"Prepare the Noose"....Greenwald presents two "traitors."

[madfloridian]

Strange for these two to be agreeing at all.

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/02/prepare-noose-for-bill-buckley.html

Howard Dean, December 5, 2005

Saying the "idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong," Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean predicted today that the Democratic Party will come together on a proposal to withdraw National Guard and Reserve troops immediately, and all US forces within two years. . . .

"I've seen this before in my life. This is the same situation we had in Vietnam. Everybody then kept saying, 'just another year, just stay the course, we'll have a victory.' Well, we didn't have a victory, and this policy cost the lives of an additional 25,000 troops because we were too stubborn to recognize what was happening."

William F. Buckley, Jr. in The National Review, yesterday


One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed. . . .

Our mission has failed because Iraqi animosities have proved uncontainable by an invading army of 130,000 Americans. . . . .

will certainly face the current development as military leaders are expected to do: They are called upon to acknowledge a tactical setback, but to insist on the survival of strategic policies. Yes, but within their own counsels, different plans have to be made. And the kernel here is the acknowledgment of defeat. . . .

[madfloridian]

1. One comment there says they will blame the loss on "liberals."

A comment:
"Damn hypocrites.

Right now we're hearing the insurgency is just too strong, but how long do you think it will be before the meme starts circulating that we lost Iraq because of the press and "liberals"?"

[formercia]

2. Yup

Thet will let us make a lot of noise, pull out and say they did it under duress.

[joefree1]

3. The civil war and The Band of Brothers rebuke this

http://www.bandofbrothers2006.org/

Now about that deficit and Global warming.

[spag68]

4. spag68

Not just the liberals but single out bill clinton

[madfloridian]

5. Yes, there must be some Clinton blaming as well.

They are trained to do that.

[Toots]

13. Not just Bill Clinton but the mighty 'Clenis'

Have you ever in your entire life heard a Conservative say they screwed up? :shrug:

[gilpo]

19. Who cares is they blame the "liberals"

At least the troops will be home safe where they belong.

[BurtWorm]

6. Who is this brilliant guy Greenwald?

He's so right on the money.

:toast:

Recommended!

[madfloridian]

7. There are some Buckley threads at a site with initials FR

which I never link to at all. They are sickening. Some do not care about people or lives lost, just spouting words and hating anything that reeks of liberal.

How long did it take to get us to this point? Was it Gingrich who targeted the word liberal? They are calling Buckley a liberal and a whole lot more.

[Hardrada]

8. They don't like Bill B. because he can write

very intelligently and argue well too. It is just his premises that are all fucked up.

[blm]

9. Kerry and Murtha said the same last fall - MILITARY VICTORY is no longer

possible, and only political success can be had IF Bush would start drawing down troops significantly and declare no PERMANENT BASES for the US.

[madfloridian]

10. "stampeded over the hill" another comment on Greenwald's post.

She is right. It will take many years.

From a lady named Mary Robinson:
"Sometime in the future, perhaps not for many years, historians will once again read what was written by those who opposed Iraq and Bush's preemptive war doctrine and see it objectively for what it was. Much of what was said and written was clear thinking and clear headed. Those who avoided the emotional fervor fueled by revenge for 9/11 could see the folly of the path being pursued - the simplemindedness, the unrealistic nature of it.

We are like a herd that was being stampeded over the hill - to a valley of danger. At first, a few in the herd see the danger - but the herd pushes them forward. We are at a tipping point, most of the herd now realizes that we've made a mistake. Those at the back are still urging us on."

[madfloridian]

11. Glenn's answer to Mary is powerful...he recognizes what we face.

He also recognizes that who said what in leading up to the war will bear on history.....it is far more important than any campaign....

His response to Mary:

Mary - This is so true. I am actually working on a post right now on this topic which will be posted a little later at C&L. If you read Howard Dean's pre-war speeches as to why invading Iraq was so misguided and counter-productive, it is genuinely staggering how prescient he was and how accurate his predictions turned out to be.

