The President's Prime Time Oval Office Address on Iraq 8/21/2010

When's the last time anything of any sort of interest came out of one of these things? For as long as I can remember, they've been the most shameless of the rehearsed and "well no shit, Sherlock" puff pieces you can come up with.

Ugly wallpaper.

They should completely fill the walls with bookcases filled with awesome old books, and make the oval moulding a sliding track for one of those old-fashioned rolling library ladders, so that you can ride it a full 360 degrees around the room. Do cool shit with my tax dollars, dagnabit!

For heaven's sake! There is no end to combat operations in Iraq. These are just empty words uttered by yet another duplicitous President for the herd to chew on in deafening silence.

Let's go back to basics.

The US has a twenty year oil "licence" in Iraq which it bestows on various corporate interests (friends of the family) and it isn't moving until they have swindled every last drip.

Yes, some combat troops have been re-assigned to Afghanistan (or recently emerging and VERY murky business in Yemen) - but nearly 60,000 will remain until 2011. Obama will say - in soothing tones - that they operate in an "advisory or protective" role and only at the express instruction of the Iraqi government. But anyone who knows a bit about Vietnam will tell you that military "advisers" are just military. As for the Iraqi government - it knows who the boss is.

I mean, this isn't difficult to grasp. The US currently operates 94 (known) bases in Iraq. The US embassy in Baghdad is Orwellian in size (as big as the Vatican city itself!), shape and influence and it was built to last.

Add to this the estimated total of 100,000 private contractors beetling around Iraq. A large number of these are mercenaries who are often better armed (and certainly better PAID) than soldiers. Recently the State Department has approached Congress to fund a MASSIVE increase of militia forces so that Obama can run a scaled-down, backdoor occupation under the auspices of "diplomatic security". The plan is to construct five "Enduring Presence Posts" (the fuckers are just shameless) at current US military bases in Basrah, Diyala, Erbil, Kirkuk and Ninewa.

And who's driving this plan through? None other than the Lord of War's wife - Hilary Clinton. The harridan who in 2008 said: "These private security contractors have been reckless and have compromised our mission in Iraq" and even sponsored legislation to have them removed!

Let us remember that private contractors operate outside of US military constraints. Their actions are secret and despite performing the same roles as soldiers their deaths are unrecorded. And, thanks to Paul Bremer (the man who sacked the entire Iraqi civic infrastructure and left the country in ruins) they can always rely on Edict 17 to ensure that pesky allegations by the Iraqi police (murder, torture, rape etc.) evaporate in the noon heat.

Meanwhile approximately 580 Iraqi civilians died last month.

Before anyone thinks that Foster's voice is one worth considering, let's remember that he defended South Africans who lived in the country during the apartheid era and didn't leave.

I like the look of the Oval Office. I like the quotes on the seal best of all.

Obama is going to get creamed for not flashing the "V for Victory" sign and leading his Cabinet in a rousing chant if "USA! USA!"

What's his deal? Does he only post here?

Liked how relatively downbeat it felt. This shouldn't be a celebration.

I think you meant "Change! Change!"

You have something to say about Iraq, Rath?

LOL, I get it - I'm being STALKED!

All day I've felt Deja Vu tap-tap-tapping at the back of my mind. Finally the answer!

Rath, I have to say that my initial response was, well, a big, fat bellyful of ROTFLMAO! It's funny enough being stalked for the first time (should I check the bushes outside of my house?) - but to twice be written off as someone to be ignored (over a discussion I can barely remember) by none other than CHUD's former long-time resident Teenager-With-Serious-Anger-Management-Issues-And-Looney ("Calm down, Rath!") distils comedy to hitherto unheard of levels of purity. Have you thought of a career in X-Factor?

