While making dinner tonight, I heard a piece on NPR about the mercenaries who work for the company Blackwater operating in Iraq. It suddenly hit me how twisted this whole thing is--we are paying civilians big money to kill for us in Iraq. Something is really wrong with this picture.

I can't defend the inept leadership in the U.S. in regards to Iraq, but I haven't forgetten what Iraq was.

The following information is from U.N. published reports, Amnesty International, the U.K. and other sources.

Under Saddam’s rule, Iraq’s Kurdish communities have experienced terrible suffering. ...execution in 1983 of 8,000 Kurdish males aged 13 and upwards.

Amnesty International estimates that over 100,000 Kurds were killed or disappeared during 1987-1988, in an operation known as the Anfal campaigns, to quell Kurdish insurgency and activities. ...included the use of chemical weapons.

According to Human Rights Watch, a single attack on the Kurdish town of Halabja killed up to 5,000 civilians and injured some 10,000 more.

The following methods of torture have all been reported to international human rights groups, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, by the victims of torture or their families.
Eye gouging
Piercing of hands with electric drill
Suspension from the ceiling
Electric shock
Sexual abuse
"Falaqa" ...Victims...beaten on the soles of their feet with a cable, often losing consciousness.
Other physical torture
Extinguishing cigarettes on various parts of the body
Mock executions
Acid baths

According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in 2001, Iraqis have become the second largest group of refugees in the world. Iraqis also top the table of foreign nationals seeking asylum in the UK. Saddam Hussein has been ruthless in his treatment of any opposition to him since his rise to power in 1979.

All I hope for is the ability of the Iraqs to experience a time of peace and the right Iraqi leadership to work toward a solution to their religious/political turmoil.

over 100,000 Kurds were killed or disappeared during 1987-1988

50,000 innocent dead a year? The Chimp has outdone that, by quite a large margin.

Were one to spend a little time observing the primates on exhibit at the Oregon Zoo, one would very quickly conclude that the alert intelligence of chimpanzees really has nothing in common with the uncomprehending, filial density of George W. Bush. The agnomen "Chimp" is a slur against our elegant hominid cousins.

And while there is furious and lusty competition for the title "World's Worst Regime" across the face of the Earth, I should think that this news item ought to represent a rare point of agreement on all sides: that the business end of a noose really is an appropriate terminus for vain and predatory leaders. I, for one, hope that this is the beginning of a trend.

Your blind hatred of all things George Bush belies a naive and anti-American world view.

Mister Tee: Your blind hatred of all things George Bush...

Who's blind here? I challenge you to defend the Bush Administration's "American" values like pre-emptive war, unchecked Executive power, and torture, to name just a few.

And if you're gonna refer to the past to justify those policies, going back to Clinton ain't gonna cut it. But the Federalist Papers or the Constitution will suffice.

Mr. T: every word of your short comment above (and in this I include "of", "a" and "and") is wrong and without factual support. I think you should stick to that excellent thing you and the Mrs. do with tomato juice.

Carol,

if only war were so simple.

the US was the #1 supplier of weapons to Hussein's regime, including the gas used on the Kurds, which our own government admits was made in Virginia. so--who killed the Kurds?

the bottom line is-the US supports regimes that support its government and strategems, and attacks or subverts those that do not.

give this a read:
http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm

Mister Tee at the buffet table of the great intellectual feast that this blog represents you sir are a paper plate of green cocktail weenies.

The scumbag was tried and executed under his country's rules. I have no problem with his leaving this earth. Under Saddam they had rape rooms and wood chippers. Under the new government it's hanging when they have been tried. I think I like the new government better.

Carol and AAA, knock it off. Nothing positive about the administration here. Only references to primates, pretzel choking, alcoholism and corruption are allowed. Thanks.

now that we've again got an Iraqi government that we like, we're again supplying it with arms--everything from rifles to artillery, armor and aircraft.

in other words, to paraphrase Smedley Butler--we've re-opened a new multi-billion dollar arms market.

God Bless America.

and if you remember nothing else, remember this: in the Eighties, after Hussein's regime used US-made chemical weapons on Kurds--we continued to supply him with chemical weapons, with full knowledge of how they were being used. (look it up.)

