Great article, Bill. For anybody interested in hearing more anti-war perspectives from leftists who served in the US military, Eyes Left is a great podcast. They also explain how people are conned into joining the military, military culture and dissent, etc. I highly recommend! Link at top of comment.
Two good quotes from Katie Couric and Jessica Yellin re: NBC/MSNBC coverage of the Iraq War:
Speaking on “The Early Show” on CBS, Ms. Couric said the lack of skepticism shown by journalists about the Bush administration’s case war amounted to “one of the most embarrassing chapters in American journalism.” She also said she sensed pressure from “the corporations who own where we work and from the government itself to really squash any kind of dissent or any kind of questioning of it.” At the time, Ms. Couric was a host of “Today” on NBC.
Another broadcast journalist also weighed in. Jessica Yellin, who worked for MSNBC in 2003 and now reports for CNN, said on Wednesday that journalists had been “under enormous pressure from corporate executives, frankly, to make sure that this was a war presented in a way that was consistent with the patriotic fever in the nation.”
It's interesting how Yellin put it, Matt: "consistent with the patriotic fever." Wasn't MSNBC and the other networks shaping and driving that "fever"? They weren't merely echoing it.
Also, I see where Couric voiced her critique in 2008 and after she'd moved to greener pastures at CBS. She deserves credit for speaking up, but it took her five years to do so.
I'd say she learned something from what happened to Ashleigh Banfield in 2003. Banfield really showed some courage speaking in the immediate aftermath of what seemed to be a proud "mission accomplished" moment.
Although I think generally CBS’ coverage of the Afghan surge and then their non-coverage of the Afghan War post-2011 or so, was similar to all the other corporate US media.
To me what’s notable about both Couric and Yellin’s comments are that they both emphasized the corporations who own the media.
Also, this from Couric in the same interview:
Couric remembered similar pressure: “I remember doing an interview and the press secretary called our executive producer and said, ‘We didn’t like the tone of that interview.’ And we said, ‘Well, tough. We had to ask some of these questions.’ And they said, ‘If you keep it up, we’re gonna block access to you during the war.’ ”
Imagine that! Complaining about the "tone" of a question. Shows you who's in charge, that's for sure.
When you appeared on CBS with Couric, Matt, it seems hard to believe we were talking of a withdrawal, or a drawdown, in 2011! Little did we know it would be 2021, not 2011. Good god.
I think about that Bill. Never did I think it would last that long. Bush and the Republicans only lasted 5 years in Iraq before they signed the deal to get out in summer 08 (which Obama was able to take credit for in ‘11)
All those "fragile" and "reversible" gains by Petraeus. All those "corners turned" in Afghanistan. All those generals cycling in and out, usually in command for a year or so, all claiming "progress" at the end of their tours. Total BS.
Yet there's no accountability, Matt. Indeed, those who failed but were "loyal" to the system got promoted; those like you with integrity got marginalized. You were right but for the wrong reasons, Matt. The "wrong" reason being your willingness to critique and reject the BS of the system.
When you resigned, few disagreed with your critique. They were disturbed by your willingness to speak up and out against a war you knew was wrong and lost. Yet the war endured for another dozen years after your resignation.
The callousness and sheer awfulness of the system -- it's really difficult to face fully. Small wonder that so many Americans simply tune out.
Do you think MSNBC still has your shade of makeup ready for your next invited appearance? :-)
Haha, that was a while ago, I am sure that makeup has dried out ;) And on another media note, I wonder how many guests they actually have in studio these days.
Thank you as always for the kind words Bill. The length of the list of those who agreed with me, from ambassadors to generals, active and retired, to junior FSOs and lieutenants, is about as long as the carnage and suffering to which they remained silent against.
"It's interesting how Yellin put it, Matt: 'consistent with the patriotic fever.' Wasn't MSNBC and the other networks shaping and driving that 'fever'? They weren't merely echoing it."