I rarely have the time I once had to devote to CHUD, which means my visits tend to be sporadic and only for short periods - yet you've retained the flame of a grudge for this long. Weird. But we're not just talking about a grudge, are we? That old Rath Ego just can't be kept under control. The kind of Ego you can set your watch by. The kind of Ego that upon spying a couple of unrelated and innocuous threads - but BY someone who has (presumably) wounded that Ego in the past - just cannot resist barging in, hi-jacking the discussion completely and screaming "STOP TALKING ABOUT THIS AND LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME! I DEMAND TO BE NOTICED! LOOK AT ME!"

Seriously (and leaving to one side the logical fallacy within your own argument), if you have something important to say about Iraq or any other subject say it here and now. If, however, you just want to carry on skulking about in the undergrowth like a sullen brat whilst every six-months-or-so attempting to hi-jack mine or somebody else's discussion you'll forgive me for consigning you to my very own Shutter Island. I mean, you should be grown up by now. Do everyone a favour and act like one.

I don't debate topics of substance with people whose opinions I completely discount due to extreme scumbagitude.

I honestly can't believe you think I'm serious. All that drinking and drugging must have killed one too many brain cells.

But if you want to know why that while I respect your intelligence, your passion for knowledge, and your obvious gift at message board debate, I think you've held some pretty contemptable opinions that people should know about (because it's CHUD, and nobody forgets), I do suggest you act like an adult and look at your own comments in that "debate you barely remember."

I'm done derailing. If you like, let's continue this in private.

I've seen some desperate attempts to discredit other people's opinions, but yours must be one of the feeblest yet.

Stick around. I've made worse.

You might have a point because to me it seems like you are taking two stances at once here. Perhaps you could explain?

Firstly, thank you for the compliment. Secondly, you might think "nobody forgets" - but I assure you I can and do. Honesty, I find the whole notion of rootling around in post histories alien, a bit weird and tedious. As for you being the ultimate arbiter of contemptibility - your early years on CHUD (in which I'm sure even you would agree were chequered) appear to rule you out, or leave you wide open to accusations of gross hypocrisy.

I don't have a problem discussing whatever issues you have via PM (I can't say I have any - other than being stalked), but if you're asking me to go back to a thread I left because it had become little more than a bear pit for insults and abuse - no.

So yeah, Iraq right? That shit is crazy...

In all seriousness, we've fucked that place royally.

It's not like Iraq was a pristine Eden like Bali. Iraq was fucked before we got there, and it will be fucked again.

And we just wasted seven years, billions of dollars and thousands of lives to leave it just as fucked as it always has been.

Well that's something anyone with a brain could have told you back in 2003...

That's not true at all. Prior to the coalition's invasion AND the decade of abominable sanctions, which United Nations humanitarian aid co-ordinator, Denis Halliday, labelled (and resigned over) - "genocide", Iraq functioned like many other countries. It had a working municipal infrastructure (the one Paul Bremer deliberately smashed) including schools, universities, fully staffed hospitals, creche/day care facilities, police and fire services, mosques etc.

Before sanctions, Iraq had one of the highest standards of living in the Middle East. Moreover, it had one of the highest rates of literacy in the WORLD. The Iraqi government maintained its commitment to high quality education even during the Iran/Iraq war. Graduates from high school were accepted in universities throughout the world. Primary school children received milk, cod liver oil, hummus, fresh fruit and vitamin supplements on daily basis.

Yes, Saddam was a monster and you cannot condone his actions (unless you're Reagan or Rumsfeld in which case he was "our kind of guy"). But Iraq was certainly not the basket case it is today.

Yes to all of this (sadly). I would that Reagan N Rummy supported Saddam as the lesser of two evils (the bigger one being Iran). In the 1980's Iraq and Iran did a passable re-enactment of World War I with the twist that the human waves that rushed through their No Man's Land were often women and children. A howl generation was wiped out on both sides, which is why today both countries have a majority of the population less than 30 years old.

I'm sorry, but I get the feeling that Arabs wouldn't look too kindly on Ginsberg.

