All Comments (39)

Re: importance to the US of access to oil

Precipitating a civil war is the wrong way to gain access to Iraqi oil.

What’s the moral position in Iraq? Is there one?
Until America is threatened as she was by the (Confederacy, Japans Imperial Army, or The Third Reich) neither this country nor the majority of its people feel obliged to assume such a position. In the interim we meddle in places like Korea,Vietnam,Afganistan and Iraq . In none of these latter conflicts were, are, we confronted with the possibility of the United States ceasing to exist as a free country as was so in those earlier wars.
Only when a country or movement of people truly threatens America’s existence (such as its access to oil) will this nation move with a true moral conviction.
We are not there- yet.

sok7 @June 22, 2007 8:02 PM: I do not confuse war with morality. War is necessary only when a country is attacked. At any other time it is non only immoral, but wrong as well.

Please explain the idiocy about Hitler. Unfortunately, in Iraq we have a situation where the US started a war, with absolutely no justification. By your standards, Hitler would love Bush, Cheney, and even SOK7. Correction, I take that back: Hitler was truthful about his motives for waging war, whereas Bush/Cheney/SOK7 are not. Sincerest apologies.

You posted "I would say that if our reasons for going to war against Iraq are wrong, then so were our reasons for warring against Germany. After all, what did Germany ever do to us? -- at least that’s what the pacifists of 1941 were saying." Just to clarify things, in 1941 Japan attacked the US, and subsequently the US found itself at war with Japan and its allies (Italy & Germany). I missed the attack BY IRAQ on the US. I deplore that the fanaticism of people like Bush/Cheney/SOK7 have ignored those who attacked the US on 9/11/2001 from Afghanistan and Pakistan, in order to attack Iraq. I also recognize that people such as that refuse to recognize the difference. But whereas we were attacked in 1941, we were not attacked in 2001 (or 2002 or 2003).

Oh, by the way, the 'abominable management of the Occupation' is the result of the unjustified attack.

Speed123

Have a look at this article by the British philosopher John Gray, expanding on Claes Reyn (?)'s view on the neocons. I think Gray is the thinker who traced the neocon's worldview back to the terror of the Jacobins during the French REvolution.

http://tinyurl.com/257ctj

An excerpt:

"Uncovering the faith base of seemingly rational opinions is a Gray speciality. He finds the apparent rationalism of militant atheists such as Daniel Dennett, Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens particularly funny. He regards atheism as a late Christian cult, based on the supremely Christian (and Marxist) idea that by changing people’s beliefs, you change their behaviour. He also sees an irony here. “They attack something congenitally and categorically human as an intellectual error, yet call themselves humanists.”

The road from Fukuyama led him directly to a series of what to future generations will seem classic works. The best are Straw Dogs: Thoughts on Humans and Other Animals – a coruscating statement of our inability to free ourselves from human nature – and his latest, Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia. Gray was, in the later stage of this phase, driven by what seemed to him to be collective amnesia. “I had been puzzled by the intensity and systematic and methodical character of the violence of the 20th century, because that century was dominated not by religious belief, but by secular belief in progress or the capacity of human beings to create a better world. It also featured unprecedented levels of mass murder.

Lanx;

Loved you last post.Really hilarious!
I'm still laughing.

"we dont have to invade anyplace - we can bomb them 24/7 for a month or longer and that will stop them."
Frank Collins

I imagine Mr. Collins typing this as he’s holding his Sgt. Slaughter G.I. Joe doll and using it to bash in the head of the wicked Cobra Commander.

“I’m comin’ to liberate yer wimin with nuk-you-lar weapons!” says Mr. Collins’ Slaughter. “Y’all have kept th’ bacon’n'playdoh hidden under burqas fer too long now! BAM, POW!”

"We've already discovered just so far the remains of 400,000 people in mass graves," said British Prime Minister Tony Blair on November 20 in London.

Did the report state that most of those murders were
committed with weapons and the blessings of the Reagan and Bush Sr. Admin.

I'm sure it didn't.

Seems to me we are still paying for the sins of the "Great" Ronald Reagan. If we would have impeached Reagan then the Dick Cheney's of the world would not have been welcomed back in to our Government.

langx

shame shame shame.