I'm not at all sure about this "patriotic fever" thing. My thought, from having closely observed the lead-up to the Iraq war, is that Bush & Co., through the shameless use of proxies like Colin Powell (who damn sure should have known better, arguably DID know better), manufactured a facade of enthusiasm for the war. That is, there might have been a lot of flag-waving staged for the cameras, but average Americans had no particular desire for the military to invade Iraq. I'd venture to guess that the overwhelming sentiment was apathy. That's a danger in itself, of course, but I really don't remember any outcry for attacking Iraq.
Yes, well put, Denise. Recall the mass marches against the war. Not apathetic at all.
Most Americans knew the war was truly motivated by oil. And indeed I heard that Iraqi oil production is now four times as high today as it was under Saddam. For those multinationals that own and profit from Iraqi oil, mission accomplished!
Yep, good point about oil production. I should have clarified that the apathy infused all EXCEPT those who knew what was actually going on. But MSM gave little or no coverage to those anti-war marches. I marched downtown as part of a sizable group, and there was nary a reporter to be found.
One very simple [but not simplistic] way of describing the situation, Bill, is that America’s MSM has become the official Domestic Psychological Warfare agency of the American government; and its primary purveyor, provider, and distributor of Propaganda to and for the masses.
This, of course, is nothing new. It’s been this way since at least 9/11, if not the First Gulf War back in 1991, when CNN came into its own and introduced the concept of “embeddedness” of the media within ~ and thus directly controlled by ~ units on the ground directly involved in that “war” [if it can be called that].
One measure of the MSM’s now embeddedness within the American Political Ruling Class and its government is the MSM’s virtual silence and notably silent inactivity on the whole Assange/Wikileaks Goat Rope. Apparently, those folks do not see the threat to what used to be called “journalism” that the arrest, incarceration, pending extradition, and ultimate imprisonment of Assange is.
In any event, and correct me if i am wrong, but as near as i can tell, the last time this nation had a truly functional MSM doing its job when it comes to reporting on War, and not beholden to the government and the RPC, was back during Vietnam, reaching its peak performance when the New York Times and Washington Post published Ellsburg’s PENTAGON PAPERS.
Yes. But even in the case of Vietnam, as you know, Jeff, the mainstream networks back then didn't start turning against the war until 1968 at the earliest.
1968 was the year that a lot of people began to question and then reject America's war in Vietnam, Bill; including, as You note, the media.
First, Gene McCarthy had announced his intent to challenge LBJ for the Democrats' nomination for the upcoming Presidential election. [And when he beat LBJ in the New Hampshire Primary in March, and LBJ announced his intent to not seek re-election, that's when RFK Sr jumped into the game.]
And probably the single most important contributing factor to McCarthy's upset of LBJ in New Hampshire was the Lunar New Year/TET Offensive launched by the Viet Cong (VC) and North Vietnamese People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) on January 30, 1968. [See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tet_Offensive for details.]
Because it was that that totally, completely, and unequivocally exposed for anybody with eyes to see, ears to hear, and a mind to think, that that so-called "light at the end of the tunnel" of Vietnam spoken of so frequently and confidently by the White House, the Pentagon, etc, ~ and parroted by the media ~ was in fact the headlite of an oncoming freight train that had lost its brakes.
i was a door gunner on assault helicopters down in the Mekong Delta when TET-68 happened; and while we had been warned that something was expected on the Lunar New Year, our intelligence folks did not even come close to accurately predicting just how big, strong, widespread, and successful the VC/PAVN Offensive would be.
And the rest, as they say, is "History." When THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE AMERICAN EMPIRE is written, it will be very, very easily argued that the actual beginning of that Decline was on January 30, 1968.
Good point. Actually, You could go back even further to right after the conclusion of WW II when Truman opted to advise and provide limitless financial, logistical, and intelligence support to the French attempt to re-colonize Indochina.
After all, America's nascent MICC NEEDED another War someplace to stay in business after WW II ended. So why not a land war in Asia? And for their diligence and effort, they got two: first Korea, and then Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.