Here's to Smedly Butler, the greatest American solder ever. We should remember his words, which apply so aptly to current events:

"War is a Racket."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler

Smedley should be required reading in our schools.

I admire the shrub. Destoying the world...one country at a time.

Hate to be a party pooper, but didn't the Democrats vote YES for the war, too ?
If there was bad info before the vote, weren't the Democrats supposed to check it out before jumping on board ?
I'll certainly agree that it has been a protracted mistake to think that we could make these people come around to our way of life, but the blame is hardly one-sided.

Democrats really want the war to continue so they can have a one-issue victory in November 2008. Bring the troops home now and stop playing politics. Cut off the funding for the war and take a stand, for once, without worrying about the spin.

Personally, I think Norma Diamond should get the big airplane with the Jacuzzi.

while the Democratic and Republican monkeys furiously masturbate and throw poop at each other in the cage, those in power stand outside and laugh, working their damage in the world.

the US was the #1 supplier of weapons to Hussein's regime, including the gas used on the Kurds, which our own government admits was made in Virginia. so--who killed the Kurds?

Based on that logic, if I hit & kill someone in my car, it wasnt my fault...talk to Beaverton Nissan.

Jon,

no, it's the fault of both, but equating a Nissan with a chemical warhead capable of killing a thousand people is not quite fair.

but in today's professionalized, legalistic, "hey, guns don't kill people, people kill people" society, sharing responsibility for what happens in the world is always considered absurd.

it's the fundamental reason nobody wants to take the blame for global warming, ecological destuction, and a host of other atrocities. we act as if making massively destructive weapons has no consequence.

and that's the problem. it's not absurd. what's absurd is to claim that the makers and sellers of chemical weapons have absolutely no responsibility for how they're used. as if the choices of a corporation and its employees bear no consequences--but the choices of each individual do.

IIRC, our government sold Saddam those weapons to help him against a common enemy at the time, Iran.
That he turned and used them on his own people after that war isnt exactly our fault, is it?

Jon,

we were selling arms to Iran at the same time.

so we sold each a match, lit the matches, then sat back and watched the fire. later, we made sure one of the uppity guys got hanged for using matches.

after all, we only sold him matches. it was his fault he used them.

I believe this image is hanging in Mister Tee's bathroom -- fired Rummy and dead Saddam shaking hands after the big arms deal secretly brokered by Ronnie Reagan.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

Mister Tee seems to forget the facts -- advanced case of Bushheimer's???

You know the disease that makes you forget all the bad, horrible, stupid, silly, obnoxious things bony-@ssed alkies do when they run dry!

Ecohuman. Your logic is flawed. It is hard to deny that Amnesty International, etc. list of atrocities are wrong, and Carol doesn't defend the "inept" war leadership; but not to try to rectify the causes for the atrocities would be wrong too.

Amnesty International also had a long list for the atrocities committed in the Balkans before we imposed ourselves to correct a wrong. And many nations besides ourselves killed, tortured many innocent Balkan citizens in our attempt for peace. To choose one war/action over another to continue ones "hatred" for a sitting president, or party, even if injustices are committed, is not fair or logical.

Reading of war history finds atrocities from both sides of a conflict. And usually in actions attempted to correct injustices there are atrocities.

"lw",

i re-read your post, and if i understand correctly, you're saying:

"two wrongs can make a right."

you missed the most important part of my posts--war is a racket. always has been. please, read the essay by General Butler, linked above. read it all. it applies to all wars. every single one of them.

and, i didn't say Amnesty International was wrong. i agree with them. gave them money last year.

"War is a racket. Always has been."

And thus rides the Glib Understanding of History into the befuddled sunset, spewing rhetoric and creating confusion we'er he goes . . .

War is many things. To reduce it to the evil machinations of war profiteers insults the intelligence.

A racket is a dishonest scheme, trick, business, or activity. Have there been dishonest wars, wars fought for less-than-admirable motives, and shameless leeches who made money off the blood of others? Of course. Are these the sole elements of war? Of course not.

I read the Butler stuff, and it's very interesting. Not any more interesting than what Eisenhower said and wrote about the military-industrial complex. Not any more interesting than what Barbara Tuchman wrote about in "The March of Folly." And also not more interesting than Middlekauf's "The Glorious Cause," Shelby Foote's narrative history of the Civil War, or Julius Caesar's take on the Gallic Campaign or Arrian's take on Alexander's marches.

War may be the most complex of all of human undertakings, making clear all of our human failings and and also exalting some of our best virtues. War may provide opportunities for scumbags, but war also provides opportunities for soldiers such as Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain to become exemplars of what our society should strive to be. Your trite dismissal of war as a "racket" demeans yourself and everyone who ever went to war for a cause larger than themselves.

Well, maybe not you.

Sheef,

i've been there, done that, wore the uniform. and, did the undergrad in history. studied war, ancient history, Latin, all of it.

i'll take Butler's knowledge of war and its history over academics or hobbyists any day.

i agree with Butler. to call Butler's conclusion a "trite dismissal"--based on several decades of first-hand, global, command experience that i am certain you and i have never had (or Tuchman, or Foote)--is stunning.

Sheef, thank you. Ecohuman, I never said "two wrongs can make a right" I admitted that sometimes, many times along the way in correcting a wrong, humankind can commit atrocities. But I am glad we try. You being learned in war history can certainly find "justified wars", even in my generation.

there are no just wars, in my opinion and a few others:

http://co.quaker.org/Writings/JustAndUnjustWar.htm

listen--we all have opinions on the matter. i don't mind at all that we disagree but, unlike "Sheef", i'm not going to tell you that your opinion is trite and demeaning.

but i might try and sway you to my point of view.

Ecohuman. No such luck. I wouldn't be here if someone hadn't intervene in WWII, a just war.

Ecohuman,

First, given your earlier euphamism about Republican and Democratic monkeys, it's pretty darn funny that you get in a twist over the word "trite."

I seriously doubt that if you read everything Butler ever wrote, or if you could resurrect him and talk to him again, he would conclude - as you did - that every single war has been a racket. You made that gross generalization in your post. I merely responded to it. Most people who have given war any serious thought know that it is an incredibly complex moral and ethical problem.

You have Butler on a pedestal, which is fine. He was an admirable military man, and his perspective on war is worth study. But he is hardly the only military man who has commented on war. Thucydides was a general. Oliver Wendell Holmes left the Union Army a lieutenant colonel. Pershing commanded the United States expeditionary force in WWI. All three also have valid perspectives on war and none of them ever concluded that war could be reduced to such a trite summary as a "racket."

You wrote: "war is a racket. always has been." That is complete and utter claptrap. It may make for a good applause line at a protest march in downtown Portland, but that's setting the bar pretty darn low.

I agree with Butler in that there have been unjust wars and also war profiteers even during just wars. But to infer from those two facts that every single war is a racket - as you did - is just foolishness.

Sheef,

nice try. most of your comment was inference, which is fine, but get the facts straight.

Butler, in fact, did say that *all* war is a racket. really. the fact that you said he didn't say tells me you didn't read his essay, or his book.

in my opinion, that facts borne out by every single writer you quoted. even Thucydides, known to be a "creative" historian who wrote more fiction than historiography.

again, it's fine if you disagree, but are you able to respond to the topic rather than make character judgements about me personally? to hold back on the personal attacks and telling me how "foolish" i am?

i've yet to see you provide any evidence, at all that contradicts Butler, for example. instead, you spend 500 words telling me i'm wrong.

i'm done. good luck.

Ecohuman,

If you take from my posts that I offer only unfounded allegations and personal insults, well, then you're not reading very carefully. Again, it's pretty funny that a person who can write a post comparing politicians to monkeys performing disgusting bodily functions has such a thin skin when faced with a disagreement.

You said that I offered no evidence that war is not a racket. Wrong. I referred to the writings of a handful of historians and military figures who have written about war. None of the people I cited have ever reduced war to such a simplistic cliche. Pay attention - that's a criticism of your argument, not you personally. How is that not refuting your argument?

You (poorly) wrote, "in my opinion, that facts borne out by every single writer you quoted." Are you seriously claiming that Caesar, Arrian, Thucydides, Pershing, Tuchman, Middlekauf, and Foote all believed that war was nothing more than a "racket"? If so, then you have seriously misread your history.

