3,000 Approaches
The 3,000 Milestone is the my most recent essay on the war. It is written as US troop fatalities in Iraq have passed 2,950, and 3,000 will likely be reached by New Year’s Day or shortly after… before the Democrat-majority Congress is seated on January 20th. I want people to use it as they see fit throughout the alternative media to support and bolster the case for immediate and unilateral withdrawl of all US military forces from Iraq.
The 3,000 Milestone
by Stan Goff
As the grim milestone of the 3,000th American troop death approaches in Iraq, what can we say about the war that hasn’t been said before?
On September 7, 2005, I wrote a lengthy analysis-from-afar on political and military developments in Iraq, called The Danger of Iraqi Partition. On that same day, we were approaching the 2,000 US-dead-in-Iraq milestone, 1,892 to be exact. Just as today, in the United States these figures of US troop deaths garner the attention of the media, that still pretends the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead, wounded, and displaced are a mere footnote.
It reminds one of the old Tarzan novels of Edgar Rice Burroughs, where the entire world exists as a background within which a white European male protagonist can have an adventure about which white males can fantasize. The media in the US is still completely the captive of the White Man’s Burden narrative, even though the term, “White Man,†has now been supplanted by “American.†This is evident in the reflexive valorization of American life over the lives of dark foreigners — which, admittedly, is necessary to sustain circulation and political clout in a culture of national chauvinism. It is also evident in the seeming inability to visualize any “solution†to the whirlwind reaped by US policy in Iraq that does not require the continued employment of US troops to occupy Iraq.
While this milestone will be used — as it should be in my opinion — to mobilize emotional support for the redeployment of US troops back to the United States and the end of the US military occupation of Iraq, I am going to take this opportunity — which it is — to introduce a more clinical account of what is happening with this war. It is fairly obvious now that most Americans want to be rid of this war. In a sense, then, the campaign to build opposition has achieved momentum in a direction that seems unlikely to be reversed. The question that arises now, and the one for which there is little satisfaction in mainstream commercialized or Democratic Party discourse, is what do “we†do? How do “we†get out?
The principal reason there have been no satisfactory answers to that question is that the majority of people rely on professional pundits and news models to acquire the baseline impressions of what is actually happening in Iraq. The account that is being propagated is one that is shallow, simplistic, largely inaccurate, and widely believed by the pundits themselves. They themselves are the captives of their own chauvinist assumptions and of the cosmic vacuums in their heads where the politics of war should be.
In the article cited from September 2005, I wrote:
milosevic:
quote:
Liberals find themselves forced to argue for conclusions that differ from their opposition, but refuse to depart from the opposition’s premises.
The central premise of the Terror War being, of course, the claim that the 9/11 operation was carried out by foreign terrorists from West Asia, rather than those of the purely domestic variety. If that premise ever came to be widely doubted, the New Roman Empire would collapse immediately.
I find it odd that you would reference that Kurt Nimmo article which provides abundant evidence of US covert operations intended at provoking a sectarian civil war, and then deny that that’s what happening by blaming it all on the Badr Brigades, as if their Imperial sponsors didn’t know what they were up to.
What do you think those two SAS goons were doing in Basra, dressed as Arabs, driving around in a car filled with bombs and remote control detonators? Were they just tourists?
It would have been easy for US imperialism to get its secure bases and compliant puppet regime, if those were the only objectives. The population was exhausted by the twelve-year UN starvation blockade, and they weren’t particularly enamoured of the Ba’ath regime. If the US occupation had allowed enough reconstruction that people had access to minimally adequate food, medical care, employment, water, and electricity, they would probably have accepted that as an immense improvement over what they had been subjected to for the previous decade. There was very little resistance activity for several months after the invasion; people were waiting to see what would happen. What they got instead was neoliberal piracy and looting, and a rampage of false-flag terrorism. This must reflect a deliberate policy; the US government can’t be that incompetent and stupid.
