[Peace-discuss] excellent articles

[Dlind49 at aol.com]

Dear Peace Colleagues:
I met with Arianna Huffington yesterday and asked her for a copy of her
commentary of April 16th.  I hope you enjoy reading this.  Lets continue to
work and pray for peace.
Peace,
Bob Edgar
General Secretary
ncccusa.org
*****


Why The Anti-War Movement Was Right
Filed April 16, 2003

By Arianna Huffington


The Bible tells us that pride goeth before the fall. In Iraq, it cameth
right after it.

>From the moment that statue of Saddam hit the ground, the mood around the
Rumsfeld campfire has been all high-fives, I-told-you-sos, and endless smug
prattling about how the speedy fall of Baghdad is proof positive that those
who opposed the invasion of Iraq were dead wrong.

What utter nonsense. In fact, the speedy fall of Baghdad proves the anti-war
movement was dead right.

The whole pretext for our unilateral charge into Iraq was that the American
people were in imminent danger from Saddam and his mighty war machine. The
threat was so clear and present that we couldn't even give inspectors
searching for weapons of mass destruction -- hey, remember those? -- another
30 days, as France had wanted.

Well, it turns out that, far from being on the verge of destroying Western
civilization, Saddam and his 21st century Gestapo couldn't even muster a
half-hearted defense of their own capital. The hawks' cakewalk disproves
their own dire warnings. They can't have it both ways. The invasion has
proved wildly successful in one other regard: It has unified most of the
world -- especially the Arab world -- against us.

Back in 1991, more than half-a-dozen Arab nations were part of our Desert
Storm coalition. Operation Iraqi Freedom's "coalition of the willing" had
zero. Not even the polygamous potentates of Kuwait -- whose butts we saved
last time out and who were most threatened by whatever threat Iraq still
presented -- would join us. And, I'm sorry, but substituting Bulgaria and
the island of Tonga for Egypt and Oman is just not going to cut it when it
comes to winning hearts and minds on the Arab street.

In fact, almost everything about the invasion -- from the go-it-alone
build-up to the mayhem the fall of Saddam has unleashed -- has played right
into the hands of those intent on demonizing our country. Islamic extremists
must be having a field day signing up recruits for the holy war they're
preparing to wage against us. Instead of Uncle Sam wants you, their
recruiting posters feature a different kind of patriotic image: an American
soldier ill-advisedly draping the American flag over Saddam's face.

The anti-war movement did not oppose the war out of fear that America was
going to lose. It was the Bush administration's pathological and frantic
obsession with an immediate, damn-the-consequences invasion that fueled the
protests.

And please don't point to jubilant Iraqis dancing in the streets to validate
the case for "pre-emptive liberation." You'd be doing the Baghdad Bugaloo
too if the murderous tyrant who'd been eating off golden plates while your
family starved finally got what was coming to him. It in no way proves that
running roughshod over international law and pouring Iraqi oil -- now
brought to you by the good folks at Halliburton -- onto the flames of
anti-American hatred was a good idea. It wasn't before the war, and it still
isn't now. The unintended consequences have barely begun to unfold.

And the idea that our slamdunk of Saddam actually proves the White House was
right is particularly dangerous because it encourages the Wolfowitzes and
the Perles and the Cheneys to argue that we should be invading Syria or Iran
or North Korea or Cuba as soon as we catch our breath. They've tasted blood.

It's important to remember that the Arab world has seen a very different war
than we have. They were seeing babies with limbs blown off, children wailing
beside their dead mothers, Arab journalists killed by American tanks and
bombers, holy men hacked to death and dragged through the streets. They were
seeing American forces leaving behind a wake of destruction, looting,
hunger, humiliation, and chaos.

Who's been handling our war PR, Osama bin Laden? The language and imagery
are all wrong. Having Tom DeLay gush about our "army of virtue" at the same
time we're blowing up mosques is definitely not sending the right message to
a Muslim world already suspicious that we're waging a war on Islam.

Neither is Ari Fleischer's claim that the administration can't do anything
to keep Christian missionaries -- including those who have described the
Islamic prophet Muhammad as a "demon-possessed pedophile" and a
"terrorist" -- from going on a holy crusade to Baghdad. You think the Arab
world might take that the wrong way? If there is one thing that could bring
Sunnis and Shiites together, it's the common hatred of evangelical zealots
who denigrate their prophet.

And it doesn't help to have the American media referring to Jay Garner, the
retired general Don Rumsfeld picked to oversee the rebuilding of Iraq, as
"viceroy." It reeks of colonial imperialism. Why not just call him "Head
Bwana?" Or "Garner of Arabia?" I didn't realize the Supreme Court had handed
Bush a scepter to go along with the Florida recount.

The powerful role that shame and humiliation have played in shaping world
history is considerable, but something the Bush team seems utterly clueless
about. Which is why the anti-war movement must be stalwart in its refusal to
be silenced or browbeaten by the gloating "I told you so" chorus on the
right. On the contrary, it needs to make sure that the doctrine of
preemptive invasion is forever buried in the sands of Iraq.