It is sad when Americans accuse Saddam of being a criminal when the weapons to commit mass murders were give to him by americans themselves. Talk about hypcricy. That's for you sok7. Just how dare you talk about the million lives lost and not blame your own govt, but even defend it? Don't you recall how when poisonous gases were sprayed, US had deliberately pointed fingers at Iran to allow saddam time to commit more destruction? Shame shame shame...

"Remember that there are three kinds of people, one kind is of those learned people who are highly versed in the ethics of truth and philosophy of religion, second is the kind of those who are acquiring the above knowledge, and the third is that class of people who are uneducated. They follow every pretender and accept every slogan, they have neither acquired any knowledge nor have they secured the support of firm and rational convictions". Ali ibne Abi Talib

The sad fact is that this coutry has been hijacked by a gang of opportunists and war mongers.They have no consideration whatsoever to the blood of US soldiers or the money of US taxpayers.The Dems have approved the surge bill because they wanted the same gang to fall deeper into the quaqmire in Iraq so that they gain leverage in the coming elections.It is all political interests as they know the war in Iraq is lost already. Unfortunately, the situation is too complicated to resolve with the current political set up and the selfish interests of the concerned parties.The main beneficiary of this ugly war is Israel and the AIPAC who keep pressuring the hijacking gang to contine with this ugly war as long as they can.In fact this is an Israeli war fought with US blood and US taxpayer's money.

-- George Carlin, You Are All Diseased
Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man -- living in the sky -- who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time! But He loves you.
-- George Carlin Politically Incorrect, May 29, 1997

GJK,

I was just using a it of controversy to highlight the fact that many on this board like to blame this war (and all others) on religion in general and Christianity in particular...thats all.

Communism was officially atheist and I do believe that the "scientific" nature of the movement allowed people to free themselves from their connections to fellow people and commit the worst killing that the world have ever seen.

Not all atheists are so politically motivated; however, it is a fact that atheism was a keep policy or tool for these communist govs.

As for Iran, Gary you are an idiot and I will no longer reply to your revisionist history and fascist "us" vs "them" mentality - our previous foreign policy has resulted in many of the conflicts we find our self today.

Want to leave this war? No war with Iran? VOTE RON PAUL1

The ONLY candidate who is completely anti-war is Republican Ron Paul.

ALL other dems and repubs WILL have military bases in Iraq and all in in favor of ANOTHER aggressive action against IRAN. All bow down to AIPAC and other special interests that have corrupted our system and democracy.

Take this country back from special interests and vote for the ONLY candidate with integrity: Ron Paul

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Speed 123:

Atheist Communism? Just what does that mean? You know atheism and communism do not always go in the same breath - it does not follow that everyone who is Atheist are also a Communist. Besides, are you so sure that all 3,000 people killed in the WTC on 9/11 were Christians - or your type of Christians? There were other people in the WTC that day besides Americans, I am sure some of them followed other religions - even Islam.

I would also argue that belief in GOD frees people to kill in greater numbers, Radical people on both sides are framing this debate. Radical Islam, Radical Christians, Radical Jews, Radical Palastenians are the problem, not the solution. Are those bombin abortion clinics and killing Doctors who perform them because GOD told them to exempt? What about a President who lies but says GOD wanted him to be President? Radical Islam and Radical Christianity are just two sides of the same loaf.

We should not be occupying Iraq. We should not even have been there in the first place. Saddam was BAD! Are the Iraqi`s better off now than they were under him? What is sad is that this President was not a student of History. He did not listen to anyone who really knew about the Middle East and these countries. Theres` is a bloody history. Read Lawrence of Arabia. Bush did not even listen to his father whose reasons for not going into Iraq were the exact things that are happening now. Unless you know someone`s past, their culture, their religion[even if it is different from your own - although Christianity and Islam are not all that different], and find some kind of common ground, how can you ever hope to find some understanding and come to some agreement? The biggest problem in Iraq is connecting Saddam with 9/11 [unless you are one of the 5 persent who still believe he was] and invading his country without really knowing what was going to happen.

