• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The fake optimism of Washington's warriors

robin

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
1,045
Reaction score
0
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The Fake Optimism of Washington's Warriors

by Norman Solomon

In front of TV cameras, Pentagon officials do their best to make war sound wise and noble. Most of all, they lie.

Sometimes they do it with bold assertions, other times with intentionally tangled syntax. But those who give the orders that consign young soldiers to participation in horror must assure the folks back home that all the carnage is under control. The officials strive to project an aura of calm about the unspeakable; they mumble clichés about grief that cannot touch it.

For the most powerful war-makers in Washington, the most dangerous potential enemies are the citizens of the United States who might insist on an end to taxpayer subsidies for mass slaughter. To forestall such a calamity, officials proclaim endlessly that the war's worst days have passed and the future looks increasingly bright for the ravaged land and for the freedom-loving invaders whose invasion has ravaged it.

And so, on Tuesday night, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff glibly responded to questions from Jim Lehrer on the PBS NewsHour. And while the historic disrepute of the phrase "light at the end of the tunnel" precluded using it in the interview, Gen. Richard Myers was close to chirpy. Along the way, he tried to make the war in Iraq sound like an uplifting exercise in civic engagement, inevitably headed toward triumph.

The general was tap-dancing in the footsteps of many who came before him – during another long war based on deception and the assumption that the USA must keep killing in order to be credible on the world stage. When Defense Secretary Robert McNamara visited Vietnam for the first time, he came back and told the press that he'd seen "nothing but progress and hopeful indications of further progress in the future." McNamara made that statement in May 1962.

More than four years later, in October 1966, McNamara held a news conference at Andrews Air Force Base after returning from a trip to Vietnam. Again he spoke with enthusiasm about the progress he'd seen there. But former Pentagon aide Daniel Ellsberg has recounted that McNamara made that presentation to the press "minutes after telling me that everything was much worse than the year before."

Of course, the commander in chief is not to be outdone. He is, among his other duties, the commander of war lies. And so, as with George W. Bush today, Lyndon Johnson professed to be grandly optimistic when he proclaimed in early 1967: "Peace is more within our reach than at any time in this century."

Fifteen months ago, at a turning point when resistance to the occupation erupted with fury in a number of Iraqi cities, the response from American officials was to put happy-face stickers on the carnage. "We have isolated pockets where we are encountering problems," said Dan Senor, a spokesperson for the top U.S. manipulator in Iraq, Paul Bremer. A week later, on April 13, 2004, President Bush declared: "It's not a popular uprising. Most of Iraq is relatively stable."

These kinds of statements may seem like mere pep talks or, in retrospect, miscalculations. But they're integral to the war-making process – continually speaking of light that's just over the horizon, while corpses pile up in grisly shadows alongside the lies that keep a war going on top of the lies that got it started.

On Tuesday night, host Jim Lehrer asked Gen. Myers: "Do you consider Iraq a success from your point of view?" The general replied: "I do now, I do. I mean I don't know why I said now. I do, absolutely; I think it's a success." A couple of minutes later he was exuding confidence about the future: "It's going to be a difficult fight, but we're going to be successful in this fight."

Washington's warriors insist that Iraq is not Vietnam. Any geographer would certainly agree. But imperial wars share similar characteristics – including the profound fact that the people who live in a country are more committed to it than the invaders are. This war can't be won for reasons that have everything to do with why it's wrong. The occupiers are on the lowest moral ground. No amount of fake optimism in Washington can change such realities in Iraq.
 
Last edited:

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
robin said:
A link would have been nice, just a hint! But lets get to the beef of the report!
The Fake Optimism of Washington's Warriors
Another article of his is called "Terrorism, 'the War on Terror' and the Message of Carnage", are you starting to see a pattern here, I am!

