In a desperate attempt to get Osama Bin Laden before election day, the Bush administration is abandoning its previous agreement to honor Pakistan's territorial integrity and is conducting cross-border raids into Pakistan.

They are also flying missile-equipped drones high above Pakistan and taking potshots at any gathering, apparently using a shotgun approach, regardless of the collateral damage. The rationale is that a few hundred dead women and children is a small price to pay for hanging onto the White House.

In the past few weeks, dozens, if not hundreds of Pakistani and Afghani civilians have been slaughtered in this shoot-first, sort 'em out later approach.

The leadership of both nations has expressed dismay and outrage at these attacks, which smack of terrorism in that civilian casualties are apparently acceptable.

If this pattern of attacking without substantial intelligence happens to succeed in taking out bin Laden, Bush/Cheny/MaCain/Palin will trumpet their success as terrorist hunters.

What about the innocent people who are being killed for the sake of Republican politics?

These people have no shame. How are they better than the enemy they hunt?

Sitting not before a jury of his peers, but the same six U.S. military jurists that had acquitted him of conspiracy to commit terrorism, but found him guilty of providing material support by driving a car for Bin Laden, Salim Hamdan was sentenced to 5 1/2 years. The prosecution, also military, had asked for life - with good reason. When Hamdan's sentence is up in a few months, what are they going to do with him?

Hamdan will almost certainly live out his life behind the razor wire at Guantanamo. Military commission officials have argued they have the ability to hold "enemy combatants" indefinitely, until the end of hostilities in the so-called war on terror. We have been told that the war on terror is expected to last forever.

Hamdan's trial was the first test of a war crimes tribunal authorized by the Bush administration to try non-U.S. captives on terrorism charges outside the regular military and civilian courts. This system is the latest attempt by the administration to bring this totally bogus system into any semblance of legality. Very likely, it will not hold up.

Under the system, defendants have no opportunity to confront their accusers, or even see all of the evidence against them. And, conveniently for the prosecution, confessions obtained under duress are allowed as evidence. Of course, the judge and the jury are all military, on the same team as the prosecutors.

The fact that the military jury "went easy" on Hamdan shows what a ridiculously weak case this was, and perhaps reflects a deep dissatisfaction for the process within the military. Several JAGs have condemned it as a legal sham.

This whole mess will certianly be remembered as one of the more rotten chapters in the shameful "war on terror". "Guantanamo", along with "Abu Greabe", and of course, the "black" prisons are a stain on the history of the Untied States that will not be easily removed.

We need to reverse course on the Bush/Cheney war on human rights.

A new Rand Corporation study concludes that the Bush administration's "war on terror" was essentially ill-conceived and wholly ineffective at preventing terrorist violence. In fact, it has been counterproductive and the study urges a "fundamental rethinking" of counterterrorism strategy.

Guess what. Many of us have been saying this since before the phony "war on terror" was declared.

The Rand corporation is no left-wing think-tank, nor does it have any affiliation with the Democratic Party. Rand was set up in 1946 by the United States Army Air Forces as Project RAND. In fact, RAND has been criticized as militarist.

I think it is worth quoting a few lines from the report, otherwise I might be accused of exaggerating or distorting the degree to which this report disparages the Bush/Cheney/McCain approach to fighting religious extremism with military force.

Here is a report on what the Rand study says:

The current strategy for defeating al Qaeda has not been successful in diminishing the group's capabilities and is unlikely to do better without a shift in emphasis, the Rand Corp. study concludes.

Since 2001, al Qaeda has conducted a greater number of attacks across a larger geographic area than at any time in its history. "We find it hard to agree that al Qaeda has been significantly weakened since Sept. 11, 2001," says Seth Jones, coauthor with Martin Libicki of the report titled "How Terrorist Groups End: Lessons for Countering al Qaeda."

The authors evaluate al Qaeda since 2001 as being both "strong" and "competent."

What's needed, the report suggests, is a "fundamental rethinking of U.S. strategy" to focus on minimizing overt military action and increasing intelligence collection and partnerships with law enforcement agencies around the world.

The report couldn't have been clearer in its refutation of one of the central tenants of the Bush administration's strategy against al Qaeda: the characterization of the conflict as a "global war".

For one thing, they point out, a major American military role sets the stage for a backlash. "The U.S. military can play a critical role in building indigenous capacity but should generally resist being drawn into combat operations in Muslim countries, where its presence is likely to increase terrorist recruitment," Jones and Libicki wrote." (emphasis mine)

Bush/Cheney/McCain were/are dead wrong. And many are dead because of them.

We need a new approach to neutralizing Muslim fundamentalism.

