Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Catherina

(35,568 posts)
Thu Mar 27, 2014, 03:11 PM Mar 2014

Anger, Disbelief as Obama Defends US Invasion of Iraq

Anger, Disbelief as Obama Defends US Invasion of Iraq
'In order to not appear hypocritical, Obama rewrites history around Iraq War while denouncing Russia'
- Jon Queally, staff writer

Wednesday, March 26, 2014


President Barack Obama delivers a speech Palais des Beaux-Arts (BOZAR) in Brussels. (Reuters)


President Obama is on the receiving end of scorn for remarks made during a high-profile speech in Brussels on Wednesday in which he defended the U.S. invasion of Iraq in an attempt to chastise Russia for recent developments in Crimea and Ukraine.

Speaking to the international community about the ongoing crisis in Ukraine and fending off repeated accusations that the U.S. has lost its moral authority given the invasion of Iraq and other breaches of international law in recent years, Obama said:

Russia has pointed to America’s decision to go into Iraq as an example of Western hypocrisy. Now, it is true that the Iraq war was a subject of vigorous debate, not just around the world but in the United States, as well. I participated in that debate, and I opposed our military intervention there.

But even in Iraq, America sought to work within the international system. We did not claim or annex Iraq’s territory. We did not grab its resources for our own gain. Instead, we ended our war and left Iraq to its people in a fully sovereign Iraqi state that can make decisions about its own future.

But instead of tamping down accusations of hypocrisy, Obama inflamed it.

Responding to the speech on FireDogLake, DSWright shot back: "Worked within the international system? So if Russia had gone to the UN to get a resolution, failed, then annexed Crimea it would have been OK?"

Reaction on Twitter was swift—and among those with a seemingly better memory of the devastation caused by the U.S. invasion of Iraq than the president—fierce:

tony_hartin @tony_hartin

#Obama says "invasion" of #Crimea worse than invasion of #Iraq. 1 million people died in Iraq due to US. How many died in Crimea? #Ukraine
2:33 PM - 26 Mar 2014

Magpie V @i_magpie

"#Obama: #Iraq invasion wasn't as bad as #Russia of #Ukraine as US didn't take territory" just destroyed it & killed & displaced millions.
12:36 PM - 26 Mar 2014

Kevin Gosztola @kgosztola

In order to not appear hypocritical, Obama rewrites history around Iraq War while denouncing Russia http://fdl.me/1o1J8Yb
12:56 PM - 26 Mar 2014


Ross Caputi and Matt Howard, members of the Iraq Veterans Against the War, spoke with Common Dreams by phone and said that President Obama's argument was both weak factually and morally. As it happens, both IVAW members were together in Washington, DC on Wednesday, organizing an evening event focused on the devastating impacts of the Iraq War—both for veterans like themselves and the Iraqi civilian population—when they heard news about what the president had said.

"What President Obama said is false," said Caputi. "The U.S. did not attempt to work within the international system. We acted unilaterally, without the approval of the UN Security Council."

Howard said the president's narrative on the events that led up to the Iraq invasion, inside or outside the context of Ukraine, was simply "not grounded in reality."

"We went from one lie, which was weapons of mass destruction, to another lie which was liberation and freedom," said Howard. Citing the devastation cited by Iraqi civil society allies, especially women in the country, he continued, "This idea that Iraq is somehow better off or that the U.S. waged a so-called 'Good War' is ridiculous."

In addition, argued Caputi, the U.S. did make very real and successful attempts to gain access to Iraqi resources, namely through the writing of the new Iraqi Constitution and aspects of the so-called "Bremer Orders," referring to Paul Bremer who was the U.S.-appointed Administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority of Iraq during the aftermath of the 2003 invasion. Those efforts "privatived Iraq's formally nationalized energy resources," paving the way for foreign oil companies, including those from U.S., to gain coveted access to Iraq oil and gas fields.

The Huffington Post's Ryan Grim also made note of this false assertion by Obama regarding Iraqi "resources," writing:

In fact, the U.S. forced Iraq to privatize its oil industry, which had previously been under the control of the state, and further required that it accept foreign ownership of the industry. The effort to transfer the resources to the control of multinational, largely U.S.-based oil companies has been hampered in part by the decade of violence unleashed by the invasion.

Obama's assertion also hinges on how broadly one construes the word "our." Taxpayers on the one hand are worse off, as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have added $2 trillion to the national debt, according to one study. But contractors reaped tremendous gains, and Halliburton -- a company often associated with the invasion, of which former Vice President Dick Cheney served as CEO -- saw its stock price surge from under $10 a share to over $50, before falling along with the rest of the market in 2008. (It has since recovered.)