What needs to happen now? I do not know. Part of me wants our troops out of there so fast it would make your head spin. Part of me says, well - we went in and we made a mess so now we need to fix it. I am smart enough to know that we can not fix everything - so the question then becomes - when do you finally decide that after everything you have done, you are not going to solve the problem and turn it over to an expert who can? When do you decide that enough is enough and that there are looming problems here in America, the good old USofA that really need fixing and need real money that you are expending elsewhere? When does Bush get real and include his war budget for Iraq in the real budget - so the American People can see exactly how much this war that was going to pay for itself is costing them?

I could probably cherry pick verses of the Bible for illustration, but I think it is too important to be used as fodder for back up. I just do not see the connection between believing in GOD and condemning those who do not believe as you do.

You can disagree with someone politically and upon matters of religion or lack of one but blaming them for all these deaths is too much.

Better go read some history speedy. The only people the shah of Iran was killing were those trying to kill him and the chief reason they were trying to kill him was because he was trying to bring the country into the 20th century. In another 5 to 10 years he might have succeeded. Unfortunately Jimmy Carter decided to turn the place over to the Ayatollahs and we've had problems in the Middle East ever since.

Mr. Dickey,

Very well written and very well conceived. It is a treat to read an analysis with which I whole-heartedly concur.

I would amplify on one point. Our military has neither the skills nor the structure to conduct a successful occupation. What it is designed for is to close with and destroy opposing enemy forces is short order. At this the US Military is demonstrably the best in the world, witness the 1991 attack on Iraq and the 2003 attack on Iraq. Had we simply contented ourselves with that victory, including the killing of Hussein’s sons and his capture, and then left it to the Iraqis to sort out their own government while we departed forthwith, we would be considerably the better for it today.

Our foreign policy should reflect the limits as well as the strengths or our military power. There is no question that we are today the most capable nation on the planet in terms of our capacity to visit concentrated military destruction to any point on the globe. On the other hand, we are among the least capable when it comes to occupying foreign territory. We thought we learned that lesson in Vietnam, but no, it appears each generation must learn it all over again. This is sad.

Vote RON PAUL!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcQQ05XtAQ4

soKY,

Half truths seem to be your m.o.:

"excesses of the Iranian Revolution"

What exactly was the catalyst for this revoluation...perhaps the American backing of a corrupt dictator Mohammad Reza Pahlavi?

As for Germany, it was a war by technicality. Japan declared war on the United States and was in an alliance with German, therefore, our declaration included all members of that pact.

I suppose you feel that 911 was the directly connected to Saddam? That is the lie Feith and Wolfowitz and the rest of the neo con traitor scum would like Americans to believe.

This was NOT a just war.... so here is a quote for you and your neo con rationalizations:

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" - Dr. Samul Johnson

there is not half truth about it; we backed Saddam as an ally and provided resources to this dictator that we then deposed.

Rumsfeld even met with Saddam at the time; however, I am sure you can give some nuanced background for that exchange.

To Amviennava (June 22, 2007 2:08 pm)

Your “GET OUT NOW” and let things “run its course” is the moral equivalent of throwing the child who can’t swim into the deep end. Which doesn’t sound very moral to me at all.

I especially like your admission that there are “Many rotten people in the world, but I feel no urge to attack them”. How Hitler would have loved and appreciated you. But then you might say, Saddam is no Hitler and you’d be right. Hitler was directly or indirectly responsible for 40-million deaths. Saddam comes in way below standard with only around a million.

Only a million deaths! The ‘only’ strips every last bit of morality out of this simple statement. Yes Bush’s management of the Occupation has been abominable, but is the occupation of Iraq all that different that the Occupation of Germany and Japan after World War II. American tanks and soldiers patrolled the streets of Stuttgart and Munich and Frankfurt 60-years ago, just as American tanks and soldiers are trying to do today in Baghdad. Millions of German refugees roamed the destroyed, burnt-out cities of central Europe back then, certainly 20% if not more of the population. But American force and American money transformed not only Germany and Japan, but most of Western Europe.

Iraq today and Germany in 1945 are similar enough that I would say that if our reasons for going to war against Iraq are wrong, then so were our reasons for warring against Germany. After all, what did Germany ever do to us? -- at least that’s what the pacifists of 1941 were saying.

Don’t get involved. It’s none of our business. Let them sort their own problems out.

“Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay – and also claims a halo for his dishonesty.” --- Robert Heinlein

To Speed123 (June 22, 2007 2:47 pm)

In response to “who do you think sponsored this war with Iran with weapons and cash”

Weapons:
Iraq has long been a client of the Soviet Union. One of the reasons it lost the Persian Gulf War in 1991 was its reliance on the tactics taught by their Soviet advisors. Iraqi tanks are T-72 and T-55 models – both Soviet made. Iraqi infantry use the AK-47 produced in Russia. The Iraqi Air Force consisted of MIG-23s, MIG-25s, MIG-29s, Su-20s, Su-22s, Su-24s, Su-25s and Il-76s (all Russian made) as well as a few Mirage F-1s (French made). Iraqi artillery was mostly Soviet during the Iran war and had been upgraded by the addition of German pieces by the time of the Persian Gulf War.

Cash:
Ronald Reagan did say that the United States “could not afford to allow Iraq to lose the war to Iran”, and some cash was exchanged. But the United States did not give more than the minimal amount of support necessary to see that Iran could not best Iraq. Iran taking over Iraq was no more in the American national interest than Saddam taking over Iran.

The only thing that might be construed for direct support for Iraq happened when the United States Navy attacked Iranian targets after oil tankers flying the American flag hit mines – while not retaliating against Iraq after the American frigate USS Stark was hit by a French-made Exocet missile launched from an F-1.

Taking steps to see Iran did not win is hardly an American endorsement of Iraq or its war. After the excesses of the Iranian Revolution, no country wanted to see Iran win (including Saudi Arabia and most other Gulf states) – that’s one reason Saddam thought he could get away with his war of aggression.

So relax with your hyper-inflated half-truths.

Mr. Dickey's informed, insightful essay on a situation amounting to a national emergency is effectively buried here by WaPo. Notwithstanding the crisis created by our government has proved too much for this same government, it thwarts every formal attempt to so much as suggest a different course. Nothing less than a citizens' revolt may be needed to stop what must be stopped for reasons so well articulated by Mr. Dickey that his essay seems exceptionally well-suited to rallying the Bushwhacked out of their stupor. Is it too cynical to suspect this is precisely why it's not on the homepage?

3000 were killed in 911; yet 100 million were killed through ATHEIST COMMUNISM.

No belief in God frees man to kill in number never before see in world history...all in the name of rational, scientific and atheist "progress."

Which is a more dangerous belief system would you say. (PS 100 million in a mere 100 years)

Christians for War - how Christlike

"Right now we are acting like a surgeon who’s discovered he’s taken out the wrong organs and is hoping to repair that disastrous mistake by taking out still more."

This is delusional nonsense.

Religion is amazing.Its power is awesome.
To think that on September 11 2001,nineteen intelligent,college educated,religious young men,some with PHD's,
could believe so strongly in a god and paradise, up there in the sky somewhere, that they died horrible deaths and killed thousands just to get in.
These were not morons.
They were just seriously religious.
For years supernatural ideas had been drilled into their brains almost hypnotically through groupthink and belief in every word of their ever studied Holy Book. Surely,once one accepts the existence of the supernatural as natural or real,then ones reason must suffer,and one is set up to believe almost anything.
Despite their PHD's, religion turned these men into deranged and murderous idiots.
Lets stop treating religious thinking as something wise and wonderful.It's not. It's ridiculous,irrational and the most dangerous force out there.

"The Iran-Iraq war, which Saddam Hussein started by invading Iran, killed hundreds of thousands of people over 8-years (some estimates go as high as a million deaths)."

Hey SOK7,

Who do you think sponsored this war with Iran via weapons and cash??? Um, the US maybe...

As for the "mistakes" made during the inital occupation, these were NOT mistakes but a concerted effort destroy the state of Iraq so that the neo cons and other theorists could transform Iraq into a radical capitalist state.

Read this and try to think for yourself:

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/09/0080197

sok7: You are correct. "Iraq does not exist in a vacuum." And we attacked because we did not want a mushroom cloud (sensationalism); and besides Bush/Cheney 'knew' his secret service had contacts with AlQaeeda (though the CIA had told them not); and Bush/Cheney 'knew' where all the WMD were (though the UN had said there were none).