Especially as the administration, high on the heady fumes of Saddam's
ouster, turns its covetous eyes on Syria. I give it less than a week before
someone starts making the case that President Assad is the next, next
Hitler.

--

Corporate America Divvies Up The Post-Saddam Spoils
Filed March 19, 2003

By Arianna Huffington

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner in Iraq. Yes, I know that the first
smart bomb has yet to be dropped on Baghdad. But that's just a formality.
The war has already been won. The conquering heroes are not generals in
fatigues but CEOs in suits, and the shock troops are not an advance guard of
commandos but legions of lobbyists.

The Bush administration is currently in the process of doling out over $1.5
billion in government contracts to American companies lining up to cash in
on the rebuilding of postwar Iraq. So bombs away! The more destruction the
better -- at least for the lucky few in the rebuilding business.

The United Nations has traditionally overseen the reconstruction of war
zones like Afghanistan or Kosovo. But in keeping with its unilateral,
the-world-is-our-sandbox approach to this invasion, the White House has
decided to nail a "Made in the USA" sign on this Iraqi fixer-upper. Postwar
Iraq will be rebuilt using red, white, and blueprints.

Talk about advance planning: Even as the people of Iraq are girding
themselves for the thousands of bombs expected to rain down on them during
the first 24 hours of the attack, the administration is already picking and
choosing who will be given the lucrative job of cleaning up the rubble.
Postwar rebuilding is a solitary bright spot in our own carpet-bombed
economy.

To further expedite matters, the war-powers-that-be invoked "urgent
circumstances" clauses that allowed them to subvert the requisite
competitive bidding process -- the free market be damned -- and invite a
select group of companies to bid on the rebuilding projects. No British
companies were included, which has left many of them seething and meeting
with government officials in London to find out where they stand.

So just which companies were given first crack at the post-Saddam spoils?

Well, given Team Bush's track record, it will probably not fill you with
"shock and awe" to learn that the common denominator among the chosen few is
a proven willingness to make large campaign donations to the Grand Old
Party. Between them, the bidders -- a quartet of well-connected corporate
consortiums that includes Bechtel Group, Fluor Corp., and, of course, Vice
President Cheney's old cronies at Halliburton -- have donated a combined
$2.8 million over the past two election cycles, 68 percent of which went to
Republicans.

The insider track given these fat cat donors proves afresh that splurging on
a politician is one of the soundest and safest investments you can make.
Where else will a $2.8 million ante offer you a one-in-four shot at raking
in a $1.5 billion payoff?

And that $1.5 billion is just for starters. The president is planning to
give post-Saddam Iraq an extreme makeover -- a wide-ranging overhaul that
will include the transformation of the country's educational, health-care,
and banking systems -- all funded by taxpayer dollars and administered by
private U.S. contractors. Think of it as a for-profit Marshall Plan.

"The administration's goal," reads one of the reconstruction contracts that
are up for bids, "is to provide tangible evidence to the people of Iraq that
the U.S. will support efforts to bring the country to political security and
economic prosperity."

As a first step toward Iraqi prosperity, the president's ambitious postwar
plan earmarks $100 million to ensure that Iraq's 25,000 schools have all the
supplies and support necessary to "function at a standard level of
quality" -- including books and supplies for 4.1 million Iraqi
schoolchildren.

I'm sure those schools in Oregon that are being forced to shut down a month
early due to inadequate funding, or the low-income students in California
who are suing the state in a desperate effort to obtain adequate textbooks
and qualified teachers of their own, would love to see the same kind of
"tangible evidence" of President Bush's support.

The same goes for our flatlining public health-care system. While more than
a million poor Americans are about to lose their access to publicly funded
medical care, the president is in the market for a corporate contractor to
oversee a $100 million upgrade of Iraq's hospitals and clinics.

And the White House has announced its intention to redesign Iraq's financial
rules and banking system after it bombs the country halfway to oblivion. Too
bad the administration keeps watering down reforms for the financial rules
and banking system here at home.

That's another way corporate America is profiting from the looming war. With
all eyes on Iraq, few are paying attention to how little is being done to
reform and redesign our own financial rules.

The new chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, for instance, is
getting away with an enforcement regime every bit as limp as that of his
predecessor, the supremely spineless Harvey Pitt.

Last week, in his first congressional testimony since assuming control of
the watchdog agency, William Donaldson made it clear that, despite a massive
increase in the SEC's budget, we shouldn't expect too much in the way of
fundamental reform -- stressing that one of his top priorities would be
boosting the morale of the agency.

I don't know about you, but I would feel a whole lot better if he'd made
boosting the morale of a badly burned public Job No. 1. Tossing a slew of
corporate crooks in the slammer would be a good start.

Maybe America's beleaguered investors should band together with this
country's "left behind" schoolchildren and start stockpiling a couple of
plywood drones with overly long wingspans, some high-strength aluminum
tubes, and a few discarded canisters of chemical gas.

Apparently, that's the only way to get this administration's attention.