The Mistaken Crime of War on Iraq

November 26, 2007

The Mistaken Crime of War on Iraq

Well, everybody makes mistakes …

American Majority Sees Iraq War as a Mistake

Most adults in the United States question their federal government’s decision to launch the coalition effort, according to a poll by Knowledge Networks released by the Associated Press and Yahoo. 62 per cent of respondents think the U.S. made a made a mistake in going to war in Iraq.

The War on Iraq was not a mistake, but a willful, carefully planed and marketed supreme crime. A war of aggression for various nefarious reasons.

But let’s not blame the people who answered the poll for their answer. They were asked the wrong (loaded) question and given only two alternatives for answers:

All in all, thinking about how things have gone in Iraq since the United States went to war there in March 2003, do you think the United States made …

.. the right decision in going to war in Iraq? (37%)

.. a mistake in going to war in Iraq? (62%)

(Refused / Not Answered 1%)

It is obvious that this was a push poll:

A push poll is a political campaign technique in which an individual or organization attempts to influence or alter the view of respondents under the guise of conducting a poll.

In a classic political campaign push poll, many more people are called than the sample needed to get statistical relevant answers. The idea is to spread a meme, a chunk of cultural information, as far as possible. That is not the case here, the sample size is 2230.

But with AP and Yahoo paying for the poll and publishing its result through their media power the meme distributing effect is even bigger than in the classic campaign case. Similar question were included in earlier polls too and the results also presented under a "mistake" headline.

There is apparently a campaign to redefine the crime of War on Iraq into a "mistake". A "mistake" of course does not justify any punishment of its perpetrators, not even their impeachment. Everybody makes mistakes …

Who orders and pays Associated Press and Yahoo to run this campaign?

If no one does, why is it their and other media companies self-interest to run this campaign?

Posted by b on November 26, 2007 at 13:55 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Just in – one result of the mistake: Iraqis may offer US deal to stay longer

The proposal, described to the AP by two senior officials familiar with the issue, is one of the first indications that the United States and Iraq are beginning to explore what their relationship might look like, once the U.S. significantly draws down its troop presence.
As part of the package, the Iraqis want an end to the current U.N.-mandated multinational forces mission, and also an end to all U.N.-ordered restrictions on Iraq’s sovereignty.

First impression: This is simply a trial balloon launched by the U.S. – I see no way that this would be accepted in the Iraqi parliament.

Posted by: b | Nov 26 2007 14:33 utc | 1

As we saw with Yugoslavia, pre-emptive ‘war’, without UN approval, to make it short, in that case by the US/nato/germany as a mover, indiscriminate bombing from the air for 78 days, is not a problem for the international community or your regular pious, moral, anti-war, often ‘leftist’ OECD citizen.
Iraq was a different; not directly under USSR influence, not a tin pot place; large and strategically complicated; having some reputation, aura, under Saddam, as a modernist ‘Arab’ country; a holdout to US hegemony, still on a pan-Arab socialist line (baathists); suffering from sanctions; certainly ‘sovereign’; and benefitting from being third in line (after Yugoslavia and Afghanistan) – an enough-is-enough kind of feeling.
Everything the demonstrators and the critics predicted turned out correct, and then some. For the other two, they didn’t bother (I mean those who did had no international clout or echo.)
So, in that pragmatic sense, it was a mistake. It was stretching too far, using tired scripts and facing failure right there on the sandy explosive roads.
However, as no one has been informed what exactly the aim of the Iraq sanctions and 2003 invasion were (support Israel? Why and how? Guarantee oil deliveries? Sell arms? Go on a killing spree? Get Iraqis to eat Big Macs? etc.) it is hard to judge. Americans seem now to believe that whatever the aims were they were not fulfilled.

Posted by: Tangerine | Nov 26 2007 16:02 utc | 2

exactly. polls are just as handy for controlling and/or influencing public opinion as they are in attempting to gauge it.(and probably more so). it’s so easy to shape polls & samples to get the answers you want to support the programs you need enacted.
any mistakes made were on the part of the common public in trusting the sales pitch of the state & its marketing machine, not being informed enough or w/ accurate data, and not having enough collective say in the matter. this could have accounted for a small percentage in the results since it’s an ambiguously-stated question as to that perspective, not explicitly asking ‘do you think the united states government made…’
people generally like to believe that their thoughts are line w/ a common consensus or, put another way, that people think like them. it’s probably hard for many to conceive of just how criminal u.s. officials are, esp if they don’t have a good understanding of everything that went into & has transpired in the situation involving iraq.
a savvy pollster can easily exploit factors/contexts such as these

Posted by: b real; | Nov 26 2007 16:05 utc | 3

who was it that said, ‘i knew they would make mistakes, i just didn’t think they would go thru all 500 of them’ 9papaphrasing)
This is simply a trial balloon launched by the U.S. – I see no way that this would be accepted in the Iraqi parliament.
actually, the nyt article you linked to recently about US dropping plans for ‘unity’, alluded to this. the people in iraq who have aligned w/the US would be up shit creek if the US departed (not much chance in that), they are the ones voting. there is a vote coming up very soon to reauthorize some UN mandate seeking approval and extension of the occupation. it will pass no doubt considering who will be voting.

Posted by: annie | Nov 26 2007 16:49 utc | 4

jeez, paraphrasing.

Posted by: annie | Nov 26 2007 16:49 utc | 5

actually, the iraq parliament passed a resolution last spring to demand another vote by the end of the year. i just have serious doubts they could ever actually vote to get the US out. we’ll see.

Posted by: annie | Nov 26 2007 17:01 utc | 6

uncle’s link
U.S. troops and other foreign forces operate in Iraq under a U.N. Security Council mandate, which has been renewed annually since 2003. Iraqi officials have said they want that next renewal — which must be approved by the U.N. Security Council by the end of this year — to be the last.……
When asked about the plan, U.S. Embassy spokeswoman Mirembe Nantongo noted that Iraqi officials had expressed a desire for a strategic partnership with the U.S. in a political declaration in August and an end to the U.N.-mandated force.
“Thereafter then, the question becomes one of bilateral relationships between Iraq and the countries of the multinational forces,” she said. “At that point we need to be considering long-term bilateral relationships and we’re following the Iraqi thinking on this one and we agree with their thinking on this and we’ll be looking at setting up a long-term partnership with different aspects to it, political, economic, security and so forth.”
truly orwellian. this is the permission for the permanent bases they have already built. the framing is mind boggling.

Posted by: annie | Nov 26 2007 17:16 utc | 7

the illegal invasion of iraq is a crime so enormous that it exceeds even the nuremburg jurisprudence. the conspiracy to commit the crime involves directly the leaders of at least 4 nations & possibly more as early as the beginning of 2002.
the spoilation & the sacking of iraq is without precedents. the conspiracy to destroy & steal is without modern precedent
the crimes against humanity – genocide, massacres & torture are as significant as those committed during 1939-45
i insist
watching drunkasarule’s video- witnessing again the bombardement of baghdad – how can we escape the enormity of the crimes that are being committed every day & every night in iraq
i was reflecting on acrivisme after the video of route irish & i wanted to give an example of direct action that had an enormous effect & was committed by people who had a lot to lose – was the apppropriation – stealing if you like – of the cointelpro documents from hoover’s fbi. this act destroyed in part the reign of hoover, it proved the conspiracy was taking place in the appareils of state – & led jurisprudentially – to thousands of people not having to face trials & it was a nail in the coffin of u s imperialisms agression against the people of vietnam, cambodia & laos
latin americans are proving to us every day with their courage that it is the people who make history
& this resistance by latin americans exists in large part because u s imperialism committed a crime too many

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 26 2007 17:32 utc | 8

We’ll keep plugging away until we get the consessions we need to keep control of the oil reserves. The type of Gov Iraq ends up with matters not to us, as long as they let us have majority control over oil reserves. This policy is bigger than any political party here in the U.S .

Posted by: ben | Nov 26 2007 19:04 utc | 9

as i have argued before – we have been coerced into becoming good germans – who knew well what was happening in the ‘east’. today we too know what is happening in iraq & in the wider middle east. we are implicity responsible for it happening because our opposition has not been sufficient
monolycus suggested the other day that he did not want our anti imperialism to be so centred on america but i am forced by the specificity of the crimes to say that there is little precedent for the way in which u s imperialism has quotidianalised terror. day to day terror. mad king leopold is close because it captures the pure frenzy of the empire’s actions – & its intrinsic lack of internal logic, it is similar to sections of the german elite & their hardmen in that they really believed a colonisation of the east would benefit a growing germany, & there a re similarities to pure madness which was articulated in the policies of the apartheid south african government – who had no realistic destiny to control that country & the madness of the state of israel who also have policies that almost guarantee their destruction or at least a state of permanant war
the most sinister aspect of u s imperialis policy is that it has synthesised all the project of other empires – it has taken the sins of those other empires & it has developed them into a ‘state of things’ – that we all live. now
this epoch, our epoch is covered in shame

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 26 2007 19:33 utc | 10

& look, i am as guilty as anyone for screaming at the site of this carcrash we call a world & only being able to offer the resitance to it that i am able
some days, & drunk as a rule’s video highlights this, is that i am overwhelmed as a human being by the criminal enterprise of u s imperialism & its psychopathic process whether it is directed at the people of the middle east or its own people

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 26 2007 19:45 utc | 11

This is the question that I want asked: “if you could choose between reducing your gas and oil use by 50% or ending the war in Iraq, which would you choose?” I am deeply pessimistic about the response.
Americans have no idea how complicit they are in all of this.

Posted by: christiana | Nov 26 2007 20:32 utc | 12

Bush, Maliki sign US-Iraq relations plan

“The shape and size of any long-term, or longer than 2008, US presence in Iraq will be a key matter for negotiation between the two parties, Iraq and the United States,” the general said.
Monday’s announcement means that the Bush administration and Iraq will work out the future of US forces in Iraq in the shadow of the November 2008 US presidential election and despite sky-high US public opposition to the war.
Any resulting agreement could limit the ability of Bush’s successor to break with the current US strategy, as Democratic candidates have promised to do amid increasingly vocal calls for a US withdrawal.
…..
The hoped-for accord “will be something like a ‘state of forces agreement,’ which would then replace the existing Security Council mandate as the authority by which we operate alongside our Iraqi partners inside Iraq,” he said.
“So what US troops are doing, how many troops are required to do that, are bases required, which partners will join them — all these things are on the negotiating table,” said Lute.
A status of forces agreement is usually a key part of any agreement to base US forces in another country, and often cover difficult issues like entry and exit rights and legal jurisdiction over US military personnel

fuck

Posted by: annie | Nov 26 2007 21:04 utc | 13

more, from AP

President Bush on Monday signed a deal setting the foundation for a potential long-term U.S. troop presence in Iraq, with details to be negotiated over matters that have defined the war debate at home — how many U.S. forces will stay in the country, and for how long.
The agreement between Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki confirms that the United States and Iraq will hash out an “enduring” relationship in military, economic and political terms. Details of that relationship will be negotiated in 2008, with a completion goal of July, when the U.S. intends to finish withdrawing the five combat brigades sent in 2007 as part of the troop buildup that has helped curb sectarian violence.
excuse me while i go barf.

Posted by: annie | Nov 26 2007 21:09 utc | 14

You’re right here Bernhard. If a person decides to rob a bank and goes to great lengths to prepare, plan for contingencies, and convince his peers that with his superior preparations, and inside sources that the deal will be, well, a cakewalk and everyone will be so much the better as a result – only to have everything go horribly wrong with countless innocent deaths, massive destruction of property, and an expensive, endless, and ongoing getaway chase, then, how could that be a “mistake”?
Which as defined is an 1)error or fault 2)a misconception or misunderstanding or 3)to recognize or identify incorrectly. All of which, with regards to intention, indicate that in order to define mistake, something of the intention must be missing, or unaccounted for that makes the intention crash and burn.
The bank robbery itself (like the invasion of Iraq) cannot be considered “a mistake” because the consequences (of its execution) have failed to yield the desired results, because the intention itself is exclusive of execution.
As far as over all assessments go, Reagan’s proclamation that Vietnam was “a noble cause” makes more sense than Iraq being “a mistake” – in spite of the absurdity of the claim.

Posted by: anna missed | Nov 26 2007 21:15 utc | 15

Bernhard,
It has always bothered me to hear political pundits use the word ‘mistake’. This was no ‘mistake’, it is a war crime just as r’giap has so described. Thank you for pointing this out, and I hope Americans are waking up to this fact.
Christiana,
I would reduce my oil and gas consumption by 50% for the rest of my life if, by some magic, that is what it would take to end the Iraq war – or better yet, being able to have prevented the war altogether. My travel would be restricted, but there are alternative energy sources available even though at a much higher cost. But is that really the proper question? I am not a global oil/energy expert, but in my opinion, Iraq under Saddam H. would have been happy to sell the U.S. its crude oil and the same now with Iran. Big Oil is making more money than ever but there would be even more crude oil on the market right now if the U.S. (and the West) would have cooperated with Saddam instead of destroying Iraq. The U.S. and other Western elites did not want Iraq to have such huge profits and be independent of U.S. control and profit taking. Of course, Israel was a big influence in U.S. policy with regard to Iraq. Currently, with oil near $100/barrel, Iran and Venezuela are making huge profits and my guess is that this fact just burns the hell out of these elites. Oil is a big factor in this war, but the profits of oil, not the lack of it, is the more important question I believe. Of course, the lack of oil will probably become a factor in political tensions and maybe even war in the not too distant future.

Posted by: Rick | Nov 26 2007 21:40 utc | 16

thank you rick – i think – if there were not communities of resistance – multiple & even isolated as they are – then the despair would as fassbinder sd – fear would eat the soul
it is strange that such an anarchic but rigorous fellow like fassbinder has much to tell us about our moral corruption as a civilisation, today, in this hour. pasolini too
these two men who did films over 30 & 40 years ago – speak of the violence that lies at the heart of economic miracles, of civilsation & of the murderous nature of culture
& it is that more than oil – how have movements & individuals been so morally corrupted that they can witness the sieges of baghdad, of fallujah, of tal afar & not think they are responsible – thinking that like celebrity, or of concocted realities – that it will pass, that it will be transitory. it will not pass
while journalists in their profound stupidity applaud this or that surge with their sweaty & bloody hands – the worst in iraq is yet to come – there will be no let up – the empire has shown us no reason why they will reduce their crimes. on the contrary those facts suggest that worse crimes are being hidden

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 27 2007 0:27 utc | 17

Son, any chance that Yahoo and AP would do a poll in Germany going like this:
“All in all, do you think Hitler made a mistake by killing all these Jews?”

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Nov 27 2007 1:14 utc | 18

everything was a mistake — the planned holocaust against Jews, the pre-anticipated pogroms of Rwanda, the Armenian genocide, chattel slavery of the Americas, the Roman enslavement of the British Isles, the Bantusan pass laws, Imelda Marcos shoe closet, the systematic dehumanization against Palestinians, the murder-by-consistency of Steve Biko, peasants rummaging for food outside Selassies palace, the contemptious starvation of the Irish …
mistakes, so lets just get over it

Posted by: jony_b_cool | Nov 27 2007 1:16 utc | 19

clueless
i think that is precisely the point – with both iraq & afghanistan – the other does not exist at all – for western civilisation – from oriental curiosities they have been reduced to ash & soil & oil

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 27 2007 1:26 utc | 20

facts fucking facts

Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 27 2007 1:40 utc | 21

Rick,
I’m no expert at all. And I think as you do that it is about profits for the big guys, of course. I guess my thought is that if the commoners altered the demand side–sacrificed–in other words, then it would go some way towards beginning a peace and a new way of thinking. I think the big guys would take notice.
Are we not there to have more than our share in perpetuity, guaranteeing the chaos for years to come, both for the elites and for us? I guess I think that Americans are very used to having more of their share and that we don’t even begin to consider the cost to the world, particularly the Middle East. Isn’t that the “American way of life” that our politicians love to talk about and that we love to live?
In some ways, all (or most) of our wars could be considered wars for the elites. A very small segment of the population always benefits greatly from wars. But,in a democracy (albeit feeble as ours), shouldn’t the average person take some of the responsibility?
In the framing of my question, though, I am also thinking of peak oil and global warming. We need to change for many, many reasons, only one being a brighter future for the Middle East.
I personally have cut my gas/energy consumption about 30-40%. But I am still a very selfish American and sickened by it.

Posted by: christiana | Nov 27 2007 1:48 utc | 22

& watching the vassal states lick theass of empire is truly disgusting. to see sarkozy being the buffoon in annapolis, kouchner le cretin – pouring forth pomposities that must make him the laughing stock of the diplomatic community, to watch the fact that one of the first acts of australia’s new prime minister was to telephone bush & announce his vassal status
watching & reding the so called journalists of the empire crawl at the feet of the empire – doing its bidding is one thing but – so called sovereign states not possessing one ounce of dignity before empire – the exaggerated rhetoric of comrade chavez must be understood in the context of the submission of others
& today we have malaki & his marlarkey – pretending he is not owned lock stock & barrel – by the u s – arranging to have an endless american presence
the criminal conspiracy continues….
the crimes continue without end…

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 27 2007 14:46 utc | 23

Back to Main