And yes, Saddam Hussein started wars (at least one of aggression); which unfortunately we did, too. Let us not forget that a 'preventive' war is a war of aggression! To compound things, our conduct of the war has been so inept that it must have been intended to cause as much human suffering as possible; either that or the administration (and the military) consist of incompetents - take your pick.

Contrary to you, MANY of US were opposed to this fiasco from the beginning, that is mid-2002. We are NOT speaking from hindsight. And we are DEFINITELY NOT rationalizing our mistakes, as those who still support it do.

The question still is where do we go from here. Take it from one who has been right about this fiasco from the beginning: GET OUT NOW. We unleashed the mayhem, and now it must run its course. It shall, whether we are there or not.

When it comes to Iraq (and the whole Middle East for that matter), Bush/Cheney (and their acolytes/minions have been wrong about every single prediction they made. A level of incompetence that I believe to be unprecedented!

The ONLY contribution we can make is to open the doors and let ANY Iraqi in as a refugee. So far, our 'liberation' has made more than 20% of the population refugees! Once things settle, we shall pay big $$$ as blood money to make amends.

A list of complaints about how 'bad' Saddam Hussein was is nice, but irrelevant. There are many rotten people in the world, but I feel no urge to attack them; heck, some of them are our 'friends' (by the way, did you notice that Hussein's WORSE actions were while allied to us?)

Something to keep in mind whenever you hear someone of liberating anyone: "The local bastard is always better than the foreign bastard".

Great posts by Amviennava and Mary.

As for the "we can't leave now because al queda will take over" folks, please stop with the neo con propaganda and try think for yourselves.

Iraq is a majority Shiite country (60%) and al queda is a sunni organization - what do you think will happen when the Shiites win the civil war after we leave?

This is not even to mention that Sunni groups are even fighting al queda - which is only 2 percent of the fighters in Iraq anyway.

As for JFK, it is sacrelige to even mention him in the context of Bush.

Bush's call to serve should be -

"ask not wether it is legal for your country to wire tap your phone, instead ask what time the mall opens and when your next tax break arrives."

Anonymous @Posted June 22, 2007 11:55 AM: You quoted JFK "Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country!".

A great statement. One flaw: Neither Bush, nor Cheney, nor any of their acolytes/minion/mentors, are the country.

I will do many things for my country. Let us not forget: "My country, right or wrong. To be defended when Right; to be set aright when Wrong". In other words, I don't have to sacrifice anything just because some idiot asks me to.

Iraq does not exist in a vacuum. That is perhaps where your analysis, Christopher Dickey, is incomplete. Iraq was one terrorist nation in a part of the world filled with terrorist nations. Saddam Hussein was a terrorist. He started 2-wars of aggression that killed hundreds of thousands. He gassed, shot, and tortured his own people. The fact that he had a political title and financed his aggression from the national treasury does not make him any less a murderer or a terrorist. It may not be moral, but it is true when I say that the world is better off without him.

So - To occupy or not to occupy, that became the question…

Bush screwed up: first, he went into Iraq with only enough soldiers to take the country but not enough soldiers to hold the country. Second, any Iraqi who knew anything about running a country was removed from his office. We didn’t have the time it takes to train an entire government bureaucracy from scratch. Third, we dismantled the Iraqi Army. With no security apparatus of its own, our soldiers became Iraq’s only police. Our soldiers are not trained or equipped to become policemen. Most can’t speak the language.

You speak in hindsight of why we shouldn’t be there. I like people who speak in hindsight, they’re always so darned helpful. But the question asked was not one of where we are (between a rock and a hard place, I know), but one of where do we go from here. I.E. Is it more moral to throw a child into the deep end of the pool and hope for the best or is the greater morality in teaching the child to swim?

Perhaps I should say that I do not care one bit if the Iraqis hate America in general or me specifically. I have gotten used to the whole world, starting with our friends in France, telling America that we are so darned evil. What I do care about is that the new Iraqi government does not export violence (such as Saddam Hussein did) and does not allow anyone living or working on Iraqi soil to export their violence either.

This implies of course that the Iraqi government will become strong enough to stop the violence on its own streets. There’s a civil war going on, another point you conveniently forgot to mention. Iraqis would rather be blowing each other up these days, targeting American soldiers has become only a sideshow.