And in real actuality, the Decline of the American Empire actually began when it nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki 78 years ago this week.
Bill, thanks for keeping the flickering flame of truth burning in the hurricane of hogwash that keeps American consumers coddled and self-content. That’s the Almighty-Dollar-worshipping fantasy world.
Contrast that with how MSM propaganda, careerists’ self-censorship & misinformation have _real-world_ effects: “in this world the way we are discussed on the Arab street, it feeds and fuels their hatred and their desire to kill themselves to take out Americans“.
Of course it’s not just Arabs. Age of Anger by Pankaj Mishra explained many things to me about the past few centuries of world history that as a “well-informed” Westerner with an quasi-elite education I ought to have understood but didn’t.
But be careful: That puts You well on the way to being a "viable" candidate.
i hope You've sent this off elsewhere ~ especially to the MSM ~ for the widest distribution possible. And i look forward to learning about what kind of feedback You get on it.
Have a Great day. Your piece has made mine an excellent one, and it's still early morning up here in Sitka. ~ jeff
Most of us who analyze politics as a paid profession and have been right 98% of the time (🤓) understand that
1. Ho Chi Minh in Nam could have been an ally if we had just told the French to cut it out and let Vietnam become independent. And invited him to a White House dinner.
2. Saddam Hussein was THE only thing keeping Iran from expanding into all of the Middle East. “Amicus meus, inimicus inimici mei" or “The enemy of my enemy is my friend!”
3. Afghanistan NO, NO, NO! Osama Bin L was offed in Pakistan. Let sleeping dogs lie. No culture wars. No bringing American treatment of women to such a deep, powerful, relentless, ancient society. Can’t be done.
Von Klausewitz the German war historian wrote “Aus Fehlern I’m Krieg lernt man“
Out of war mistakes we must learn. His book Vom Kriege ("On War"). Worth reading.
We seem to have ignored his advice over and over again.
He should know. He fought in many battles and reflected on the mistakes made by leaders & commanders. He was skeptical about war as the best way to achieve complex policy objectives. For me this is the most brilliant and important.
“… war in itself does not suspend political intercourse or change it into something entirely different. In essentials that intercourse continues, irrespective of the means it employs. The main lines along which military events progress, and to which they are restricted, are political lines that continue throughout the war into the subsequent peace."[17]
In Ukraine that political (diplomatic) discussion has NOT effectively continued.
Majority of people in the US oppose Congress authorizing more funding for Ukraine in NATO's proxy war with Russia. But the weapons keep flowing to escalate the war, because, in the grand US "democracy", public opinion has zero impact on foreign policy.
And then there’s this just in on the horizon. What could possibly go wrong, eh? The last time the US and France worked together was back just after World War II in what the Vietnamese People term “The French ~ as opposed to The American ~ War." And we all know how that all worked out. …:
US/FRANCE THREATEN INTERVENTION IN RESOURCE-RICH NIGER: FEARS OF WAR IN WEST AFRICA by Ben Norton / Geopolitical Economy 080523
The US and France have threatened intervention to re-install a pro-Western regime in Niger, which produces uranium needed for nuclear energy, has untapped oil reserves, and hosts strategic US drone bases and French troops. This follows coups led by nationalist, anti-colonial military officers in West Africa.
Niger is a major producer of gold and uranium, the latter of which is needed for European nuclear energy. The country has significant oil reserves to which foreign corporations have wanted access. It also hosts large US drone bases.
These Western threats follow coups led by nationalist, anti-colonial military officers in neighboring Burkina Faso and Mali, whose governments have warned that intervention would be considered an act of war, and could thus set off a regional conflict.
While Blinken said “climate change” was more existential threat than bearding Russia to nuclear war , in an interview in late July in Australia.
Blinken either supposes he can win a nuclear exchange or the plan is soon back off with the proxie war, that is backdown when Russia hits the US’ safe haven intel parts of its kill chain.