See also here.
20 December 2006, 9:51 pmMarilyn Farhat:
Stan,
We have beaten this dead horse many times now. Unfortunately, the American public will not take a definite stand on the issue of U.S. casualties or the war until most families begin to perceive that they will be affected negatively by the continuation of the slaughter.
There is nothing rational about why we go to war. Most people acknowledge that war should be avoided, but most are also seduced by the false sense of security it gives them. Even among those who were against the war in the first place, there is belief that we should not leave Iraq yet because of an irrational assumption that somehow we will be able to salvage what we have broken over there.
The American public does not have to deal with the realities of war, so the myth of war is easily perpetuated. The Iraq War is a lucrative business for many in this country and abroad and, people deep down, may not necessarily want to see an end to it. Most people remain unaffected by it negatively. However, once it starts hitting the pockets and the lives of the majority out there, you will see a shift. Once the soldiers and their families start resisting, you will see change.
The media has always been an instrument of those in power. It is a historical fact and is not an observation reserved for the modern age. Those with money will have the muscle and those who have the muscle will have more chance to be heard and followed although the majority may not necessarily agree with them.
This war will have to get so bloody and so bad before the conscience of the public is stirred enough to do something. Most people are still not willing to sacrifice time, money, or freedom for what they believe is right. That alone is an indication that whatever needs to be done to change things will not happen.
22 December 2006, 6:30 pmstacia:
just who is this “American public” that we so despair of and despise?
23 December 2006, 1:18 amand who are ‘most people’?
not you?
not me?
stan’s article was anything but another beating of that poor old long-dead horse, as it ended with a pretty clear and specific local directive, and it makes sense. it doesn’t matter if it will work. the only alternative to doing something, whether it works or not, is to do nothing.
it doesn’t matter if you have hope. some days i have hope, some days i don’t. fortunately, hope is not necessary. all you need is an idea, a next step, and it does not have to be big.
here is what i am doing. it is very small. since 2001 around holiday time, the elementary school children have been ‘asked’ (required) to send letters overseas to Afghanistan and then Iraq. I objected to this, wrote letters, got no traction, and recently went to the school board about it, my neighbors and friends in town. i was open and relaxed, but quite clear about the coercive nature of this, and that the children are being used to create an appearance of community support for the war. i asked that from now on, these activities not take place in the school. the school board heard me, and although they haven’t reached a decision yet, my next step is to organize and take it to other towns and then to the district level.
i’m not under any illusion that this is a big deal, or in any way a war-ending stance. in doing this, i put nothing on the line. i haven’t made any sacrifice of money, freedom, or personal liberty. if i succeed in getting this out of the schools, i don’t feel i will have changed the world or even brought us any closer to ending the war.i do it because the only alternative is not doing it, and that’s reason enough.
and you may be sure that my recently-elected democratic congressman will hear about it. i will ask for his support. so thank you stan for putting that bug in my ear.
are there other ideas? i’d really like to hear them. it would make a difference.
stacia
Marilyn Farhat:
Actually, Stacia, I agree with you. But my point is that it is going to take more casualties to make more people like you involved. There were many of us who started getting involved in 2001 long before the first soldier set foot in Afghanistan and we were not able to stop the war. The reason was that most people were behind the invasion and there is a large majority that remains behind the war. THAT was my main point.
The fact that YOU are doing something about it NOW is great and admirable and I would hope that more people would, but for those few who started five years ago under a constant barrage of abuse, they are still waiting till the majority join in the struggle. You and I are the public and so are the other 300 million people in this country, most of whom are not involved at all. So, yes, the American public as a whole is not involved. Most people who were eligible to vote in the last election chose not to vote anyway. So, I am not surprised that they have no interest getting involved in war issues.