If you want me to offer specific evidence to refute your idea, I offer you the Gettysburg Address. This is the most poetic statement ever by an American about the higher ideals that are worth fighting for. Lincoln believed the Civil War was not a "racket." Despite Butler's well-earned laurels, I'll take old Abe on this point.

Is that specific enough for you?

Let me be clear: I believe that war is too complex to be reduced in such a simplistic manner as you attempt to do. I believe that your idea that war is nothing more than a mere "racket" is a bad idea. That you expressed your idea with hyperbolic rhetoric on a blog opens your idea to criticism, and this is a forum (as you so eloquently displayed with your earlier post) that is not as reserved as a university debate.

It may be comforting for you to think of war in such simplistic terms. It sure eliminates a lot of the heavy lifting needed to think critically about complex subjects. Unfortunately, that approach causes more harm than good.

Bush's Killing of Upward Bound/Good Old Republican Deceit

Hi

My name is Sheron Jefferson and I live here in NE Portland, Or. I was just wondering if you have heard or care about President bush latest gift to public education? Anyway here’s the skinny.

Upward Bound according to the federal government web site:

http://www.ed.gov/programs/trioupbound/index.html

Upward Bound provides fundamental support to participants in their preparation for college entrance. The program provides opportunities for participants to succeed in their precollege performance and ultimately in their higher education pursuits. Upward Bound serves: high school students from low-income families; high school students from families in which neither parent holds a bachelor's degree; and low-income, first-generation military veterans who are preparing to enter postsecondary education. The goal of Upward Bound is to increase the rate at which participants complete secondary education and enroll in and graduate from institutions of postsecondary education.

Okay I'm going to jump right in here. I’m a 50 year old black woman living off social security disability. Statistic … yeah I know. I am currently disabled because I have spent a live time doing menial labor while ignoring persistent aches and pains because with the jobs I had one usually does not get health insurance. And if I didn’t work I didn’t get a paycheck. No paycheck, no rent, no food, no lights, and so on and so on. And if you got hurt on the job you just tough it out because Workman’s Comp is the working man’s joke. So now, yeah I’m a statistic.

I have a daughter (Schuyler) who just turned 16 and is currently a sophomore at Cleveland High School here in Portland, Oregon. My daughter is currently enrolled in Upward Bound out at Pacific University in Forest Grove, Oregon. This is her second year there. On Saturdays’ she goes for 2 hours of tutoring downtown where upward Bound staff help her with any of her classes she’s having a hard time with. Before going to Upward Bound Schuyler was at her best a C- student. Since enrolling Schuyler in Upward Bound she’s a solid B+ student. Now for some that’s not much, but for us it means hope and prayers of her getting into college. She’s also learning study skills and time management which she will need once she gets into college.

Schuyler is also second year varsity basketball player at Cleveland. When she attends her Upward Bound tutoring sessions because of time conflict, she forgoes practice on her team. Her coach is very understanding about her needing Upward Bound not only to ensure that she is academically eligible to play basketball, but also for her in the future. Schuyler gets a stipend of $4.00 an hour for every tutoring session if she maintains a 2.5 GPA. In a normal month Schuyler receives about $32 a month. Not a lot of money but it adds up. I have set up a bank account for her and she can only spend 10% of any check. I tell Schuyler she will need that money when college comes around. Sure Schuyler could work and make more money. Some of her friends work part-time and sometimes she wishes she could. She’s even come up with inventive ways to make money, (cutting lawns, showing people how to set up web pages, (Schuyler is very adept at computer skills), trying to get jobs only after basketball season. She cannot work during the summer because one of the requirements of Upward Bound is that students spend six weeks during summer vacation at Pacific University. While there they get to spend time on a college campus to give them a taste of college life. According to Upward Bound literature the summer program for the kids:

Upward Bound is federally funded to develop the skills and motivation necessary for success in education beyond high school. The program works with high school students who have academic potential but lack adequate support, college role models, or academic preparation necessary to succeed in college. Upward Bound enables 50 high school youth to live on Pacific's campus where they participate in academic, cultural, and recreational activities.

Now that I’ve said all that here’s the skinny on President George W. Bush Axing Upward Bound.