________________________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/03/26-7
20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Anger, Disbelief as Obama Defends US Invasion of Iraq (Original Post) Catherina Mar 2014 OP
DISBELIEF is appropriate. elleng Mar 2014 #1
Once again the far left looks for an excuse to attack Obama 4now Mar 2014 #2
Oh, please . . . markpkessinger Mar 2014 #7
Nonsense. yardwork Mar 2014 #9
Bush didn't quite accomplish oil privatization, but not for lack of trying with bipartisan support yurbud Mar 2014 #3
To use a legal term, what President Obama did was to distinguish the Iraq war from Crimea Gothmog Mar 2014 #4
He "ineffectually" distinguished. go west young man Mar 2014 #8
I listened President Obama's comments on my car radio when he made the speech Gothmog Mar 2014 #10
From the Russian's perspective.. go west young man Mar 2014 #13
Russia has 50,000 to 100,000 troops on the eastern border of Ukraine Gothmog Mar 2014 #17
Russia has always had most of their armed forces in the Eastern Steppe go west young man Mar 2014 #19
That esssentially legalistc quibble pscot Mar 2014 #15
You are wrong Gothmog Mar 2014 #16
Yeah, it's okay to invade if you're an American Demeter Mar 2014 #12
When's all that "Change!" scheduled to begin?!?! blkmusclmachine Mar 2014 #5
The tone went from Hope to Audacity. Maybe Change is next? n/t Catherina Mar 2014 #6
Who are you going to believe, Obama or your lying eyes? Demeter Mar 2014 #11
du rec. xchrom Mar 2014 #14
Russia has 50,000 to 100,000 troops on the eastern border of Ukraine Gothmog Mar 2014 #18
They have always had a lot more than that in the region. go west young man Mar 2014 #20

4now

(1,596 posts)
2. Once again the far left looks for an excuse to attack Obama
Thu Mar 27, 2014, 03:51 PM
Mar 2014

and they are just getting more desperate.

yurbud

(39,405 posts)
3. Bush didn't quite accomplish oil privatization, but not for lack of trying with bipartisan support
Thu Mar 27, 2014, 07:46 PM
Mar 2014

of Congress.

Gothmog

(143,998 posts)
4. To use a legal term, what President Obama did was to distinguish the Iraq war from Crimea
Thu Mar 27, 2014, 08:12 PM
Mar 2014

Remember that President Obama is a lawyer and a law professor. What President Obama did in his speech was to distinguish the Iraq war from the situation in Crimea. Here is a simplified explanation of this concept. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/distinguish

Distinguish
To set apart as being separate or different; to point out an essential disparity.

To distinguish one case from another case means to show the dissimilarities between the two. It means to prove a case that is cited as applicable to the case currently in dispute is really inapplicable because the two cases are different.

The Iraq war is a very different situation compared to the conduct of Russia in annexing Crimea. In his speech, President Obama did not defend the Iraq war but merely explained why the Iraq war was not relevant to the conduct of Russia in annexing Crimea.

As a lawyer, there is a huge difference here.

Gothmog

(143,998 posts)
10. I listened President Obama's comments on my car radio when he made the speech
Fri Mar 28, 2014, 01:44 PM
Mar 2014

I admit that I am a lawyer but I did not hear a defense of the Iraq war but the normal response of a lawyer (remember President Obama is a lawyer and a law professor) who distinguished the Iraq war from the actions of Russia in Crimea. President Obama's comments were not a defense of the Iraq war and I am really confused by the comments who believe that President Obama was defending the Iraq war.

Words have meanings and the words used by President Obama did not constitute a defense of the war in Iraq.

 

go west young man

(4,856 posts)
13. From the Russian's perspective..
Fri Mar 28, 2014, 02:07 PM
Mar 2014

it was a telling moment. In the States we may not see it so but they surely do.

Gothmog

(143,998 posts)
17. Russia has 50,000 to 100,000 troops on the eastern border of Ukraine
Fri Mar 28, 2014, 05:32 PM
Mar 2014

The purpose of President Obama's speech was to build unity among the US and its European allies on this issue. I personally think that the speech was successful as to that goal

 

go west young man

(4,856 posts)
19. Russia has always had most of their armed forces in the Eastern Steppe
Fri Mar 28, 2014, 06:24 PM
Mar 2014

less than two hours from the Ukrainian border...that is old reality....not new. Here's their take on Obama's claim. http://rt.com/news/russia-ukraine-troops-obama-945/ Looks like someone is making stuff up. Funny that Russia has allowed in 4 inspectors from different countries and is allowing the US and Germany to fly over to verify but no photos have been provided from Western leaders. You'd figured with all the surveillance going on that someone could at least get a photo.

pscot

(21,023 posts)
15. That esssentially legalistc quibble
Fri Mar 28, 2014, 02:50 PM
Mar 2014

invites comparison of other less flattering detaisl and suggests a moral superiority that doesn't pass the laugh test. It was at best inept.

Gothmog

(143,998 posts)
16. You are wrong
Fri Mar 28, 2014, 04:07 PM
Mar 2014

Facts matter and the facts stated in President Obama's address are correct. President Obama presented facts that are true even if you disagree with these facts. I personally think that bush, cheney, rice and rumsfeld lied to the American people about the reasons for the war in Iraq but these lies do not change the fact that the Iraq invasion is very different under international law compared to the annexation of Crimea by Russia. The US did work with the UN on this invasion compared to the complete lack of concern by Putin concerning international law. That is a difference.

Look, the actual words of President Obama's address in Belgium are true and the Iraqi invasion is very different under international law compared to the complete annexation of Crimea by Russia. In the legal world, facts and words actually matter. Here the facts are clear and your claims are not correct

Gothmog

(143,998 posts)
18. Russia has 50,000 to 100,000 troops on the eastern border of Ukraine
Fri Mar 28, 2014, 05:37 PM
Mar 2014

The purpose of this speech was not to make people who hate the Iraq war happy but to refute Putin's arguments concerning the annexation of Crimea and to hopefully build support among our European allies to deter Putin from invading and taking the eastern portion of Ukraine.

President Obama refuted Putin's arguments and our European allies seem to be united. Hopefully, Putin will not use his 50,000 to 100,000 troops to take the eastern portion of Ukraine.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Anger, Disbelief as Obama...