A good infrastructure and high literacy rate is nothing compared to the sweet, sweet nectar of America-sponsored Freedom!

Man, that sounds good for the weekend. Where can *I* get some of this Freedom stuff?

I've worked with a lot of Iraqis, and the storm of emotions swirling around there is unfathomable. Of course the opinions are as mixed as they are here regarding the past couple decades, but every single one of them has been heart-broken about how things are just so damned broken compared with 25-30 years ago. Not in the BS shining golden 50's way that has so much steam in America, but around the ruined physical state of the place and the brain drain that occurred even before the invasion. That decay started with their first Gulf War, and the acceleration post Kuwait is undeniable.

It shouldn't have to be pointed out, but there's nothing but hatred for Saddam in that mix, and that only adds to the frustrations I've heard. It's obviously a tiny sliver of the internal view on display there, but it's none the less affecting for that.

It's like Mussolini making the trains run on time. There's a trade off for the good things done, paid in blood and pain.

So let's wave a magic wand as many on the left have been screaming to do for years. We leave Iraq and Afganistan tomorrow. We pull every combat and support troop out of both countries. What happens next?

I mean, after the civil wars explode?

Surely the onus is on justifying the billions of dollars and thousands of lives that have been spent by the US and its allies already and pointing out how that expenditure of human and financial capital has done any concievable positive 'good' whatsoever?

...because surely if you can't point to any conceivable gains in the country, the entire affair has been an obscene waste of lives and money by the west - surely?

Please list the good things done, Viv.

What a fantastic refrain. "Well, what would you stinking lefties do about it now that the GOP has nobly fucked up the country beyond repair?"

Well, I'm sure Hitler would have had no problems tasering suicidal 60 year-olds. So that's a plus in your column.

I have to agree with Dr. Viv to a certain degree on this one.

While I find next to no reason to validate the mistakes and crimes that have been done in regard to this two wars, Iraq in particular, having been opposed to this war from the very beginning does not absolve the "West" from taking responsibility for what has been done to the country and the region as a whole. While it is an impossible situation where likely no happy ending will be in sight for decades to come, "we" can´t just drop the ball and call it a day.

While the damage has been done already it would be infinitively worse to just declare "victory" and turn our backs on this country. Especially considering the neighbourhood.

Yes but what was Adolfs views on taxation I wonder?

Listen, harp on it all you want, but I said I understood the concept of the implied social contract within limited taxation. Beyond that taxation is theft.

I'm not sure if you're being hypothetical or not. I'm in no way suggesting I have the correct answers for the situation there, and most of the expatriates I've known wouldn't make that claim either.

Just as Saddam's rule had it's benefits and horrifying detriments (though many from Kurdistan and what was then Saddam City would argue the former) so does our presence in the region. So did our assistance to Saddam in prior decades, and so did our assistance to the Shah in Iran. So will our eventual departure. The strains on the state of Iraq will be of a whole other nature than they are currently when we leave, and I don't know that we're working from that mindset. Our record of success in this line of business, especially in that region, doesn't give me much reason to believe our continued presence is beneficial, if it ever really was.

I imagine everybody here has fucked something up tremendously and then upped the damage by trying to repair it long past the time when that was feasible. Foreign policy doesn't scale down to the individual so well, but sometimes you just aren't the person who can fix shit. It doesn't get easier when you've got a collection of motives that aren't entirely benevolent.

Do you agree with your tax dollars being used to zap the shit out of the elderly for being belligerent, Tzu?

Jan, I agree that we can't cut and run. The point that Viv and so many others seem to gloss over is that the majority of left-leaning types in the Western world were against this war in the first place. And now Obama et al are the ones expected to have answers for the monumental fuck-ups of the right?