Of course, Howard Dean was dismissed and caricatured as some sort of pacifist freak, even though nothing could be further from the truth. He emphatically advocated the need to fight wars when doing so is necessary to defend a country's vital interest, but argued that, for many reasons - all of which turned out to be exactly right - the invasion of Iraq was not in our interest.

But that debate could not even be had, precisely because of the tactics that I describe in this post. To raise questions about the Leader's war made you a traitor and a coward, and that was the end of that.

It is worth remembering who was right about their predictions concerning the war - and who was very, very wrong about pretty much everything - not because it's the time for recriminations or because of the satisfaction that comes from some sort of "I-told-you-so" moment, but because we are in a very serious and troublesome situation there still and the country has to decide whose judgment it trust from this point forward.

Glenn Greenwald is very right in recognizing this is not about being liberal...it is about trying to have the debate. And we couldn't, and we didn't...the rest is history.

[madfloridian]

12. Glenn's new post is now up at Crooks and Liars.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/stories/2006/02/25/whoseJudgmentOnTheIraqWarIsEntitledToRespect.html

Whose judgment on the Iraq War is entitled to respect?

"It is becoming increasingly apparent even to loyal Bush followers that our occupation in Iraq has turned into a full-blown, irreversible disaster. Conservative hero William Buckley, writing in the pages of National Review yesterday, emphatically proclaimed American defeat in that war.

The United States has a tragic and disastrous situation on its hands, and there are no good choices. Having invaded the country, shattered its infrastructure, removed its government and promised to stay until the country was re-built, stabilized, and democratic, there is something self-evidently unseemly and extremely irresponsible about simply leaving the mess in the Iraqi’s lap by withdrawing our military presence the minute it looks as though a civil was is about to break out.

But, as Jack Murtha pointed out (months before Buckley did so), there is no point in staying if our military occupation is not improving the situation, let alone if it is making the situation worse (an observation which caused Murtha to be promptly accused by the White House of wanting to "surrender to the terrorists").

During the build-up to the war in 2002 and early 2003, most prominent Democrats were bullied and intimidated into supporting the invasion of Iraq by a combination of Bush’s sky-high popularity and accusations of subversiveness which were launched at anyone who opposed the Leader’s war. One of the few nationally prominent Democrats to emphatically oppose the war was Howard Dean, and it is truly staggering just how right he was in virtually every statement he made about the war."

He then links and refers to Dean's foreign policy speech in Feb. 2003.

Glenn Greenwald in both posts refers to something we never allowed ourselves to have...out of fear of ridicule most likely....it was a debate. He is reminding us how little debate there was before we attacked a sovereign country for no reason.

[blm]

14. You could go even further back and see others opposed the war.

even those who supported IWR still opposed the CHOICE to go to war before the guidelines were administered properly.

Greenwald does make a mistake to equate the IWR as a vote for war. The IWR was no more a vote for war than the Biden-Lugar version was a vote for war. Both would have PREVENTED war if administered by any other president, even Reagan.

Had Biden-Lugar version passed, what would Greenwald be saying differently? He'd be saying that though Kerry and Dean supported IWR (B-L version) they both said Bush rushed to war without letting the inspectors give the feedback proving military action was unnecessary.

But for the grace of a media ignorant of his support for Biden-Lugar goes Dean. That is the truth that cannot be spun.

[madfloridian]

15. No, I am tired of hearing the excuses on that vote.

I am sorry, but that is how I feel right now. Dean's own party said he was unelectable because of his opposition.

[blm]

16. Did they say he was electable BEFORE his opposition? Did they change?

You know darn well that he supported Biden-Lugar version of the IWR and had it passed, Dean would've been lumped in with the IWR supporters and when he tried to explain that he could be for the resolution and AGAINST the CHOICE to go to war, he would be called a flip-flopper.

Because NO ONE WANTS to listen to FACTS when the mediaspin is in.

I tire of lies and mediaspin. I hope you see the point. But for the grace of a media that ignored his support for Biden-Lugar goes Dean.

[madfloridian]

17. I am also tired of the spin.

This is just like 04, blm...all the crap about Dean being for the war. I have heard the B&L stuff enough as well. I have all the quotes, his exact words.

The ones who voted for the resolution knew exactly what they were doing. The denial makes a lot of us angrier than we would be if they would just be honest.

We are in Iraq because our Democrats helped Bush get there. They did not speak out and allow a dialogue. They ignored us when we called. I know because I called senate and presidential campaigns daily before the vote.

I also called them on the day the bombing started. I remember not getting answers from any offices but Edwards. His aide said of course he did not like the bombing and the deaths...I said but that is what war is about.

They knew what they were doing.

[blm]

18. Not the point, is it, mf? Point is that Dean wasn't FOR war. Biden-Lugar

wasn't FOR war. IWR wasn't FOR war.

Biden-Lugar would have prevented war if administered honestly and IWR would have prevented war if administered honestly.

The spin if Biden-Lugar had passed would be that Dean was FOR war just as the spin that anyone who supported IWR was FOR war.

It's so simple and yet people still won't admit it. Greenwald and other supposed "journalists" should dare to be COMPLETELY HONEST.

But for the grace of the media ignoring his support for Biden-Lugar goes Dean.

[madfloridian]

20. You keep telling yourself that, and someday you will believe it.

I was a good Democrat. I supported Kerry, my husband and our daughter donated a hell of a lot and campaigned for him here. He is a good man.

Edwards is a good man. A lot of them who voted for the resolution are good men. You are misrepresenting Dean's view, and that is not honest of you.

The ones who voted for the war knew that Bush could not be trusted. He took office early 2001, and the vote for war came in October 2002....so don't piss on my leg and tell me its raining. That is about 2 years into his incompetent presidency.

They knew what they were doing. They are good men, but that vote was wrong.

[blm]

21. Then supporting Biden-Lugar was wrong, too, by that analysis.

Don't you GET IT? Come on. You can't SAY HONESTLY that one version was right and the other wrong because neither version made Bush more honest than the other.

In fact, mf, you won't even address that point, at all. It's as if you have no realization what would have happened had Biden-Lugar passed.

[madfloridian]

22. I have privately asked some of you to stop acting like I am not bright.

I tried to handle it personally, but it does not work that way either.

So please don't talk to me like I don't know what you are talking about.

I have files on just about everything. I see no reason to go there now. Dean was obviously against the Iraq invasion. Kerry obviously knew what would happen if Bush were given that authority. He may not have actually wanted it to happen, but it did.

So let's drop it.

[blm]

23. It's not a matter of brightness. It's WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN SAID about Dean

had Biden-Lugar passed. Dean AND Kerry were against the invasion. So were others who supported the IWR. They wanted Bush to follow the guidelines and let the weapons inspectors work - JUST LIKE in the Biden-Lugar bill.

Your files tell you that Dean supported Biden-Lugar version of the IWR.

Had it passed, your files would be telling you that Dean supported a resolution that Bush violated when he invaded Iraq - just like Kerry supported a resolution that Bush violated when he invaded Iraq.

And THAT is the bottom line that you ignore.

[madfloridian]

24. That would have been no worse than what was said anyway.

Like he forfeited the right to be president..that from Bill Clinton because he signed the civil unions bill.

Or that he lived in a spider hole of denial....that from Joe Lieberman.

Or that he was not fit to be president because he said we were no safer with Saddam captured...that from John Kerry.

So there was so much said that a little more would not have mattered. And this was just his own party, my friend.

[blm]

25. do you even KNOW half the crap Dean slung at Kerry that wasn't true?

Dean started saying that Kerry never accomplished much in the Senate - completely ignoring that Kerry uncovered more government corruption than any other lawmaker in modern history. Dean SPUN his legislative work KNOWING that Jr. Senators rarely get their names on bills.

But, hey, that's hardball politics and Dean was just as hard as anyone, right?

Or that Dean claimed Kerry and the others supported Bush's taxcuts for the rich when ALL of them voted against them? Dean SPUN a vote where Dems voted for a Dem version of the bill to get middle class taxcuts added if a tax bill was going to go through. But, they all voted against Bush's taxcut.

but, hey, that's hardball politics and Dean was just as hard as anyone, right?