Pacifism can be born or moral conviction or of apathy. Unfortunately, I believe America’s rush to get out of Iraq has little moral basis.

To Rick Bauer (June 22, 2007 1046 am):

The Iran-Iraq war, which Saddam Hussein started by invading Iran, killed hundreds of thousands of people over 8-years (some estimates go as high as a million deaths).

The Persian Gulf War, which Saddam Hussein started by invading Kuwait, killed tens of thousands over a six-week period (best guess 85,000, mostly Iraqi).

Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons to kill the inhabitants of an entire Kurdish village in northern Iraq.

In an attack on the Iraqi village of Dijail, Saddam Hussein killed 148 Iraqi citizens, and imprisoned and tortured an additional 1500. He then leveled what remained of the town.

Saddam’s secret police are responsible for the deaths (or disappearances) of between 2000 and 5000 people every year that Saddam was in power.

Saddam enticed his son-in-law back into Iraq with a promise of a pardon and then had him and his brother killed.

And yet you say that “the US has created a far more grievous humanitarian situation in Iraq than in the former regime”. You are not even close to being correct in this assessment. Horrible crimes have been committed in Iraq for far longer than CNN has been covering them.

Anon,

The US (and the UK) was warned and warned and warned again--increasingly urgently by members of GHW Bush's admin no less-- that an invasion of Iraq risked tipping the region into civil war. Bush and his colleagues went ahead with the invasion.

The Pope spoke out, Nelson Mandela spoke out--probably the men who possessed more moral authority than the rest of the world's 'leaders' combined. Bush and his colleagues went ahead with the invasion.

During the summer of 2003 there were proposals to hand the project over to the UN, partially withdraw American troops, and declare the project a 'success'. Bush and his colleagues went ahead with the occupation.

Now American troops are stuck in the middle of an increasingly vicious civil war, providing *both* sides with a tempting target. (Operation Provide Target?)

Like rabbits caught in the glare of headlights from an oncoming car Bush and his colleagues stand--transfixed by what they have precipitated.

Get the troops out, for God's sake. Move, folks, move!

Americans are being occupied by the Department of Homeland Security. Government is in my face with its hand out and its pistol drawn at every juncture. The US Federal Government is building nuclear weapons under our noses on American soil. It is a far bigger nuclear threat than Iran or Korea, if only because of the Feds'incompetence. Most infuriating is taxpayers paying for it. I say if you want war, you pay for it.

Yo Yo what complete garbage! You would rather throw the president and our country under the bus then try to resolve any issues in a supportive manner. Typical of your kind!

Our country and president were fed bad Intel about Iraq; we were told by former Iraqi defectors that America would be welcomed into there country and the Iraqi people would support the overthrow of Saddam! Truth one!

Truth two, there was weapons of mass destruction because they were used on the Iranians by Saddam.

Truth three, Saddam wasn’t complying with the United Nations regarding inspections and remained defiant.

Truth four, Saddam has carried out genocide against Iraqi’s!

Truth five, Saddam was aggressive to other Middle East Countries. Saddam invaded Kuwait for OIL! Saudi Arabia was fearful they were next and asked the US assistance and the beginning of Bin Laden’s animosity towards the US!

I don’t like the war either but there is a lot of blame to go around and Christianity shouldn’t be used as the scapegoat! The Catholic Church has condemned the war since day one I can’t say that about the entire fence jumping democrats!!!

Yes Bush mismanaged the war and yes our government underestimated the cultural impact that the war would have on Shiites, Sunni’s, and Kurds. Yes the war is horrible! I agree to all of those things.

We need to solve the problem and not point fingers! I stand behind our government for positive change do you?

JFK – Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country!

PEACETROLL:

Iraq's Legacy of Terror: Mass Graves

Download the report in PDF format
Since the Saddam Hussein regime was overthrown in May, 270 mass graves have been reported. By mid-January, 2004, the number of confirmed sites climbed to fifty-three. Some graves hold a few dozen bodies—their arms lashed together and the bullet holes in the backs of skulls testimony to their execution. Other graves go on for hundreds of meters, densely packed with thousands of bodies.