I commented in that thread. I don't feel he was tased for being belligerent. He was deemed a threat to himself and most professions where the concept arises have obligations where you cannot abandon someone who may be a threat to themselves; you have to get them to a counselor for further evaluation. He refused to cooperate and then stood up. What was he going to do? From the video I don't know. The cops obviously had other thoughts being present for the entire time. Were they premature in pulling the trigger? From the looks of the video, it could easily be said that yes they were. But I wasn't there.

I will say that from what I did see and from what could have possibly occurred they were most likely well within their rights to de-escalate the situation by putting him down.

A 6'4", 200+lb drunk can do some damage once he makes up his mind to do so. I said it over there, cancer survivor or no that guy looked to be in pretty decent shape for his age.

He was tasered three times. He must be some Crimson Ruby of Cyttorak-carrying motherfucker to need that to subdue him.

But, just to establish, tasers for cops to zap the elderly are fine, but tax going towards healthcare for the poor is a big no-no.

I was equating Mussolini and Saddam in my original post, Andy. Saddam was being painted as some kind of great leader in here, all the while the idea of his rape dungeons and genocide against his own people was being blown off.

To me, it's like saying Hitler wasn't all that bad, all things considered. We just overreacted.

No-one, anywhere in this thread, has said that Saddam was a great leader. But, weighing the positives and the negatives, we seem to have done more harm than good in our attempts to...well, I have no fucking clue what the real motives for going into Iraq were.

And the Hitler/Saddam comparison is so massively out of whack. You're better than that.

Come the fuck on, you know that nothing of the kind was happening. You said Iraq was fucked before we got there, as if it was a pile of rubble that Saddam occasionally rolled barrels of feces down like a mustached donkey kong. The reality is more complicated than that or the past seven years would have gone very differently.

Here's a thought...

Oh, yeah? Well, we'll see about that!

I think the ulterior motives of the Bush adminstration were terrible for the second Iraq war, and I think American blood and treasure were horribly misspent. I dread to see what comes next out of the man made disaster that is the Middle East.

But America has stuck its foot in a trap. To pull it out would cause even more damage. We have to figure out how to pry the trap open.

I think we should be encouraging Iran's opposition groups, but I don't think we should pre-emptively bomb them either. We shouldn't allow Israel to do so either. If Iran really does go for the nuclear button, I think nations in the theater had better do something about it because I don't think they want a glowing crater on the edge of the Persian Gulf.

I meant it was fucked as it was being ruled by Saddam.

But hey, if that's your idea of a paradise of a country, don't let me interrupt. It sickens me that the US had anything to do with this monster, and that we're probably doing it all over again elsewhere.

I despise this snide form of debating. If you have good points, make them.

Iraq was not a paradise, but it functioned. People could live there. Pointing this out is hardly praising Saddam Hussein any more than saying the US functioned in 2005 should be taken as praise for George Bush.

The Lancet has twice published surveys showing just how badly Iraq was ruined by the US invasion. Iraqis were better off in all ways before Bush invaded.

If you're not being disingenuous I'm not sure how you can take anything said above and reach the conclusion that anybody is praising Saddam or claiming life under his rule was idyllic.

The point being made (by myself at least) is that while living under a tyrant is nightmarish, there were definitely benefits for the majority of the Iraqi population that are no longer in existence. We came in and lifted a tremendous burden by removing Saddam. We also dropped a shit ton of new, lighter loads that certainly add up. This is in addition to the weight of a decade's worth of international sanctions.

Our reception was ambivalent from the outset, and things haven't gotten cheerier. From that position it is very difficult if not impossible for us to 'fix' things.

And again, just so I'm clear, Saddam was a monster. al-Anfal, Halabja, targeting civilian populations during the war with Iran, unending torture of political figures, journalists, civilians, writers, artists, everybody, executing anything that looked like it didn't want to be a Ba'athist; it's not like it's hard to put together a list of his atrocities.

None of that changes the fact that the fundamental structure of the country is in far, far worse shape than it was before we finally turned against Saddam. Which, regrettably, came after far too many of the above listed events.