by Norman Solomon
His Website I believe he can speak for himself, its not worth debating at the moment!
In front of TV cameras, Pentagon officials do their best to make war sound wise and noble. Most of all, they lie.
Did I mention he loves a good spin!
Sometimes they do it with bold assertions, other times with intentionally tangled syntax. But those who give the orders that consign young soldiers to participation in horror must assure the folks back home that all the carnage is under control. The officials strive to project an aura of calm about the unspeakable; they mumble clichés about grief that cannot touch it.
Intentionally tangled Order ! Give me a break! Horror? They are fighting terrorism not zombies! Carnage? Who is this author more conserned about the terrorist shooting at our forces or our forces trying to kill them? Oh yes, GOD forbid the Government try to keep the morale up for their families! Oh the terror of being optimistic!
For the most powerful war-makers in Washington, the most dangerous potential enemies are the citizens of the United States who might insist on an end to taxpayer subsidies for mass slaughter. To forestall such a calamity, officials proclaim endlessly that the war's worst days have passed and the future looks increasingly bright for the ravaged land and for the freedom-loving invaders whose invasion hasravenged it.
Now he's calling them War-makers, no wait he refered to ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS! Mass slaughter, obviously this author doesn't know much about war casualties, I mean more people died in the "American Revolutionary War" than have died in Iraq. And still the author has showed no brite side to the war.
And so, on Tuesday night, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff glibly responded to questions from Jim Lehrer on the PBS NewsHour. And while the historic disrepute of the phrase "light at the end of the tunnel" precluded using it in the interview, Gen. Richard Myers was close to chirpy. Along the way, he tried to make the war in Iraq sound like an uplifting exercise in civic engagement, inevitably headed toward triumph.
Yea he can critisize the general, but can't qoute he exactly said. I say spin!
The general was tap-dancing in the footsteps of many who came before him – during another long war based on deception and the assumption that the USA must keep killing in order to be credible on the world stage. When Defense Secretary Robert McNamara visited Vietnam for the first time, he came back and told the press that he'd seen "nothing but progress and hopeful indications of further progress in the future." McNamara made that statement in May 1962.
Another flaw of his statements is that this is a was based on deception. "All warfare is based on deception.""-General Sun Tzu " This critic should really do some research on war before he ASSUMES things about war! Then he references to a qoute from someone during the Veitnam war, which that war had 58,168+ deaths, and Iraq has had less than 3000 deaths, big difference there!
Of course, the commander in chief is not to be outdone. He is, among his other duties, the commander of war lies. And so, as with George W. Bush today, Lyndon Johnson professed to be grandly optimistic when he proclaimed in early 1967: "Peace is more within our reach than at any time in this century."
When angry, disown your own party! Good strategy! Lyndon B Johnson-D From his Biography:
The other crisis arose from Viet Nam. Despite Johnson's efforts to end Communist aggression and achieve a settlement, fighting continued. Controversy over the war had become acute by the end of March 1968, when he limited the bombing of North Viet Nam in order to initiate negotiations. At the same time, he startled the world by withdrawing as a candidate for re-election so that he might devote his full efforts, unimpeded by politics, to the quest for peace.
Yes they share a same goal, but not the goal the critic is whining about!
Fifteen months ago, at a turning point when resistance to the occupation erupted with fury in a number of Iraqi cities, the response from American officials was to put happy-face stickers on the carnage. "We have isolated pockets where we are encountering problems," said Dan Senor, a spokesperson for the top U.S. manipulator in Iraq, Paul Bremer. A week later, on April 13, 2004, President Bush declared: "It's not a popular uprising. Most of Iraq is relatively stable."
Well why don't we read this crititcs book on "War made Easy" since that is what this person seems to think war is.
These kinds of statements may seem like mere pep talks or, in retrospect, miscalculations. But they're integral to the war-making process – continually speaking of light that's just over the horizon, while corpses pile up in grisly shadows alongside the lies that keep a war going on top of the lies that got it started.
Spin some more. He seems to think war is like clockwork, and its predictable, but he doesnt know what he is even talking about. He lost his focus a paragraph ago!
On Tuesday night, host Jim Lehrer asked Gen. Myers: "Do you consider Iraq a success from your point of view?" The general replied: "I do now, I do. I mean I don't know why I said now. I do, absolutely; I think it's a success." A couple of minutes later he was exuding confidence about the future: "It's going to be a difficult fight, but we're going to be successful in this fight."
So in order for the war to be a success it should be easy! WTF is this writer thinking? What logic could this :tocktock2 possibly posses!
Washington's warriors insist that Iraq is not Vietnam. Any geographer would certainly agree. But imperial wars share similar characteristics – including the profound fact that the people who live in a country are more committed to it than the invaders are. This war can't be won for reasons that have everything to do with why it's wrong. The occupiers are on the lowest moral round. No amount of fake optimism in Washington can change such realities in Iraq.
Hmm, I wonder why Iraq is not like Vietnam, maybe because Vietnam had oh 55,000+ more deaths! There there, don't be throwing words around "Why its wrong" when you couldn't even count Vietnam American deaths compared to Iraq! I mean you did not state how many died in Vietnam just stated public statements? Always a good Dodger calling themselves Hero's these days!

I would just like you robinto know that none of these comments were targeted to you! Just your source! My Appologies! :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom