Showing posts with label iraq war. Show all posts
Showing posts with label iraq war. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Reflections on the Anniversary of the 9/11 Attacks // Are American Civil Liberties & Pentagon Budget Restraint Toast?

PLUS: Maryland politicians fundraising on 9/11

UPDATE: The ACLU of Maryland warns that tomorrow Congress is scheduled to vote on an extension of police powers allowing the government to wiretap American's communications without a search warrant. Use the ACLU's online action tool to send an email to your members of Congress today.

ANOTHER DAY OF 9/11 REMEMBRANCE: Today marks another anniversary of the tragic 9/11/01 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Indeed, I nearly forgot about this new American milestone, until I woke up and started reading the news coverage and alerts streaming through my email inbox. Of course, most news outlets are running the ordinary tributes and commentary on the event itself, and the victims deserve their moment of remembrance. It is, after all, tough to forget the jarring emotional period in American civic life that many of us lived through. It is harder still to forget the tragic imagery from that day and how it continues to impact the American policy mindset (both positively and negatively)....

Monday, March 19, 2012

CD6: War Becomes a Campaign Issue Again // Democratic Candidates Debate Preemptive Military Strikes on Iran

UPDATE: The New York Times is reporting that the Pentagon has recently concluded "war games" simulations modeling the Iran-Israel crisis, and the results are not pleasant:
New York Times: A classified war simulation held this month to assess the American military’s capabilities to respond to an Israeli attack on Iran forecast that the strike would lead to a wider regional war, which could draw in the United States and leave hundreds of Americans dead, according to American officials.

DELANEY TRIGGERS DEBATE ON WAR WITH IRAN: Last Friday, Maryland Juice wrote about an alarming press release from 6th Congressional District Democratic candidate John Delaney. In a new position paper, he signaled that when dealing with Iran, he believed that "all options" should be left on the table.

The issue has since come up at a recent Democratic candidates debate, and amazingly, the rest of the candidates (except for Milad Pooran) refuse to reject the idea of preemptive military strikes. My how far the neo-conservative movement has come -- it is truly amazing to me that in the highly educated DC suburbs, Democrats now view foreign policy with a mob mentality.  

DEMOCRATS EMBRACE NEOCON "PREEMPTIVE WAR" DOCTRINE: The Baltimore Sun flagged some of the candidates' views on when to apply the novel concept of "preemptive war" (aka attacking someone before they've actually attacked you). Remember that this is a new and controversial addition to America's foreign policy vocabulary, and that the ridiculous idea was brought in by the Cheney/Rumsfeld crowd of chicken-hawks. They started pushing the idea of "preemptive war" during their campaign to brainwash the nation into pursuing a voluntary war with Iraq. Also note that this preemptive doctrine exists so that countries can justify circumventing and undermining the U.N. and diplomacy.

Does anyone remember that this entire debate happened once before? Do ya'll really not see the replication of this process with Iran? Really? Did everyone forget that a large number of us were horrified that the United States was even discussing preemptive war and that we thought America would lose the moral high-ground by attacking first? Apparently, the answer is yes. See the CD6 candidates' statements on voluntary war below:
BALTIMORE SUN: All of the candidates at the forum, which was organized by several area Democratic clubs, said they support the Obama administration's emphasis on sanctions to deal with Iran. But they differed when pressed to explain when U.S. military intervention would be appropriate.

Garagiola said he would support military strikes if Iran was "on the verge of having nuclear weapons capability." Businessman John Delaney said the decision of whether to involve the U.S. military would depend on the circumstances at the time. "Military options are on the table...but you cannot answer when the line is drawn because you don't know the specific facts."

Milad Pooran, a physician who emigrated from Iran when he was six years old, said he would support military action if Iran struck the U.S. or its allies first. Attorney Ron Little said he would back military action if the Ahmadinejad regime was prepared to use nuclear weapons. Charles Bailey said the military could rely on unmanned drones to take out the country's nuclear facilities.

PRE-EMPTIVE WAR IS A NEW IDEA // NOT NORMAL FOR THE US! - I know this kind of warmonger talk sounds normal to many Maryland Juice readers -- even coming from Democrats -- but don't forget that it was precisely this rhetoric and framing of the argument that we witnessed in the lead-up to the Iraq War. Indeed, it was NOT always the case that Democrats believed in preemptive military strikes against other nations -- especially if fueled only by speculation and hypothesis about a foreign nation's motives and assumed capabilities. The terms of the debate have been obviously contaminated with Neo-Conservative rhetoric, and yet here the Democrats go again....

I've decided to make a quick info-graphic about this mess:

6th Congressional District Democratic Candidates Debate Preemptive War With Iran

Monday, February 27, 2012

Owners of WBFF Fox 45 Force Rightwing Activism on Station // Plus, Their Non-Discrimination Policy Excludes LGBT Language

UPDATE: A Facebook user has provided Maryland Juice with a link to a petition that they have started to oppose WBFF's commingling of news and anti-LGBT activism.  
 
Last Friday, Maryland Juice highlighted how WBFF Fox 45 (Baltimore's local Fox affiliate) had turned from journalism to activism by advocating for rightwing policies on their website. Their site banner currently provides direct links to anti-gas tax propaganda and an anti-marriage equality petition. All signs are pointing to these decisions being foisted on the news producers by their corporate masters at Sinclair Broadcast Group (SBG). SBG became famous in 2004 during the Bush-Kerry battle. A wiki entry on SBG notes:
For example, in April 2004, the company refused to broadcast a special "Nightline" broadcast, produced by the ABC television network, that was devoted to reading the names of soldiers who had died in Operation Iraqi Freedom....
Sinclair gained further notoriety by ordering its 62 local stations to preempt prime time programming to broadcast an anti-Kerry film just before the November 2, 2004 general election.
The Washington Blade also recently reported on who was responsible for the anti-marriage equality link:
Maryland’s marriage equality law hasn’t even been signed yet, but Baltimore Fox News affiliate WBFF-45 has endorsed a referendum effort to repeal the measure.