Info about subscribing or unsubscribing from this list is at the bottom of this 
message.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://snipurl.com/f94o
Cost of War In Iraq By State

http://snipurl.com/f94q
Analysts linked to intelligence failures on Iraq rewarded

------------------

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5427823.html

Editorial: Memorial Day/Praise bravery, seek forgiveness
Published May 30, 2005  The Minneapolis Star-Tribune

Nothing young Americans can do in life is more honorable than offering
themselves for the defense of their nation. It requires great selflessness
and sacrifice, and quite possibly the forfeiture of life itself. On
Memorial Day 2005, we gather to remember all those who gave us that
ultimate gift. Because they are so fresh in our minds, those who have died
in Iraq make a special claim on our thoughts and our prayers.

In exchange for our uniformed young people's willingness to offer the gift
of their lives, civilian Americans owe them something important: It is our
duty to ensure that they never are called to make that sacrifice unless it
is truly necessary for the security of the country. In the case of Iraq,
the American public has failed them; we did not prevent the Bush
administration from spending their blood in an unnecessary war based on
contrived concerns about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. President
Bush and those around him lied, and the rest of us let them. Harsh? Yes.
True? Also yes. Perhaps it happened because Americans, understandably,
don't expect untruths from those in power. But that works better as an
explanation than as an excuse.

The "smoking gun," as some call it, surfaced on May 1 in the London Times.
It is a highly classified document containing the minutes of a July 23,
2002, meeting at 10 Downing Street in which Sir Richard Dearlove, head of
Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, reported to Prime Minister Tony
Blair on talks he'd just held in Washington. His mission was to determine
the Bush administration's intentions toward Iraq.

At a time when the White House was saying it had "no plans" for an
invasion, the British document says Dearlove reported that there had been
"a perceptible shift in attitude" in Washington. "Military action was now
seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action,
justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence
and facts were being fixed around the policy. The (National Security
Council) had no patience with the U.N. route, and no enthusiasm for
publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little
discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."

It turns out that former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke and former
Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill were right. Both have been pilloried for
writing that by summer 2002 Bush had already decided to invade.

Walter Pincus, writing in the Washington Post on May 22, provides further
evidence that the administration did, indeed, fix the intelligence on Iraq
to fit a policy it had already embraced: invasion and regime change. Just
four days before Bush's State of the Union address in January 2003, Pincus
writes, the National Security Council staff "put out a call for new
intelligence to bolster claims" about Saddam Hussein's WMD programs. The
call went out because the NSC staff believed the case was weak. Moreover,
Pincus says, "as the war approached, many U.S. intelligence analysts were
internally questioning almost every major piece of prewar intelligence
about Hussein's alleged weapons programs." But no one at high ranks in the
administration would listen to them.

On the day before Bush's speech, the CIA's Berlin station chief warned
that the source for some of what Bush would say was untrustworthy. Bush
said it anyway. He based part of his most important annual speech to the
American people on a single, dubious, unnamed source. The source was later
found to have fabricated his information.

Also comes word, from the May 19 New York Times, that senior U.S. military
leaders are not encouraged about prospects in Iraq. Yes, they think the
United States can prevail, but as one said, it may take "many years."

As this bloody month of car bombs and American deaths -- the most since
January -- comes to a close, as we gather in groups small and large to
honor our war dead, let us all sing of their bravery and sacrifice. But
let us also ask their forgiveness for sending them to a war that should
never have happened. In the 1960s it was Vietnam. Today it is Iraq. Let us
resolve to never, ever make this mistake again. Our young people are
simply too precious.

_____________________________

Note: This message comes from the peace-justice-news e-mail mailing list of 
articles and commentaries about peace and social justice issues, activism, etc. 
 If you do not regularly receive mailings from this list or have received this 
message as a forward from someone else and would like to be added to the list, 
send a blank e-mail with the subject "subscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
or you can visit:
http://lists.enabled.com/mailman/listinfo/peace-justice-news  Go to that same 
web address to view the list's archives or to unsubscribe.

E-mail accounts that become full, inactive or out of order for more than a few 
days will be deleted from this list.

FAIR USE NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the 
information in this e-mail is distributed without profit to those who have 
expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational 
purposes.  I am making such material available in an effort to advance 
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, 
scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair 
use' of copyrighted material as provided for in the US Copyright Law.

Reply via email to