Obama Announces Full Troop Withdrawal from Iraq by Year's End. Confirming reports that emerged last week that the US does not plan to maintain a residual troop presence in Iraq, the US will pull out of Iraq completely by the end of 2011, bringing to a close a bloody chapter in international history that first began in March 20, 2003. With other recent reports that the administration is considering a faster withdrawal from Afghanistan in the aftermath of Osama Bin Laden's death at the hands of US special forces in May of this year, an end to America's longest running military conflict also seems likely to come soon.
posted by saulgoodman on Oct 21, 2011 - 232 comments

Clinton White House Spokesman Joe Lockhart does stand-up. Text, or if you prefer there is some audio at the 51min mark from This American Life.
posted by East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 on Aug 17, 2007 - 7 comments

"Good Riddance Attention Whore" Cindy Sheehan is done protesting. CNN Story [via]
posted by muckster on May 29, 2007 - 172 comments

There are Klingons in the Whitehouse! Er, make that faux Klingons.
posted by alms on Jan 16, 2007 - 29 comments

Baghdad is calm, except it's neither. So this guy Howard Kaloogian is running for Congress in California, and he supports the troops. Thinks they're making all sorts of progress that simply isn't reported by the evil lib'rul mainstream media, so he went to see Baghdad for himself, and posted a picture of a calm Baghdad street - See? No terrorists here! Except that certain sleuthing types found something awfully fishy about that photo...
posted by kgasmart on Mar 29, 2006 - 146 comments

Prone to Violence FROM THE French Revolution to contemporary Iraq, the beginning phase of democratization in unsettled circumstances has often spurred a rise in militant nationalism. Democracy means rule by the people, but when territorial control and popular loyalties are in flux, a prior question has to be settled: Which people will form the nation? Nationalist politicians vie for popular support to answer that question in a way that suits their purposes. When groups are at loggerheads and the rules guiding domestic politics are unclear, the answer is more often based on a test of force and political manipulation than on democratic procedures.
posted by Postroad on Jan 7, 2006 - 17 comments

Bush and Blair slated by Pinter George W Bush and Tony Blair must be held to account for feeding the public "a vast tapestry of lies" about the Iraq war, writer Harold Pinter said. [Postroad: but then, what do artists know about politics?]
posted by Postroad on Dec 7, 2005 - 41 comments

Are the counter protests today pro-war or something else? Photos coming into the news wires show a mixture of devout Bush loyalty, people erecting giant Ten Commandments and traitor paranoia... and not to forget.. supporting the troops. So is this just a misfire of people who simply hate protestors or do they believe in something besides waving the flag?
posted by DougieZero1982 on Aug 27, 2005 - 67 comments

A new Harper's article by Jeff Sharlet , author of the also-must-read Jesus Plus Nothing. To win a war, you must have an elaborate strategy...
posted by deusdiabolus on May 27, 2005 - 24 comments

Freedom's Defenders or Politicians' Pawns? No pretense of protecting Americans’ freedom went into the decision to enter into the Spanish-American War. It was out-and-out imperialism and nothing more. Veterans of that war may have helped to liberate Cuba , Guam , Puerto Rico , and the Philippines from Spanish rule; but those same veterans then turned around and rammed the jackboot of the U. S. military into the faces of those they had just liberated. Hundreds of thousands of Cubans and Filipinos, who had thought they were being freed only to find out they had merely exchanged one colonial master for another, were killed in their own independence-from-Uncle-Sam movements. When they finally did throw off direct U. S. rule, they were then saddled with dictators of Uncle Sam’s choosing. No credit for the defense of Americans’ freedom can be granted to veterans of this war. Compare to this: Gunning For Saddam We report, you decide indeed...
posted by Elim on Mar 6, 2005 - 23 comments

LAWs instructions for starting criminal procedures against Bush Today in Vancouver, Lawyers Against the War filed torture charges against George W. Bush under the Canadian Criminal Code. The charges were laid by Gail Davidson, co-chair of Lawyers against the War--LAW, under provisions enacted pursuant to the U.N. Torture Convention, ratified by both Canada and the United States. The charges concern the well known abuses of prisoners held by US Armed Forces in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba. The charges were accepted by the Justice of the Peace and referred for a hearing to decide whether Bush should be required to appear for trial. The Attorney General of Canada's consent is required within eight days for proceedings to continue, and the question of Bush's diplomatic immunity will have to be resolved by the court.
posted by sunexplodes on Dec 1, 2004 - 66 comments