I am siding with the neocon all out option as any time now it will be sunset for the empire.
Ray, Jeanie McEachern attempted to post a reply to you, but was unable to do so, and asked me to post for her. Her comment is as follows:
"erumpent thank yous, bill astore, denise donaldson, and ray joseph cormier, for your elucubrating article, comments, and link to oliver stone's comprehensive interviews w/ putin. i've viewed all 4 parts, and i must categorically agree that these interviews are critical for achieving even a scintilla of understanding about how one-sided US/russia relations are, and how nakedly naive, indolent, rah-rah militaristic, and delusional most of the corporate-controlled, MSM-saturated american electorate are. they are either too busy shopping, consuming, mall-ratting, slaving for their bosses, internet-surfing, or insouciantly gaming to notice or even care about what russian citizens' legitimate concerns are. am in your debt, rjc, for posting stone's 4-part-interview alert w/ putin."
Below is Jeanie's response to your comment about her.
REPLY TO RAY JOSEPH CORMIER: tnx for your sanguinity and concern for my perseverance among the living, rjc. tho' having just spent yet another dolorous b-day, my 82nd, i feel miserable. the source of my misery is 2-fold:
1] my b-day falls unpropitiously on 6th august, that befouled day in the US' maculated history, when on my 4th b-day the US [my country priror to marrying my canadian husband] nuked hiroshima, incinerating its helpless inhabitants, and contaminating generations beyond w/ invidious atomic radiation fallout. every year, i beseech my family to ignore my b-day b/c it is a joyless day for me, not one to be celebrated.
2] i have recently returned to mindoro island from several months away... the month of march on lembongan island in indonesia; the month of april preparing for a volunteer teaching 'mission' [not connected to any ecclesiastical establishment] w/ PROJECT HOPE NABLUS inpalestine's west bank; then the months of may, june, and july were spent as a volunteer teacher in 4 different refugee camps surrounding the nablus area.
i returned home to the philippines a wreck, my brain twisted w/ dendrites tied into gordian knots, and a shit-filled augean stable of memories. what the israeli military 'visited' on the palestinians while i was in-situ was not only inhumane, it also constituted egregious human rights crimes: the daily horrors of militant, humiliating, aggressively threatening checkpoints; the nightly bombing raids; the house demolitions; the cauchemars suffered by the children; the inexorable, unrelenting, unremitting screams of missiles, automatic weapons, sirens, and protests; the deranged mothers ululating over the hideous deaths of their young freedom-fighting sons and daughters; the israeli military's blockages to hospitals; their barricades to every conceivable access to security, safety, and survival adytums…
mindoro island is so tranquil by comparison, that i feel somehow culpable for just being alive in this safe, secure tropical ecesis when i know my palestinian 'compatriots' persist in enduring such inhumane depredations.
https://m.soundcloud.com/eyesleft
Great article, Bill. For anybody interested in hearing more anti-war perspectives from leftists who served in the US military, Eyes Left is a great podcast. They also explain how people are conned into joining the military, military culture and dissent, etc. I highly recommend! Link at top of comment.
Thanks for the link, Rachel.
Two good quotes from Katie Couric and Jessica Yellin re: NBC/MSNBC coverage of the Iraq War:
Speaking on “The Early Show” on CBS, Ms. Couric said the lack of skepticism shown by journalists about the Bush administration’s case war amounted to “one of the most embarrassing chapters in American journalism.” She also said she sensed pressure from “the corporations who own where we work and from the government itself to really squash any kind of dissent or any kind of questioning of it.” At the time, Ms. Couric was a host of “Today” on NBC.
Another broadcast journalist also weighed in. Jessica Yellin, who worked for MSNBC in 2003 and now reports for CNN, said on Wednesday that journalists had been “under enormous pressure from corporate executives, frankly, to make sure that this was a war presented in a way that was consistent with the patriotic fever in the nation.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/30/washington/30press.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
It's interesting how Yellin put it, Matt: "consistent with the patriotic fever." Wasn't MSNBC and the other networks shaping and driving that "fever"? They weren't merely echoing it.