The "war on terror" is now over and we lost.

Let's now try to understand and to diffuse the antagonism towards the United States that it has bred.

Let's demonstrate by example the tolerance and freedom that were the hallmarks of this country until the past few years.

 

Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama, currently in Afghanistan as part of a tour of Europe and the Middle East, is working hard to separate himself from the Bush/McCain war policies, and at the same time demonstrate that he can muster some enthusiasm for those same policies.

Obviously, he is trying to inoculate himself from charges by the right that he is not tough enough on our enemies. He has to make aggressive noises and strike warrior poses, mimicking the brainless militarism of Bush/McCain, or risk being called weak.

It is tragic that this is necessary. Obama's resistance to the invasion of Iraq was, of course, a huge factor in his early support by grassroots Democrats. But apparently this country, post 9-11, is not ready for an anti-war candidate.

The utter futility of fighting a "war on terror" should be obvious by now. Of course, there never were any "terrorists" in Iraq, other than the ruling junta. Still, it is considered the front line in this "war".

After a million deaths in Iraq, and 5-6 million Iraqis displaced, the depletion of America's military forces, and the resulting ravages on the value of the dollar and unimaginable increases in oil prices, the Iraqi people live in a fiercely sectarian society with rampant lawlessness and without electricity. While there are hopeful signs that sectarian self-segregation will keep violence down, there is precious little evidence that a liberal, secular, self-standing society will emerge anytime soon. There are major issues that are hopelessly deadlocked in sectarian positions, and the nation of Iraq could still degenerate into civil war if someone (say Al-Queda) were to actively foment more sectarian violence by perpetrating atrocities on civilian targets.

One thing is certain. The Iraqis want us out. I take this as a positive sign, but doubt that our "investment" in Iraqi oil will allow this, regardless of who is our next president.

Obama is calling for additional troops in Afghanistan to highlight the difference between himself and Bush/McCain, claiming that they lost focus on the real front in the "war on terror". This is pandering, pure and simple. The very last thing that Afghanistan needs is more American/NATO troops creating resentment in the population and acting as bait for terrorist attacks, which inevitably kill more Afghanis than soldiers.

Must we repeat the same damn war all over again? Do we expect any different result?

What both Iraq and Afghanistan need is international help in creating a functional infrastructure including water systems, highways, electrical grid, health care and schools. The money we have wasted on a military campaign could have paid for these things, easily.

It is very disappointing to see Obama pick up the sabre, but I sincerely hope that he is merely posing for the camera, and will begin to turn American foreign policy in a more humanitarian direction if he is elected.

In the last two days, George Bush has, by his own definition, surrendered on two fronts in his “War on Terror”.

When Bush spoke before the Israeli Knesset a few weeks ago, he compared Barack Obama’s call for unconditional talks with Iran to Nazi appeasers:

"Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along," said Bush.

"We have heard this foolish delusion before," Bush said. "As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American Senator declared: 'Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is -- the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

After Iran fired several medium and long-range missiles in a show of its willingness and ability to return force if attacked, Bush caved. Now, we will sit down and talk.

Until the missile launch, the administration had insisted it would not speak with the Iranians until they ended their nuclear enrichment program. Iran has made no such commitment, in fact has been vehement in its refusal to do so.

Today, Bush has agreed in principle with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, to set a “time horizon” for the withdrawal of American troops, because the Iraqis want their country back.

When Obama or others have called for such a timeline, they were labeled as surrender monkeys. John McCain, up until today was ridiculing Obama for suggesting such an approach.

What it amounts to is that Bush and McCain have no clue what to do now that American military forces, by their heroic efforts, have exposed the fact that the “War on Terror” is unwinnable.

After the slaughter of as many as a million Iraqis and more than 4,000 Americans, the forces of fundamentalist Islam are stronger than they were on 9/11. After our invasion, they came to Iraq, tied down the greatest military in the history of the world, and then snuck out the back door.

They are now re-taking Afghanistan, and when we “surge” there, they will go somewhere else, perhaps even back to Iraq.

They will never be defeated by force. Barrack Obama knows this.

John McCain wants to keep on fighting, slaughtering innocent civilians, glorifying the extremists and wasting U.S. lives and dollars.

It is time to admit that the “War on Terror” was nothing more than a cover for *** Cheney to deface the Constitution, and to hold the members of this administration accountable for their crimes.

 

 

It’s the Fourth of July! Hooray! We’ve won the War on Iraq! Big Oil is moving in to pump more oil our way. Mission Accomplished! Light up those fireworks!