Terrorising free speech. Al Lorentz is a reserve Non-Commissioned Officer currently serving in Iraq. His blazingly clear, succinct article on Iraq, titled "Why we cannot win", has raged over the wires (also at MeFi) since it was published on LewRockwell.com. Now, the military chain of command is considering charging Al with violation of Article 134 for making a statement with the intent to promote disloyalty or disaffection toward the U.S. by any member of the Armed forces. The military is also considering charging Al with violation of 1344.10, the conduct of partisan political activity, and violation of Standards of Conduct for unauthorized use of Government assets to create and email stories.
posted by acrobat on Sep 29, 2004 - 30 comments

Mr. Bush and His 10 Ever-Changing Different Positions on Iraq: "A flip and a flop and now just a flop." Delightful Moore (to those who like what he does), and a few links to backup his reasoning for those who don't.
posted by acrobat on Sep 28, 2004 - 52 comments

Impeach Tony Blair. Backed by a large dossier, supported by a handful (so far) of UK members of parliament. Summarised by The Spectator.
posted by iffley on Aug 26, 2004 - 21 comments

As the verdict of Butler Report into the intelligence used to justify the war in Iraq, draws near in Britain, a senior intelligence source reveals that MI6 took the "rare step" of withdrawing the intelligence assessment that underpinned the claim that Saddam had continued to produce WMD (an admission that such information was fundamentally unreliable), however Blair did not tell the public "that the evidence of WMD was crumbling beneath him". [Watch the Panorama programme in question here for 7 days from 11-7-2004] The Dossier that Lord Hutton declared was not sexed-up (leading to senior BBC resignations), Dr Brian Jones (former head of the nuclear, chemical and biological branch of the Ministry of Defence's Defence Intelligence Staff) says was sexed-up, and details exactly how.
posted by Blue Stone on Jul 12, 2004 - 26 comments

The anonymous author of Imperial Hubris has been revealed.
posted by sixpack on Jul 2, 2004 - 12 comments

Powerful anti-war flash animation from the Kucinich campaign. A bit heavy handed, but when dealing with life and death, literally, its best to just come out and say what one thinks.
posted by skallas on Dec 8, 2003 - 35 comments

A Private Army Grows Around the U.S. Mission in Iraq and Around the World As Report Shows Iraq Contractors Politically Active
--see also Making A Killing - The Business of War, and on the inside...
posted by y2karl on Oct 30, 2003 - 21 comments

"Never before have so many stories been created to sell a war," says Sam Gardiner, author of a new report {.pdf, here's an html cache} that explains how the world was deceived.
posted by Domain Master 666 on Oct 17, 2003 - 35 comments

Let's fire Rumsfeld! Moveon wants him fired and so does Truemajority. Considering the White House has been looking for a fall guy for Iraq for some time now, can the constituents help Bush decide? I guess we can debate the effectiveness of petitions but photos like these are just impressive.
posted by skallas on Sep 18, 2003 - 31 comments

Did America Walk Into A Trap? In stories reported by Newsweek and Fox News it appears possible that the armed resistance now being encountered by US/British forces was part of Saddam Hussein's plan all along. The documents that have been found essentially say that should Baghdad fall, the Baath party loyalists should fade into society and extract vengeance on the occupying soldiers bit by bit. The nightmare scenario before the war was urban combat, Mogadishu style. But now it appears that Hussein may have upped the ante with this "guerrilla-type campaign".
posted by owillis on Jul 16, 2003 - 65 comments

"War Crimes" is a powerful Flash video about the war. "Doctor Bushlove" is darkly comic. Both are by Eric Blumrich, and are well-crafted but quite graphic. And in the interests of fairness, Blumrich has given equal time to his critics. [Via BuzzFlash.]
posted by homunculus on Apr 6, 2003 - 18 comments