Also, I see where Couric voiced her critique in 2008 and after she'd moved to greener pastures at CBS. She deserves credit for speaking up, but it took her five years to do so.
I'd say she learned something from what happened to Ashleigh Banfield in 2003. Banfield really showed some courage speaking in the immediate aftermath of what seemed to be a proud "mission accomplished" moment.
She actually had me on one time to discuss Afghanistan on CBS: https://youtu.be/X0C1gC0LJhM?feature=shared
Although I think generally CBS’ coverage of the Afghan surge and then their non-coverage of the Afghan War post-2011 or so, was similar to all the other corporate US media.
To me what’s notable about both Couric and Yellin’s comments are that they both emphasized the corporations who own the media.
Also, this from Couric in the same interview:
Couric remembered similar pressure: “I remember doing an interview and the press secretary called our executive producer and said, ‘We didn’t like the tone of that interview.’ And we said, ‘Well, tough. We had to ask some of these questions.’ And they said, ‘If you keep it up, we’re gonna block access to you during the war.’ ”
https://www.today.com/news/network-anchors-differ-iraq-war-coverage-1c9012067
Imagine that! Complaining about the "tone" of a question. Shows you who's in charge, that's for sure.
When you appeared on CBS with Couric, Matt, it seems hard to believe we were talking of a withdrawal, or a drawdown, in 2011! Little did we know it would be 2021, not 2011. Good god.
I think about that Bill. Never did I think it would last that long. Bush and the Republicans only lasted 5 years in Iraq before they signed the deal to get out in summer 08 (which Obama was able to take credit for in ‘11)
All those "fragile" and "reversible" gains by Petraeus. All those "corners turned" in Afghanistan. All those generals cycling in and out, usually in command for a year or so, all claiming "progress" at the end of their tours. Total BS.
Yet there's no accountability, Matt. Indeed, those who failed but were "loyal" to the system got promoted; those like you with integrity got marginalized. You were right but for the wrong reasons, Matt. The "wrong" reason being your willingness to critique and reject the BS of the system.
When you resigned, few disagreed with your critique. They were disturbed by your willingness to speak up and out against a war you knew was wrong and lost. Yet the war endured for another dozen years after your resignation.
The callousness and sheer awfulness of the system -- it's really difficult to face fully. Small wonder that so many Americans simply tune out.
Do you think MSNBC still has your shade of makeup ready for your next invited appearance? :-)
Haha, that was a while ago, I am sure that makeup has dried out ;) And on another media note, I wonder how many guests they actually have in studio these days.
Thank you as always for the kind words Bill. The length of the list of those who agreed with me, from ambassadors to generals, active and retired, to junior FSOs and lieutenants, is about as long as the carnage and suffering to which they remained silent against.
"It's interesting how Yellin put it, Matt: 'consistent with the patriotic fever.' Wasn't MSNBC and the other networks shaping and driving that 'fever'? They weren't merely echoing it."
I'm not at all sure about this "patriotic fever" thing. My thought, from having closely observed the lead-up to the Iraq war, is that Bush & Co., through the shameless use of proxies like Colin Powell (who damn sure should have known better, arguably DID know better), manufactured a facade of enthusiasm for the war. That is, there might have been a lot of flag-waving staged for the cameras, but average Americans had no particular desire for the military to invade Iraq. I'd venture to guess that the overwhelming sentiment was apathy. That's a danger in itself, of course, but I really don't remember any outcry for attacking Iraq.
Yes, well put, Denise. Recall the mass marches against the war. Not apathetic at all.
Most Americans knew the war was truly motivated by oil. And indeed I heard that Iraqi oil production is now four times as high today as it was under Saddam. For those multinationals that own and profit from Iraqi oil, mission accomplished!
