Weapons of Mundane Destruction

Given all the attention to Iraq’s alleged but unfound Weapons of Mass Destruction, it’s remarkable, in light of the devastation wrought by the current non-war, that there isn’t more discussion about the weapons that Iraq does have. As the body count of Iraqis and foreigners mounts daily, one thing is clear: that country is swimming in conventional weaponry.

From short-range rockets to mortar shells, from grenades to anti-aircraft guns, anti-occupation forces seem well-provisioned enough to hold out indefinitely. How did they get all that firepower? Iraq certainly didn’t build most it. They bought it from around the world.

Talk of halting terrorism and increasing global stability and peace is meaningless without an honest exploration of the international trade in weaponry – including the role of the US government, American companies, and of America's allies, directly and indirectly -- in perpetuating misery and chaos.

- posted by Russ @ 11:15 AM

These days, John Kerry, offered the opportunity of a lifetime, is bobbling it. Many would relish the chance to aggressively face off against President Bush, a man famous for his fumbling, one-size-fits-all response to any and all questions. But Kerry instead weakens himself unnecessarily by doing the exact opposite – engaging in constant, talky, self-contortion.

As the satirical website Scrappleface put it in a faux headline, “Kerry Supporters Eager to Learn 'Who He Is'” This wasn’t really so satirical at all, because Kerry actually declared his intention to show, and surprise people, with ‘who’ he is. He also plans to prove that he is no liberal.

This is bad strategy. One shows who one is not through efforts to formally define oneself, but through actions and declared policies.

Howard Dean was at his finest early in the campaign, when he spoke candidly about how he felt (albeit not always with the greatest temperance.) It was when he began trying to remake himself into something he wasn’t that he really came in for the fiercest criticism.

The Bush campaign strategy in recent days has been to endlessly state that Kerry is “outside the mainstream,” but pretty clearly, he is not. The Bush Administration, meanwhile, is so far beyond the American and global pale on so many different issues, that Kerry should own the term “mainstream.”

Instead, Kerry reacts defensively to this mantra, and thus lends it legitimacy. Meanwhile, George Bush’s singular strength is that he does NOT go off message. He does not give his opponent an inch, no matter how weak or improbable his utterances. John Kerry might have experience, intelligence, practical smarts, but he could learn a thing or two about thriving under pressure from George Bush.


- posted by Russ @ 2:43 PM

THE NOISE THAT CONFUSES

Just reading the transcript of Condi Rice’s testimony before the 9/11 investigative commission. One thing that struck me about her prepared opening statement was her ability to slip Iraq in, to subtly justify it by conflating it with Al Qaeda, without facing any challenge.

“After the September 11 attacks, our nation faced hard choices. We could fight a narrow war against al Qaeda and the Taliban or we could fight a broad war against a global menace. We could seek a narrow victory or we could work for a lasting peace and a better world. President Bush chose the bolder course…. We are working to stop the spread of deadly weapons and prevent them from getting into the hands of terrorists, seizing dangerous materials in transit, where necessary. Because we acted in Iraq, Saddam Hussein will never again use weapons of mass destruction against his people or his neighbors.”

This is on its face a ridiculous statement, open to many different critiques. Most of the deadly weapons Saddam had, he got with US assistance or forbearance; he had actually only used them in a limited way a long time ago and was not likely to use them again; and, most importantly, dangerous weapons continue to spread unabated. Another is that the narrower approach was the only viable one, and that the broader approach RIce exalts was the one least likely to bring about “a lasting peace and a better world.”

Today, the White House released the intelligence briefing Bush got a month before 9/11. It makes clear that a domestic Al Qaeda threat existed, but that no highly specific, actionable intelligence existed. What to make of this? Hard to say.
If anything, the disclosure just muddies the waters further.

Then there’s Dick Cheney, playing his Darth Vader role so effectively, continuing to this day to assert that WMDs will be found in Iraq, thereby making Bush seem quite rational and sober by comparison.

Rice’s appearance and her statement, the White House’s creeping along the disclosure highway, Cheney’s ongoing hardcore act, GOP criticism of any Democratic criticism, it is all part of a carefully choreographed act, designed to bewilder and exhaust swing voters. It becomes just too much for anyone to sort out all the inconsistencies.

The only effective way for Bush’s critics to challenge him is to focus on the singular fact that invading Iraq was a colossal, misguided, misrepresented, error. Lots of people dead, lots of people angry, no peace, no prosperity, no stability in sight --and much much more bad news to come. Everything else is just noise.

##


- posted by Russ @ 7:08 PM

Great piece by the Rev. Jim Wallis, of Call to Renewal, in the March 4, 2004 issue of SojoMail. Jim is one of the leading voices for true religiosity – ie a humanistic approach to what he believes to be God’s work. A recent poll co-sponsored by CTR shows that most voters, given a choice, care a lot more about substantive things than they do about the kind of hot-button “moral” issues that Karl Rove is so busy conjuring up.

The poll, by a bipartisan organization, asked: "The question of values is sure to be important to many voters this November. As you decide your vote for president of the United States, which of the following would be more important to you: hearing a candidate's position on gay marriage or hearing a candidate's plan for fighting poverty?"

A remarkable 78 percent chose the poverty plan; just 15 percent cared more about gay marriage.

Now, it’s possible that some respondents might lie in answering such a question. But presumably not most people.

What this tells us is that Bush will have problems if he is forced to discuss the kinds of things a president can – and should – really do something about. It's also a message to John Kerry – if you want to succeed, focus on what matters most, and don’t get dragged into discussions about sensational issues that needlessly divide people.

- posted by Russ @ 11:54 AM

Chipping Away at Our Freedom

The Transportation Safety Administration is considering installation into boarding passes of a chip that would track our movements within airports. They’d even know, for example, how much time we spend in the bathroom. That’s just one of many threats that have slipped under the radar of most people. It would be interesting to see how all the States Rights and privacy fanatics who support President Bush would feel if they knew to what extent the administration is ‘chipping’ away at basic freedoms. Combined with ubiquitous surveillance cameras, the reporting of library borrower habits and many other examples, it's a far more frightening time than most have noticed. Meanwhile, the number of terrorists nabbed as a result of these measures is uncertain, and might well turn out to be Zero.


- posted by Russ @ 2:53 PM

TIME TO STUDY THE SHIITES

The past few days are already proving a kind of watershed in Iraq. The city of Najaf has turned into a major battlefield, with heavy coalition and Iraqi injuries. It’s getting harder and harder to distinguish between a difficult peace and an outright war. Near Najaf, according to today’s Washington Post, many of the American-trained police abandoned their posts and joined the anti-US fighters rallying under the banner of a Shiite cleric, Mogqtada Sadr. The New York Times called this “punching a hole” in the occupation authorities' hopes of turning security over to Iraqis. Today, the authorities announced their intention of executing an old warrant for Sadr’s arrest, an act that is sure to swell dissent and unrest considerably. President Bush announced his continued commitment to the June 30 timetable for turning rule over to the Iraqis, while commanders were said to be calling for more, not fewer, troops.

What is going on is extremely consequential, for it suggests that affairs may be turning down a road that can only lead to greater disaster. Anyone interested in contextualizing the fast-breaking news could do worse than to invest some hours in reading Stephen Kinzer’s fine new book, All the Shah’s Men. It’s about Iran, not Iraq, and explores events of half a century ago, but the lessons are crucial. Kinzer tells the story of the US’s role in overthrowing the democratically-elected prime minister Mohammad Mossadegh and installing the Shah Reza Pahlavi. Notably, Kinzer explicates the essence of the Shiites – the considerable passions and principles that motivate this schismatic Islamic movement. One thing this book makes clear: these folks have a heart-felt, social justice-based commitment to their cause, however misguided it may seem to outsiders, and a fearlessness in action. The US civilian and military brass, the foreign advisors and consultants, are ill-informed, ill-equipped and ill-prepared to deal with the phenomenon.

- posted by Russ @ 2:13 PM

BUSH FOLKS -- GET YOUR FREE RIDE HERE!

Most Americans get all their news from the electronic media. That’s why that sector’s generally pathetic attempts to grill Bush Administration officials are so troubling.

The Sunday morning chatfests rarely reveal anything that the guests don’t want to put out. They’re mostly vehicles for getting new spin strategies operational. But even those mainstream outlets that are supposed to be marginally more dynamic are not coming through in the clinch.

Yesterday, for example, we heard top Bush aide Karen Hughes promoting her new book on NPR’s Fresh Air. The host, Terry Gross, asked easy questions that Hughes batted out of the park, and closed with a humorous anecdote from Hughes’ book about her huge feet and a shoe salesperson’s punch line about transvestites. Surely, none of us are interested in Hughes as a personality. What we want is to hear admissions and crucial new details of what has gone on at the top the past three years. But Gross seemed generally too ill-informed to press specifics, and allowed Hughes to answer each critical question with a contrived “on-message” response. Had George Bush lied or misled? No, he’s a fine, religious man. Was he generally uninterested in policy? No, he’s one of the best listeners and thinkers around. Even the shoe closer seemed designed to appeal to those in the audience who need reminding that the big issue is Bush and Marital Sanctity vs. Perverts.

With the daily revelations march, the electronic media have almost never had so much material to work with. The New York Times alone has started scoring with daily revelations that need to be raised in interviews with administration officials – and pressed until a reasonably honest explanation emerges. Yesterday, the Times had the revelation that the Bush administration had quietly blocked an IRS request to add investigators into Al Qaeda financial networks. That’s pretty shocking stuff given the president’s constant assertion that he will pull out all stops to quash the terrorist threat. But who will ask about it in the big e-media markets? Today, the Times reported that, contrary to military claims, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the people attacking US and foreign troops and civilians are more likely angry Iraqis than Jihadists from abroad. That’s another good one that administration officials ought to have to explain. If they don’t talk straight, the interviewers ought to have the skills and the will to make them squirm.

##
- posted by Russ @ 12:23 PM