So maybe things are not going so well in Afghanistan, with violence up, the Taliban running the country outside of Kabul, and even the neocons afraid of accidentally toppling Musharraf by venturing into Pakistan to get Bin Laden.

Get ready for this Summer’s blockbuster! The War on Iran is showing trailers on TV screens nationwide. You’ve seen it! Now buy it!

(Why wouldn’t we attack Iran? What, do we have to wait for the Israelis to do it?)

OK, this time it's REALLY not about oil (they don't have any.) This is about… saving you from nuclear attack!

They hate us because we’re free!

Oh hell, believe whatever you want, but we ARE going to fight. In fact, it's already happening.

All of you big-time supporters of the War on Iraq, please prepare your eligible sons and daughters to attempt what a million Iraqis and Saddam’s WMDs couldn’t do.

And this is going to hurt a bit, but in the spirit of making the world safe for democracy, get ready for a little bit more expensive gasoline.

But do NOT worry about increases in your taxes! We’ll pay for this war the same way we’re paying for the other ones. Saudi Arabia has agreed to loan us the cash at a very reasonable rate.

Providing you vote Republican.

Americans appetite for war has been satisfied, and the media is reacting by turning down their war coverage.

The vicarious rush of "shock and awe" passed quickly, the euphoria of "Mission Accomplished" gave way to the nightmare of the insurgency, Saddam's capture was exhilarating, but his execution was sickening, the whole yellow ribbon magnet thing played out to the point that there are magnets for favorite dog breeds, and even the critical analysis about how Bush got us into this mess has gone way past tedious to being annoying. I mean really, who cares any more?

Frankly, no one wants to hear about the wars, let alone talk about them. Want to kill a conversation? Try mentioning a war.

It seems that the only people who keep harping on the wars are those of us who want to shut them down and the military families whose members are still fighting.

Network media coverage is fading quickly. CBS doesn't have a single correspondent in Iraq. None of the the American television networks has a full-time correspondent in Afghanistan.

Americans are generally not in a good mood, with a recent poll showing that somewhere over 80% feel like things are "on the wrong track" in this country. This is serious depression, and it's easy to see plenty of reasons.

But that does not give us the right to ignore the real sacrifices still being made by American soldiers and the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. Nor should we be so foolhardy as to look the other way while the war profiteers continue to take out sub-prime mortgages on the American economy. Every dollar we borrow to pay for this war drives down the value of that dollar, and increases the interest we will have to pay back.

If the U.S. were a person, we would be taking "payday" loans to pay our maxed-out credit cards.

These insane wars need to stop now. Sorry to bring it up and spoil your morning.

I can't even comment on this.

"An eight-month McClatchy investigation of the detention system created after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks has found that the U.S. imprisoned innocent men, subjected them to abuse, stripped them of their legal rights and allowed Islamic militants to turn the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba into a school for jihad."

"The public outcry in the United States and abroad has focused on detainee abuse at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, but sadistic violence first appeared at Bagram, north of Kabul, and at a similar U.S. internment camp at Kandahar Airfield in southern Afghanistan."

U.S. abuse of detainees was routine at Afghanistan bases

Personally, I am excited about the holiday weekend, as I will be visiting some good friends in Indianapolis and attending the Indy 500 for the first time. (Go Danica!)

 

But I will miss being with Doc and going to the cemetery, like we usually do. I have learned from Doc that Memorial Day is not about glorifying the military or celebrating victory in war, but taking the time to remember, and visit the graves, of all those who have completed their life’s journey, and who made ours possible.

 

Grandma and Grandpa, Aunt Myrtle, Aunt Mae, Aunt Blanche, and “Peewee”, who died as a teenager from a disease not even considered serious now. Aunt Mamie and Uncle Charlie, and even Uncle Henry, who was such a pain when he was alive. And of course, Mom and Dad, and Helen.

 

People who worked their fields, built our machines, raised their kids and, yes, fought in wars, or took over the factories while the men were gone.

 

Two years ago, my wife and I, along with Aunt Mae and a small group of younger relatives, had the honor of taking Doc to Washington D.C. to see the new World War II Memorial. He had been sending in small donations for years to build this monument, and said more than once that he was afraid he would die before they got it finished.

 

Doc wasn’t contributing to build a monument to himself.

 

Like any veteran I’ve ever met; he talked about his service in terms of “the guys” he served with. He could remember names and hometowns and idiosyncrasies about these people as if he had talked to them yesterday, rather than 60-some years ago. When he spoke of them he would smile and laugh, and it was obvious to me that the pleasure he remembered was genuine, but that it was covering other emotions that he did not want to feel.