Since 2001, letters have been written, phone calls have been made to the White House, the UN, the Congress, School Boards, newspapers, we have been on radio and T.V. Programs, schools have been visited, forums and lectures have been organized, people have been arrested, weekly and monthly vigils were and are being organized, peace rallies and marches were and do continue to take place, draft forums were put on to educate children about the reality of war, but they were not able to stop the carnage because there is underlying support for the war at this time. Children continue to sign up for the military with the support of their families. The culture as a whole in enamored with the military. Just look at the number of support activities that all the different groups around the country are putting on for the soldiers abroad (like putting a band aid on a festering wound). THAT is the point that needs to be addressed.
Please do not take what I said personally, and my post was not a criticism of what Stan said at all. That topic was discussed here before and I was trying to make a point that change will come when people feel that it is in their best interest to do so and, that time is not here yet and, yes, the American public has no experience with war generally speaking. They have no idea what it is like to struggle and make a living in a war environment. That is one reason why returning soldiers will have a hard time adjusting: the experiences of their families are not the same as theirs and there is no way they will be able to talk to their families about the good and not so good things they did or saw in the Middle East.
Most people I know do not talk about the war and really have no idea what is going on (aside from TV and newspaper articles). Many are uncomfortable with it and their support of the war stems from a black and white ideology that has to do with right and wrong. That way of thinking is difficult to change.
Sometimes, individual “peace activists” get caught in their own struggle and see everything from their own areas of activism. Sometimes they find it hard to accept that despite their efforts, their agenda for change does not come to fruition. Societal issues are so complicated and what may be important to you and your anti-war efforts may not be important to the ones actually supporting the war. I think that is one area where we all have to work into bringing people together towards a common goal.
There is such an abhorrence of the “Left” or the “Liberal” elements on the part of war supporters. That fact alone is making dialog difficult between those for and against the war. Also, many peace supporters are not that firm in their values and they are undecided about whether we should stay in Iraq or not.
The impetus for change will come as more soldiers (not Iraqis) die and be maimed for life and who will require life-long economic and mental support. Most Americans do not really care about Iraqi casualties on a concrete level because Iraqis are so far from us. It is American casualties that may become one decisive factor in turning this war around. The other one is when the soldiers themselves, in groups, start saying: “SIR, NO SIR!”
As far as hope is concerned: without it we become slaves to our own inaction and we cease to put in any effort.
Good luck to you and to everyone out there who is out there in a conscious struggle for what is right.
23 December 2006, 5:32 pmMarilyn Farhat:
As a follow-up to my previous post, I agree that political pressure on our local and other elected reps. is what really causes the change. There is one thing to keep in mind though, peace activists are not the only ones putting pressure on our reps. War supporters are too and have been far more vocal. We need sheer numbers to tilt the scale.
I know that the results of this last election have given people more hope, but my fear is that there will be more troop presence in Iraq and a re-introduction of the Draft Bill. Both are being actively pursued at this time.
What we have to do is find common grounds among all the working class people, whether Republican, Democrat, or any other political group. There are changes taking place among some in the Christian Right/Republican sectors of society who are finally catching on to the dishonesty of the Bush regime’s drive to war.
I do not know if the Right and Left (and everything inbetween) elements of society will ever be able to meet on common ideological grounds. That may be a far stretch, but what they may be able to do is that, in the case of this war, when the lives of the poorer segments of society (the soldiers) are being wasted, it becomes a common bond that may give enough numbers to put pressure on our elected reps. to stop the war. After all, those soldiers are the children of all the poor and working class families of all denominations and political parties.
We also have to remember that many of those soldiers do not even have families since they grew up in foster care and literally do not have a single known relative for support. They are the voiceless ones and it would be great if, as a nation, we took them under our wing and looked out for their well-being.
I would urge people also not to donate to causes that send gifts to soldiers abroad. I know it may seem cruel. I think such gestures by the folks at home are designed to ease the sense of guilt we feel and to give us a sense of doing something while the soldiers are abroad. In reality, it is acquiescing in their murder and the murder of Iraqis.