Operation: Cover George's butt? As the backpeddling and fingerpointing over "cakewalk" predictions continues, Talking Points Memo notes a recent article in the Charlotte Observer that quotes "senior administration officials" in saying that "dissenting views [about the war plan]' were not fully or energetically communicated to the president.'" Sounds like someones taking out an insurance policy, don't it?
posted by Gilbert on Mar 31, 2003 - 15 comments

Richard Perle resigns the Defense Policy Board chairmanship. Richard Perle, after being accused of profiteering and conflict of interest, has resigned as chairman of the Defense Policy Board. Was this the real reason he resigned, or is the administration distancing itself from Perle due to his claims the Iraqis would be "dancing in the streets" after a US invasion, his links to an advocate for invading Saudi Arabia, or perhaps his call in the British press to get rid of the UN?
Don't start missing him yet, however. Perle will still remain on the Defense Policy board at Donald Rumsfeld's request.
posted by insomnia_lj on Mar 28, 2003 - 5 comments

Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, had a difficult end to his press briefing [Real]. Skip forward to 29 minutes.
posted by Pretty_Generic on Feb 28, 2003 - 80 comments

If Saddam Hussein were to use chemical/biological weapons in an Iraq conflict, how safe would soldiers in the field be? The Department of the Defense says "no problem", but some of the men on the ground seem to believe otherwise. The gear the soldiers will use to protect themselves and their water supply appears to be old, prone to failure while the training received in the usage of these tools looks inadequate. It could be the return of "Gulf War Syndrome" (PDF).
posted by owillis on Feb 20, 2003 - 19 comments

French Muslims Influence Government Policy on Iraq This piece from an on-line Arab source helps us to understand the French reluctance to want a war with Iraq. And you thought it was only about French oil interests, but non.
posted by Postroad on Feb 18, 2003 - 62 comments

The tide is turning. A new poll from the Pew Research Center indicates that the Bush Administration is losing support for a war against Iraq, with only 29% favoring war if U.N. inspectors fail to find weapons of mass destruction. Polls are looking considerably worse in Great Britain, where 47% of the public disapprove of an attack on Iraq, compared to just 30% in favor of such an attack. Blair is certain that he can get the British public to support war, however, even if Britain goes to war without U.N. support. "When and if that time came, people would find the reasons acceptable and satisfactory because there is no other route available to us."
posted by insomnia_lj on Jan 21, 2003 - 55 comments

The Liberaral Quandry on Iraq [nytimes reg req'd]. [warning : iraq political story]. As a "liberal hawk", I have had some issues regarding whether to support a war with Iraq or not. In this article, George Packer talks to four liberals (David Rieff, Leon Wieseltier, Michael Walzer and Paul Berman) about what they think, and presents a sort of top ten list of reasons for or not. After reading the article, I'm a little less confused about where I stand, and a little closer to coming to grips with it
posted by rshah21 on Dec 9, 2002 - 29 comments

An Open Letter to Congress from the editors of The Nation. All the makings of a final plea.
posted by mooseindian on Sep 26, 2002 - 91 comments

Is Germany next on the list? Well, no, but the way the Bush administration approaches diplomacy needs some work. Is a war in Iraq worth "poisoning" America's relationship with the international community?
posted by elwoodwiles on Sep 23, 2002 - 30 comments

Administration Says It Can Attack Iraq without Congressional Approval Not a new story, per se, but this Post article lays out pretty well the arguments behind the administration's case, one being simply Bush's role as commander-in-chief. It's strange how closely this issue reflects earlier attempts by the administration to avoid Congressional and/or public scrutiny (Cheney's Enron meetings, for example). Why this aversion, and why fight so hard? And I have a sneaking fear that Bush will seek Congressional approval only after invading, and he will bully votes by claiming that reps have a patriotic duty to support a president in a time of war.
posted by risenc on Aug 26, 2002 - 65 comments

Well, ha ha ha, and yah, boo said Christopher Hitchens to those who would oppose the war on November 14. At this time, of course it was assumed by Hitchens and his ilk that we had won, all that remained was to install "our sons of bitches", and rub the peacenicks faces in it. Now it seems very far from over and Hitchens and others with similar views have articulated their thoughts in the Guardian. It makes interesting reading. As does this article on how it is possible to love the U.S but not George Bush.
posted by Fat Buddha on Mar 20, 2002 - 9 comments