 

As we approached the Memorial, he began remembering how they died.

 

Survivor’s guilt and a flood of pure sorrow overtook Doc. He had to sit down. He actually became speechless. He tried, but no words would come.

 

 

I was in McDonalds today. (Believe it or not, I had just come from Wal-Mart.)

I will readily admit, as I am already considered by some readers to be anti-American, that I do my best to avoid both of these corporations. Sometimes you do what is convenient.

I took my tray from the counter and looked for a table where I could see the TV. Normally, I resent the TVs hanging all over restaurants, but when you are dining alone…

I sat down, and focused on the set. Bush was speaking to one of his small, handpicked audiences.

He was pandering to a score or so of Cuban immigrants. The TV was on closed caption mode, and Bush was, typically without any sense of irony, condemning the Cuban regime for spying on its citizens, and for seizing and torturing people for political purposes.

As I grew unable to watch, my attention shifted to three people seated across from me. The gentleman directly in my line of sight appeared to be in his mid-thirties, and his companions probably twice his age.

By their body language and their mannerisms, I guessed they were his parents.

The younger man glanced at the television image of Bush, and then back to his sandwich. He looked at the man I assumed to be his father.

“If I had fought a battle the way that that man fought a war,” he said without emotion, “I’d be dead.”

His parents chewed in silence.

“You go into a battle with objectives. You have milestones. For getting in, and getting out.”

I looked more closely at the younger man and he was wearing a black baseball cap that was heavily embroidered. “Combat Veteran”. There were some bars with multicolored stripes below those words.

And below the bars was another word; “Afghanistan”.

With a matter of fact tone, the man continued, “People say his father was wrong to stop at the border. They say he should have gone into Baghdad and taken out Sadaam. He was right. That wasn’t his objective.”

“And he was smart enough to know what would happen.”

The three fell into silence as they finished their meal.

I had finished mine a while ago. I got up and dumped my trash.

American needs to do the same.

 

News flash for John McCain:

The Pentagon’s own National Institute for Strategic Studies issued a report last fall, prior to the flare-up of the Shia civil war, and released yesterday, and opens the report with the following: "Measured in blood and treasure, the war in Iraq has achieved the status of a major war and a major debacle."

My heart goes out to those families whose loved ones have been killed, injured or are still fighting Bush’s war.

The following are quotes from a McClatchy Newspaper article by Jonathan S. Landay and John Walcot, quoting from the report.

"No one as yet has calculated the costs of long-term veterans' benefits or the total impact on service personnel and materiel," wrote Collins, who was involved in planning post-invasion humanitarian operations.

The report said that the United States has suffered serious political costs, with its standing in the world seriously diminished. Moreover, operations in Iraq have diverted "manpower, materiel and the attention of decision-makers" from "all other efforts in the war on terror" and severely strained the U.S. armed forces.

"Compounding all of these problems, our efforts there (in Iraq) were designed to enhance U.S. national security, but they have become, at least temporarily, an incubator for terrorism and have emboldened Iran to expand its influence throughout the Middle East," the report continued.”

Keep this in mind when John McCain is talking like John Wayne.

 

More good news follows closely on the encouraging signs that the Iraqi government is now fully willing and (somewhat) able to use deadly force against its own citizens!

As you may remember from last week (if you’re still paying attention) the civil war in Iraq got a big shot in the arm when (apparently at *** Cheney’s urging), the Iraqi Prime Minister (“Yes sir, Mr. Vice President! Sir!) Nuri al-Maliki launched a disastrous attack on the Madhi Army of al-Sadr down there in Basra, which quickly spread across Iraq.

One of the hotspots in this intra-Shia conflict is Sadr City  - affectionately referred to as a “massive Shia slum” - on the outskirts of Baghdad. Apparently this home to hundreds of thousands of desperately poor Shiites is within mortar and rocket range of the “massively fortified” Green Zone, from which somebody (evildoers!) rained said projectiles for several days, pinning American residents down and killing several people.

As a gentle reminder of who now runs Iraq, American pilots launched numerous missiles into the residential neighborhoods of Sadr City, regardless of the fact that uninvolved citizens were bound to be killed and maimed. On each of these occasions the military reported, as is their custom, that “X number of insurgents were eliminated” as though everyone killed is, by definition, an insurgent. (It’s the same logic that leads to the conclusion that every one of the tens of thousands of prisoners of the United States in Iraq, Cuba, Afghanistan and elsewhere (only God knows where) around the world is an “unlawful combatant” who has the information that could lead to the saving of thousands of American lives if only we can find just… the… right… interrogation technique to make them spill their guts.) (“Do you have a daughter?”)