Our financial support is better put to use to bring them home now.
23 December 2006, 6:31 pmMarilyn Farhat:
I happen to agree with the poster “Milosevic.” The fragmentation of the Middle East has been in the planning for at least 2 decades.
Jonathan Cooke, Seymour Hersh and others have talked about the black ops groups roaming in the Middle East to try and destabilize the region (part of the Neo Con agenda too). The verdict on the Hariri’s assassination in Lebanon in 2005 is not out yet despite the recriminations and insinuations that Syria was behind all of it. The Hezbollah news outlets were warning of “agents” working in Lebanon prior to, during, and today, to continue the internal conflict.
In fact there were rumors circulating in Lebanon that while the Marines were busy transporting stranded Americans off Lebanese shores, others of their command were smuggling heavy artillery to the Christian militias and Israeli and U.S. supporters. There was talk of secret meetings between Condoleeze Rice and Ja’ja’ to try to take care of the “Hezbollah problem” internally and to shift the power back into the hands of anti-Syrian elements (despite the wishes of the majority of the people in Lebanon). The hope was for a destabilization of the country and the weakening of Hezbollah through attrition.
These things are not new and always happen in war. Espionage and sabotage are the spark that ignite more conflict.
The war in Iraq was long in the planning. That is why it is frustrating to hear people talk about exit strategy, beefing up troop numbers, democracy in the Middle East, and all the little turf wars that really are just a diversion from the whole sick way of being and that are an outcome of our intervention in the first place. We have people planning the lives and deaths of future generations, people who have no moral basis for their philosophy and people who hold such contempt for others.
I for one am sick and tired of listening to the born-again peace activists and late bloomers in the peace movement who really have no spine and who really have little grasp of the history of the Middle East or who still think that a bake sale will solve our ills. I look around me and after five years of slaughter and war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and after sixty five years of slaughter in Palestine (with the encouragement of the liberals), it is still the same people who are out there speaking out and getting beaten up, spat at, and arrested because the rest of the country is too comfortable in their own bubbles of comfort. People are still too busy to take time from their busy schedule to advocate for stopping the war. It is a non-issue for most Americans. Americans should have been vigilant enough from the beginning. It is too late now to stop anything by “activists.” What will stop it is more American blood. Have we forgotten the 15 year long Vietnam War and the tens of thousands of Americans and over a million Vietnamese killed? When will enough be enough for our citizens whose main identification with their culture is their ability to consume what does not belong to them? Every American who wants us out of the Middle East should take it upon themselves to try and discuss the issues with a friend who is undecided or who does not vote and see if they can sway them to our “cause.” After all, is that not what grassroots activism is all about? How did people function before we had computers and telephones? They still did it!
The wheels of this war have been set on a global scale and I hope no one will think that by some magic wand we will be able to stop it. What will stop it is a mass movement of resistance that involves the average citizens of every country in the world, locally, nationally, and internationally. Such people will start contributing the minute they start feeling the pain of the war.
We have been lucky in this country. We have not seen a war on our soil for generations. But it has also made us complacent. We have forgotten how bad it can be for the rest of the world. Our children are so adept at playing violent computer games that they have become desensitized to the idea of killing and blood.
Wait till January and see if we are going to bring the troops home or send more to the Middle East.
Thanks Stan for allowing me the opportunity to express my views on this blog. I am truly grateful. I just need to spend more time doing other things and good luck to everyone out there. I hope our children and their children will not inherit this miserable place we have left for them.