Yep, good point about oil production. I should have clarified that the apathy infused all EXCEPT those who knew what was actually going on. But MSM gave little or no coverage to those anti-war marches. I marched downtown as part of a sizable group, and there was nary a reporter to be found.
One very simple [but not simplistic] way of describing the situation, Bill, is that America’s MSM has become the official Domestic Psychological Warfare agency of the American government; and its primary purveyor, provider, and distributor of Propaganda to and for the masses.
This, of course, is nothing new. It’s been this way since at least 9/11, if not the First Gulf War back in 1991, when CNN came into its own and introduced the concept of “embeddedness” of the media within ~ and thus directly controlled by ~ units on the ground directly involved in that “war” [if it can be called that].
One measure of the MSM’s now embeddedness within the American Political Ruling Class and its government is the MSM’s virtual silence and notably silent inactivity on the whole Assange/Wikileaks Goat Rope. Apparently, those folks do not see the threat to what used to be called “journalism” that the arrest, incarceration, pending extradition, and ultimate imprisonment of Assange is.
In any event, and correct me if i am wrong, but as near as i can tell, the last time this nation had a truly functional MSM doing its job when it comes to reporting on War, and not beholden to the government and the RPC, was back during Vietnam, reaching its peak performance when the New York Times and Washington Post published Ellsburg’s PENTAGON PAPERS.
How far the mighty have fallen, eh?
Yes. But even in the case of Vietnam, as you know, Jeff, the mainstream networks back then didn't start turning against the war until 1968 at the earliest.
1968 was the year that a lot of people began to question and then reject America's war in Vietnam, Bill; including, as You note, the media.
First, Gene McCarthy had announced his intent to challenge LBJ for the Democrats' nomination for the upcoming Presidential election. [And when he beat LBJ in the New Hampshire Primary in March, and LBJ announced his intent to not seek re-election, that's when RFK Sr jumped into the game.]
And probably the single most important contributing factor to McCarthy's upset of LBJ in New Hampshire was the Lunar New Year/TET Offensive launched by the Viet Cong (VC) and North Vietnamese People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) on January 30, 1968. [See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tet_Offensive for details.]
Because it was that that totally, completely, and unequivocally exposed for anybody with eyes to see, ears to hear, and a mind to think, that that so-called "light at the end of the tunnel" of Vietnam spoken of so frequently and confidently by the White House, the Pentagon, etc, ~ and parroted by the media ~ was in fact the headlite of an oncoming freight train that had lost its brakes.
i was a door gunner on assault helicopters down in the Mekong Delta when TET-68 happened; and while we had been warned that something was expected on the Lunar New Year, our intelligence folks did not even come close to accurately predicting just how big, strong, widespread, and successful the VC/PAVN Offensive would be.
And the rest, as they say, is "History." When THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE AMERICAN EMPIRE is written, it will be very, very easily argued that the actual beginning of that Decline was on January 30, 1968.
Yes. I suppose I'd put it sooner: Tonkin Gulf followed by the decision by LBJ to commit major combat forces in 1965.
Of course, you could go back to Ike in the 1950s and his decision not to allow elections in Vietnam since Ho Chi Minh would win.
But getting involved in a land war in Asia -- thinking that U.S. firepower would solve everything -- was the height of hubris and folly.
Good point. Actually, You could go back even further to right after the conclusion of WW II when Truman opted to advise and provide limitless financial, logistical, and intelligence support to the French attempt to re-colonize Indochina.
After all, America's nascent MICC NEEDED another War someplace to stay in business after WW II ended. So why not a land war in Asia? And for their diligence and effort, they got two: first Korea, and then Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.
And in real actuality, the Decline of the American Empire actually began when it nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki 78 years ago this week.
Bill, thanks for keeping the flickering flame of truth burning in the hurricane of hogwash that keeps American consumers coddled and self-content. That’s the Almighty-Dollar-worshipping fantasy world.
