the people? ... just the opposite of what we have done in Iraq.

If someone attacks and you 'win" a war it means you can bring eveyone home and resume normal life. If we leave Iraq next month and resume normal life we will have "won" -- and so will the Iraqis, sort of, considering their country is now destoyed but at least the invaders will be gone. As long as the US is there it's lose-lose. Even we install apuppet government that's not a win -- look what happened when we put the Shah in Iran: payment was only put off.

The only "winners" are the corporate fascists who paid to set up the right wing think tanks and get their puppets into the US government, and have made huge profits. The corporate fascists behind all this never cared about the politicians -- they are just pawns, and pawns can neither fail nor succeed. When Bush stopped effectively carrying out thier agendas the forces for his destruction and replacement were engaged.

But 'what profiteth a man if he loses his soul AND the world, in the end'? Endlessly pursuing madness is not 'winning' either; it is losing one's own humanity. Those who might be religious believers better HOPE there is no afterlife with a reckoning! But in the meantime they've lost themselves, whether they realize it yet or not. The pity is that they destroy the rest of us as part of that madness -- as we permit them. Consider what we have already lost, even in the past few years. And are THEY happier? Financially richer, of course, but no happier, and poorer in soul.

This is ALL lose-lose.

by Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 997 comments) on Sunday, Apr 22, 2007 at 3:33:21 PM

  (0+)