24 December 2006, 1:46 pmLisa:
Very interesting Christmas message from the American Monetary Institute (sorry for the long post, but the message itself is not posted on their site; it was sent to newsletter subscribers):
A Christmas Message for Peace, Understanding, and Action
Our Money & Banking system causes warfare. Two important steps can fix this: (From Stephen Zarlenga’s welcome address at the 2006 AMI Monetary Reform Conference)
“We often focus on the problem of interest payments on debt money created privately out of thin air. Yes it’s a huge injustice, concentrating wealth and power into fewer and fewer hands - mainly undeserving hands. This pressurizes life and de-humanizes society … But an even bigger question is control over where the money goes – what gets funded and what doesn’t - misdirecting humanity into warfare, death and destruction. Who is doing this? We get a clear view from time to time of the secular and religious gangs involved…
HOW and WHY does a private money system lead to warfare?
Raise your hand if you think you know.
Yes - it provides a huge motive for war!
Here’s a real life example: It is March, 2003 and $15 billion is needed to repair the levees protecting the city of New Orleans. Public TV documentaries (NOVA) have authoritatively warned of the danger that New Orleans would be flooded with over 100,000 dead. Millions of viewers have seen and believe the documentary. But under a private money system, the government must either go into more debt, or raise taxes to get the money. Both of these prove politically impossible. The levees fail in August 2005. Thousands die and $400 billion of property damage results.
OR It is March, 2003. Under a major deception purposely designed to rush America headlong into war, an administration catering to financiers, religious maniacs and other warmongering elements rushes into warfare, and under a barrage of fear mongering and war hysteria even its Democratic opposition is completely unable to vote against wasting what will eventually total over a $ trillion dollars on a losing, and clearly immoral war! The money comes from borrowing. Over 600,000 Iraqi civilians and 3,000 American soldiers lose their lives for no good reason.
U.S. Government debt balloons because of a combination of these war expenditures and pernicious tax cuts to the already obscenely rich. The usurers get their risk free loans to government and the ability to get secure interest on their vast wealth. The debt based money system that empowers them is protected.
With a private money system the motive for Warfare is that it forces the government into ever more debt – paying interest to financiers on privately created money and increasing their influence. This hogties our government, the only organizational form that can protect the nation from the thieving “Enrons†of the world. Under wartime conditions, the opposition is neutralized and the people are left unprotected and more vulnerable to their predations!
The financial controllers could have thrown their considerable political power behind a drive to build levees, or to provide universal health care, or to fund a decent educational system. With their control of media, they might still have forced the government into more borrowing from them. But then the people of our nation would have received some infrastructure, some health care, and some educational benefits, albeit under a continuing unjust and pernicious private money system… so it appears evident that the preponderance of the “financial controllers†don’t want to improve the nation. If they did, we’d see improvement, not merely the concentration of great wealth into their hands. They don’t want the nation to be able to defend itself from their parasitical predations; they don’t want the people and the economists to see and learn from concrete examples, how government expenditures can be properly used to benefit the population.
That would undermine the very ethos of the class warfare system their class invented and nurtures, known as “economics,†which almost openly defines its purpose as doing whatever it can to harm and weaken their opposition; to keep the victims of their economic theories – the people of our country - in bondage. That’s why it usually does more harm than good, to co-operate with them. That’s why mankind is better off to let events run their course and to then decisively remove this millstone from humanity’s neck. Continuing under their control with nuclear weapons, ultimately is humanicide.â€
End of Excerpt.
What is the better way? To realize that our government can raise revenues by creating its own money, instead of borrowing it or taxing it. History shows that done properly, this is by far a superior source of funding, and need not be inflationary.
There are two kinds of action necessary to remove the scourge of warfare for profit from the brow of humanity:
First: this war must be ended now, plain and simple. As long as the warmongers keep us at war, they will use the threat of mortal danger as an excuse to move against our own Constitution. Every sort of crooked deal and vicious agenda is protected under the tent of wartime emergency. These agenda’s have nothing in common with true American interests.