Anyway - if you remember, the militia of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq – sorry – the Iraqi Army - rolled into Basra fully confident that their five years of training by the United States would stand them in good stead against the “dead-enders” of the al-Sadr militia, obviously in “the last throes” of resistance. (“They might even throw us flowers!”)

Turns out – not so much.

President Bush, as only he can do, looked at the sunny side of this bloodbath.

"Normalcy," President Bush announced, "is returning back to Iraq." (From where? Hell?)

In praise of al-Maliki, the President said, “His bold decision -- and it was a bold decision – (I love his BOLDness!) to go after the evildoers in Basra shows his leadership."

OK, then. As it went, the Iraqi government, one of our strongest allies in the “war on terror”, had to send emissaries to Tehran (Yes, THAT Tehran) to ask Iran (Yes, THAT Iran - were they in that “Axis of Terror” thing?) to pull their butts out of the fire. Please.

President Bush may or may not have thought that this development was good news. He didn’t say, but we can assume so.

But I am sure that he will be delighted by today’s good news!

Apparently, those Iraqi soldiers and national policeman - (What’s the difference between a soldier and a national policeman?) – the ones who ran away? – And those other ones that took off their uniforms and switched sides in the heat of battle? Well, they got fired today!

That’s right, in yet another sign of the strength and determination of our guys running the so-called Iraqi government; those guys all lost their jobs. “If you’re going fight for THEM, then you don’t get the uniforms! So give ’em back! Right now! (Keep your weapons... it's dangerous out there.")

Oh, and the really, really good news? General Petraeus came to Washington last week, and he and Commander-in-Chief Bush agreed; as of next January, “Bush’s War in Iraq” will have a new name!

We can’t tell you what it is yet, but it will be the very first American war named after a woman or a black man!

 

PS. The Associated Press reports that at least 19 American soldiers died in Iraq last week, the highest weekly death toll of this year. A figure for Iraqi deaths was not available.

 

OK, I’m biased. I hate war. All of them.

I will concede that some wars are more evil than others. The United States, under the administration of George Bush, is responsible for two of the most evil in modern history.

The so-called Global War on Terror is an empty concept, a marketing campaign designed to capitalize on the terror of 9-11 and drive the American people into uniting behind two illegal invasions of sovereign nations by the administration.

The first, the invasion of Afghanistan was a little more than a cover for the invasion of Iraq. Tragic as it is, it’s a sideshow. Look! Over there! It’s Bin Laden!

Bush, Cheney and friends knew that they could overwhelm the Iraqi forces in a matter of hours. Then, they assumed, it would be a matter of some paperwork to set up a puppet government, contract some friends to build a proper petroleum processing infrastructure, and set up the cash registers. And the genius of all this was that the American people would be making the entire investment, paying for everything, AND serving as the target market for the product. Dom Pérignon time.

The brilliant minds of the neocons came up with the marketing plan. Not only could this double-edged thievery be sold as a preemptive deterrent to an Iraqi nuclear attack on the U.S. (Look! Is that a Mushroom Cloud!?), but it could also be pitched as Our Moral Imperative: Bringing Democracy and Enlightenment to the Middle East. God, that sounds great!

The problem with this plan? The damned Iraqis. Turns out, they really resented having their nation invaded, and saw right through the plan to cash out their oil. Who’d have thought they were that smart enough to figure it out? The marketing-savvy Americans bought it right up to their gills.

There’s really only one thing to do now. Come up with a new marketing plan for the fall season.

Any ideas?

 

With the inevitable end of the Bush administration within sight, the relief felt by most Americans is palpable.

 

Tragically, among the debris that will be his legacy to the American people will be the festering wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Fluctuations in the statistics of violence could not be less important to those bleeding out of missing limbs, grieving their dead, or running for their lives. The massive displacements, the dehumanizing violence and the devastating chaos will continue indefinitely, with the real possibility of wider war to come.

 

While some Americans, notably likely Republican presidential nominee John McCain, claim to believe that  "victory" is still an attainable goal, the majority of us wonder if we yet have any idea what that would look like.

 

The idea that military aggression can neutralize religious zealots dispersed around the globe - a "Global War on Terror" - is so obviously counter-productive and inhumane that the shame for our actions will haunt us for generations. We have chosen a road that has led us to rationalize kidnapping, confinement without charges, and torture.

 

Faced with the likely choice between Barack Obama, who represents a clear denunciation of the failed war policies of Bush, and John McCain, the unbowed soldier who offers the false promise of a decisive and redemptive victory - it is entirely possible that Americans will again choose the insanity of war.