Contrast that with how MSM propaganda, careerists’ self-censorship & misinformation have _real-world_ effects: “in this world the way we are discussed on the Arab street, it feeds and fuels their hatred and their desire to kill themselves to take out Americans“.
Of course it’s not just Arabs. Age of Anger by Pankaj Mishra explained many things to me about the past few centuries of world history that as a “well-informed” Westerner with an quasi-elite education I ought to have understood but didn’t.
Keep up the good work, Bill!
Great analysis. If war is so good why did we lose Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan, oh, and Cuba. ?
As Gen. Smedley Butler noted, over 100 years ago, "War is a racket." Shamefully, corporate owned media are in on it.
THANK YOU, Bill, for “The Greatest Fighting Force in Human History: The Perpetual Wars You Aren't Supposed to Notice" at https://tomdispatch.com/the-greatest-fighting-force-in-human-history/ .
But be careful: That puts You well on the way to being a "viable" candidate.
i hope You've sent this off elsewhere ~ especially to the MSM ~ for the widest distribution possible. And i look forward to learning about what kind of feedback You get on it.
Have a Great day. Your piece has made mine an excellent one, and it's still early morning up here in Sitka. ~ jeff
You're welcome, Jeff.
I'm declaring my candidacy for POTUS! Now watch all the hit pieces that call me a Putin puppet, anti-American, delusional ...
Just kidding, of course ...
You're "just kidding, of course" about declaring Your candidacy? Or just kidding about the hit pieces?
i am looking forward to both the hit pieces and the AttaBoyz that Your article generates. That's why i hope it gets the widest possible distribution.
I'll take Biden's place on the ticket. Call the DNC! :-)
Heh. Roger that.
Most of us who analyze politics as a paid profession and have been right 98% of the time (🤓) understand that
1. Ho Chi Minh in Nam could have been an ally if we had just told the French to cut it out and let Vietnam become independent. And invited him to a White House dinner.
2. Saddam Hussein was THE only thing keeping Iran from expanding into all of the Middle East. “Amicus meus, inimicus inimici mei" or “The enemy of my enemy is my friend!”
3. Afghanistan NO, NO, NO! Osama Bin L was offed in Pakistan. Let sleeping dogs lie. No culture wars. No bringing American treatment of women to such a deep, powerful, relentless, ancient society. Can’t be done.
Von Clausewitz is with a letter “C” but my auto spell (AI stupid?) disagreed. Don’t you hate that?!
Von Klausewitz the German war historian wrote “Aus Fehlern I’m Krieg lernt man“
Out of war mistakes we must learn. His book Vom Kriege ("On War"). Worth reading.
We seem to have ignored his advice over and over again.
He should know. He fought in many battles and reflected on the mistakes made by leaders & commanders. He was skeptical about war as the best way to achieve complex policy objectives. For me this is the most brilliant and important.
“… war in itself does not suspend political intercourse or change it into something entirely different. In essentials that intercourse continues, irrespective of the means it employs. The main lines along which military events progress, and to which they are restricted, are political lines that continue throughout the war into the subsequent peace."[17]
In Ukraine that political (diplomatic) discussion has NOT effectively continued.
Is sinful if we made a peace?
CNN latest polling:
Majority of people in the US oppose Congress authorizing more funding for Ukraine in NATO's proxy war with Russia. But the weapons keep flowing to escalate the war, because, in the grand US "democracy", public opinion has zero impact on foreign policy.
https://prada.substack.com/p/is-sinful-if-we-made-a-peace-truce
And then there’s this just in on the horizon. What could possibly go wrong, eh? The last time the US and France worked together was back just after World War II in what the Vietnamese People term “The French ~ as opposed to The American ~ War." And we all know how that all worked out. …:
US/FRANCE THREATEN INTERVENTION IN RESOURCE-RICH NIGER: FEARS OF WAR IN WEST AFRICA by Ben Norton / Geopolitical Economy 080523
The US and France have threatened intervention to re-install a pro-Western regime in Niger, which produces uranium needed for nuclear energy, has untapped oil reserves, and hosts strategic US drone bases and French troops. This follows coups led by nationalist, anti-colonial military officers in West Africa.