The “Neo-Conservatives†have done more harm to America than anything you can name. Its finally being understood that their war of choice has been the greatest catastrophe in American foreign policy, and it can get worse – a lot worse! Find out how they got the label “neo-conservatives,†how their leaders switched from destructively (anti-American) liberal to destructively (anti-American) conservative in the late 60s/early 70s, and which of their beliefs they did not change, in that process. That will tell you who and what they truly serve. They are now beginning the long term process of switching back toward “liberal†in this “game†of pushing the social pendulum much too far in alternating directions.
What interests does it serve? Ultimately none, as the people of our country rise in indignant opposition to being told until a few short weeks ago that the war was going well. Indeed this war will be stopped!
How? By politics. The writing is already on the wall. The first anti-war candidate–Democrat Dennis Kucinich a longtime opponent of the war has entered the Presidential race. Take a look for yourself at the excitement building at http://www.kucinich.us and at http://www.myspace.com/kucinich2008 . Then look up the website of new Independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont (http://bernie.org/?p=65) who adamantly opposes sending more troops to Iraq. Shortly we’ll be able to direct you to some Republican lawmakers who are now getting ready to oppose this war. This is a multi-partisan effort because it is an American issue.
We do not endorse partisan campaigns, but we can support important issues such as ending this war and we pledge to draw similar attention to all lawmakers or Candidates of whatever party who seriously oppose the war!
Second and more important than stopping one war: We must begin a program to remove the financial motivation for warfare by reforming our monetary and banking system. The MONEY POWER, the privilege to create what we use for money in this system must be removed from private hands and re-established within the U.S. Treasury. It’s well enough known how to do that without inflationary effects. What’s not so well realized is that this will remove a major incentive for unnecessary warfare.
Otherwise stopping this war will have only a short term benefit for humanity. The structural faults favoring warfare now built into the system must be eradicated. This is accomplished with the American Monetary Act, a comprehensive reform of our monetary and banking system that places the Federal Reserve System within the US Treasury, and removes the private privilege to create money. (see http://www.monetary.org/amacolorpamphlet.pdf ) This Act has its best chance for enactment in the next financial crisis (or the next one). A smaller step in this direction is taken with the Monetary Transparency Act which requires the present Federal Reserve System to provide transparent information on how the money system is affecting our nation. This will assist legislators in making important public policy decisions. The Monetary Transparency Act can be passed in the new Congress. We’ll post its final form on our website soon.
25 December 2006, 3:34 pmmike ferner:
to all the stout souls commenting on stan’s article:
27 December 2006, 11:42 amwill the war only end when enough u.s. soldiers are killed? only when enough members of the public begin to feel a personal stake in the ongoing tragedy?
will activities of the antiwar movement have any appreciable effect?
is there any reason to have hope that what we do will make any difference?
tough questions. recurring questions. somedays trying to answer them leaves me undone. most days i plug away, hoping it will make a difference, hoping that i’m not just trying make myself feel better (although some days that’s not a bad goal to tell you the truth).
and all the time i feel a terrible sense of complicity in what we’re doing, even though i oppose it actively. that alone is reason to do something–to partially resolve that complicity.
so if you are one of those who eventually settles on the side of doing something is better than not doing something and you’re looking for a tactic with a bit of promise, check out the “occupation project,” initiated by voices for creative nonviolence http://www.vcnv.org and supported by veterans for peace http://www.veteransforpeace.org.
if you go to my website and scroll down to the first article “to the choir,” you’ll see the best reasons i can muster for joining this project, plus a list of roll call votes in the house and senate identifying everyone who’s voted for war money in the last four years–and who therefore are legit targets to have their local offices occupied beginning in february before the next $160,000,000 is pissed away.
be well. raise hell.
mike ferner
(and you can email me at mike.ferner@sbcglobal.net)
jimmy higgins:
Stan–Your article has been posted at the Bring Them Home Now! campaign website for over a week now. Your readers miht also be interested in the “3000″ cards BTHN! has printied up for the purpose of running a blowtorch gently across the soles of the feet of our elected officials, or in donating to help insure their timely distribution.
27 December 2006, 3:53 pm