"We've already discovered just so far the remains of 400,000 people in mass graves," said British Prime Minister Tony Blair on November 20 in London. The United Nations, the U.S. State Department, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch (HRW) all estimate that Saddam Hussein's regime murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent people. "Human Rights Watch estimates that as many as 290,000 Iraqis have been 'disappeared' by the Iraqi government over the past two decades," said the group in a statement in May. "Many of these 'disappeared' are those whose remains are now being unearthed in mass graves all over Iraq."

If these numbers prove accurate, they represent a crime against humanity surpassed only by the Rwandan genocide of 1994, Pol Pot's Cambodian killing fields in the 1970s, and the Nazi Holocaust of World War II.

Please note: This report contains some graphic images and descriptions, including first-hand accounts from three Iraqis who survived the mass murders.

If we had a President who did not believe in the supernatural,we wouldn't be in Iraq today.
I truly believe that.
He is every bit as deluded as the 9/11 religionists
who brought down the World Trade Center.
They believed they were doing God's work.
Bush believes he is doing God's work.
I cringe at the stone-age stupidity of both the bombers and Bush.
Will the world survive this madness? Only God knows.
And He doesn't exist.

The Iraq invasion was planned and undertaken by a cabal of men who did not have America's interests at heart but more their desires to topple Saddam for Israel and for the oil. Iraq is not a just war, ill-conceived, ill-planned and hideously mismanaged and therefore a failure. Iraq will never ever be a success. Bring our troops home.

The only way to win this war in Iraq is to have the Iraqi's turn on Al Qaeda. Until then we can't leave until our enemy has been defeated! If we leave Iraq in the state that it is then, Al Qaeda will claim victory. Then the real hell will begin!!! Let's hope that never happens...

Al Qaeda probably wasn't in Iraq during the start of the war in Iraq but they are there NOW!

Think about the scary propaganda! Bin Laden defeated the Soviets in Afghanistan and now has defeated the great Americans!

Scary!!!

Wonderful article and very helpful perspective. Demonstrates the flaws and unintended consequences of policy (and perhaps personal) hubris by the US administration in Iraq. Interesting that this war had been roundly critiqued by the US Catholic bishops and the Pope, and any conception of the Iraq invasion meeting Augustine's conception of a "just war" has long been debunked by theologians and philosophers...and so the US intervention contradicted the religious convictions of the largest Christian group in the nation.

Of further interest is the fact that the US has created a far more grevious humanitarian situation in Iraq than in the former regime (cruel as it may have been), and that leaving all parties to "work out their problems locally" by the US precipitiously leaving may result in further bloodshed, as defacto ethnic cleansing between Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd no doubt accelerates. What would be the role and makeup of any continuing humanitarian presence in Iraq as we move forward? Thoughtful ways that the UN could be utilized in this role have not been developed to any satisfactory detail.

Wonderful article and very helpful perspective. Demonstrates the flaws and unintended consequences of policy (and perhaps personal) hubris by the US administration in Iraq. Interesting that this war had been roundly critiqued by the US Catholic bishops and the Pope, and any conception of the Iraq invasion meeting Augustine's conception of a "just war" has long been debunked by theologians and philosophers...and so the US intervention contradicted the religious convictions of the largest Christian group in the nation.

Of further interest is the fact that the US has created a far more grevious humanitarian situation in Iraq than in the former regime (cruel as it may have been), and that leaving all parties to "work out their problems locally" by the US precipitiously leaving may result in further bloodshed, as defacto ethnic cleansing between Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd no doubt accelerates. What would be the role and makeup of any continuing humanitarian presence in Iraq as we move forward? Thoughtful ways that the UN could be utilized in this role have not been developed to any satisfactory detail.

The reason for occupying Iraq was founded on a lie.

The false lies that Saddam was killing thousands of his own people every year is a LIE.

America has caused more damage to Iraq (the common people), then Saddam every did or ever could.

There are over 1 million dead due directly or indirectly because of America and Israeli foreign policies.

It was always about oil, money and giving Israel pre-eminance in the area.

The United States, the west and specifically israel the fascist state are all offensive to the true God.

Iran possibly developing nuclear weapons and Israel's protector encamped on Iran's border with aircraft-carriers stationed off Iran's coast?