Niger is a major producer of gold and uranium, the latter of which is needed for European nuclear energy. The country has significant oil reserves to which foreign corporations have wanted access. It also hosts large US drone bases.
These Western threats follow coups led by nationalist, anti-colonial military officers in neighboring Burkina Faso and Mali, whose governments have warned that intervention would be considered an act of war, and could thus set off a regional conflict.
Continued at https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2023/08/05/us-france-intervention-niger-west-africa/
While Blinken said “climate change” was more existential threat than bearding Russia to nuclear war , in an interview in late July in Australia.
Blinken either supposes he can win a nuclear exchange or the plan is soon back off with the proxie war, that is backdown when Russia hits the US’ safe haven intel parts of its kill chain.
I am siding with the neocon all out option as any time now it will be sunset for the empire.
i second the recommendation for submission to not just NYT and WaPo, but to the entire MSM and Beyond.
And that is not just Your loudest statement as a Peace Warrior, Bill; it is Your clearest, and potentially most impactful.
Ray, Jeanie McEachern attempted to post a reply to you, but was unable to do so, and asked me to post for her. Her comment is as follows:
"erumpent thank yous, bill astore, denise donaldson, and ray joseph cormier, for your elucubrating article, comments, and link to oliver stone's comprehensive interviews w/ putin. i've viewed all 4 parts, and i must categorically agree that these interviews are critical for achieving even a scintilla of understanding about how one-sided US/russia relations are, and how nakedly naive, indolent, rah-rah militaristic, and delusional most of the corporate-controlled, MSM-saturated american electorate are. they are either too busy shopping, consuming, mall-ratting, slaving for their bosses, internet-surfing, or insouciantly gaming to notice or even care about what russian citizens' legitimate concerns are. am in your debt, rjc, for posting stone's 4-part-interview alert w/ putin."
That she is, Ray. If she reads this comment, I'll relay any reply.
Below is Jeanie's response to your comment about her.
REPLY TO RAY JOSEPH CORMIER: tnx for your sanguinity and concern for my perseverance among the living, rjc. tho' having just spent yet another dolorous b-day, my 82nd, i feel miserable. the source of my misery is 2-fold:
1] my b-day falls unpropitiously on 6th august, that befouled day in the US' maculated history, when on my 4th b-day the US [my country priror to marrying my canadian husband] nuked hiroshima, incinerating its helpless inhabitants, and contaminating generations beyond w/ invidious atomic radiation fallout. every year, i beseech my family to ignore my b-day b/c it is a joyless day for me, not one to be celebrated.
2] i have recently returned to mindoro island from several months away... the month of march on lembongan island in indonesia; the month of april preparing for a volunteer teaching 'mission' [not connected to any ecclesiastical establishment] w/ PROJECT HOPE NABLUS inpalestine's west bank; then the months of may, june, and july were spent as a volunteer teacher in 4 different refugee camps surrounding the nablus area.
i returned home to the philippines a wreck, my brain twisted w/ dendrites tied into gordian knots, and a shit-filled augean stable of memories. what the israeli military 'visited' on the palestinians while i was in-situ was not only inhumane, it also constituted egregious human rights crimes: the daily horrors of militant, humiliating, aggressively threatening checkpoints; the nightly bombing raids; the house demolitions; the cauchemars suffered by the children; the inexorable, unrelenting, unremitting screams of missiles, automatic weapons, sirens, and protests; the deranged mothers ululating over the hideous deaths of their young freedom-fighting sons and daughters; the israeli military's blockages to hospitals; their barricades to every conceivable access to security, safety, and survival adytums…
mindoro island is so tranquil by comparison, that i feel somehow culpable for just being alive in this safe, secure tropical ecesis when i know my palestinian 'compatriots' persist in enduring such inhumane depredations.