On Saturday (March 24, 2007) I received a letter from Willard Kniep, Vice president for Academic Affairs and Provost at Pacific University in Forest Grove, Oregon. The letter states that for more than 40 years Pacific University has hosted Upward Bound, making it the oldest Upward Bound program in Oregon. Nice huh! Mr. Kniep goes on to state and I quote

“with the recent restructuring of the federal Department of Education, programs have struggled, especially the past four years, with a dramatic decrease in funding.”

Here’s President George W. Bush's punt to leave no child behind.

Quoting Mr. Kniep:

“Along with these funding issues, a new requirement by the U.S. program concerned. As part of a new system for evaluating the program, the federal government is requiring Upward Bound programs to recruit twice as many students as they can serve, using half the students as a control group – without benefit of Upward Bound services – to compare their performance with those students who actually admitted into the program. Pacific University’s administration - as well as those other colleges across the nation – is opposed to this unethical manner of dealing with students and their families.”

Did you get President George W. Bush Leaving all low income children behind? Is this Conservative compassion? Or Is this blatant classic Republican shenanigans? Does fairness only apply to President George W. Bush when he cries reverse discrimination? Or does he believe like his mother, that people lower class people don’t need dreams and hopes? First New Orleans now Upward Bound! Maybe he thinks the program only helps black kids? Does he know that the majority of the kids in the program are white? Does he care? Or is President Bush along with Vice-President Cheney too busy lining their pockets with Iraq. Maybe President Bush is trying to eradicate as many social programs as he can before he leaves office. After all social justice according to Republican doctrine is should not be the job of the federal government, unless one is talking about so called 'reverse discrimination'. And if as the federal Government says:

"the goal of Upward Bound is to increase the rate at which participants complete secondary education and enroll in and graduate from institutions of postsecondary education."

I mean if you only give half the students the benefits of the program that in itself defeats not only Leave No Child Behind but also the federally mandated mission of Upward Bound? Are these kids to be guinea pigs because they are low income families and noboby gives a damn. Could be that President George W. Bush is trying to correct reverse discrimination on another level. Or is this like Iraq another power trip from an otherwise insignificant little piss ant who’s daddy happened to be rich enough, his brother crook enough to steal a whole state’s electoral rights, and a cousin at CNN to call the victory his, out of familial nepotism all to steal a presidential election.

Okay let me get on with Mr. Kneip’s letter.

“Therefore, in consultation with the director of Pacific’s Upward Bound program, Pacific University has made the difficult decision to discontinue operation of the Upward Bound program, effective August 31, 2007. Students in the program will receive benefits through that date. Pacific Upward Bound staff will make every effort to suggest educational alternatives for students when our Upward Bound program ends.”

I agree with Mr. Kneip it is the only fair thing to do. And that’s exactly what President George W. Bush wants. President George W. Bush and the party of Mark Foley has won, again. One less social program to fund. After all President George W. Bush has money to buy any tutor his kids needs. Cause Lord knows he’s too dumb to teach them himself. Hell President George W. Bush needs help tying his shoe laces. Oops forgot he wears loafers so he don’t have to tie them himself.

Once again let me get on with Mr. Kneip’s letter.

“This was not an easy decision, but one we felt was the ethically mandated option and the best decision for students, their families, our staff and the University. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Upward Bound Director Roberta Nickels or myself.”

Of course I would suggest that everyone contact the white house and let them know people are aware. But then people are aware aren’t they. But they buy into President George W. Bush crap anyway. Yes hooray for President George W. Bush. Who cares? These are just a bunch of inner city kids who are going to be a bunch of losers anyway. (This is not true most of the kids are not from Portland, but from the suburbs and rural areas.) They don’t need no education someone has got to grow up and ask ‘would you like fries with that?’ Yes I know Double negative but what would you expect from a poorly educated black woman.

Alright enough with the pity party! Everyone, anyone who reads this message please respond even if you disagree with me. For once say something, do something, these kids need this program and President George W. Bush needs to know he can’t get away with leaving any children behind.

By the way Upward Bound Director Roberta Nickels has been with the program out at Pacific University for almost the forty years it’s been there. Her life’s work taken down by a shrub. Please feel free to confirm this with her. I hope this matters to someone. I hope to here from you. And I pray someone can stop this pilfering of American dreams.

Thank You

Sheron Jefferson
just another mother trying against all odds to keep her kid from becoming another STATISTIC