Catch Up

I've been preoccupied over the past few days with a good deal of work and a new gift I've received from the devil. The blog, unfortunately, has had to take a place on the sideline. Here's a catch-up post:

* What happens if Bush “wins”? It's a scenario to start thinking about.

* Bush has proclaimed his desire to bring "democracy" to the Mid East. The State Department thinks this new version of the domino theory is a pipedream.

* If We Care About Elizabeth Smart, Why Not the Children of Iraq?

* "Forty years ago, the Central Intelligence Agency, under President John F. Kennedy, conducted its own regime change in Baghdad, carried out in collaboration with Saddam Hussein," writes Roger Morris in the NY Times. The last regime change in Iraq didn't turn out too well, and there are signs that it won't this time around, either...especially if we stick around for 20-25 years.

* Some senior US intelligence officials "have concluded that al Qaeda has effectively been defeated," reports CBS News.

* Camille Taiara explains how the media enables the Bush administration's war on public information.

* The prospect of rebuilding Iraq after an assault will be a bonanza for several US-based multinationals. Halliburton tops the list, no doubt due to the Cheney connection. Dick's still on the payroll, after all.

* "The FBI is looking into the forgery of a key piece of evidence linking Iraq to a nuclear weapons program, including the possibility that a foreign government is using a deception campaign to foster support for military action against Iraq," report Dana Priest and Susan Schmidt of the Washington Post. Assuming the allegations by the FBI aren't disinformation to throw scrutiny away from the US' role in forging the document, my vote for the "foreign government in question" is Israel. Mossad is most definitely up to the task, and Israel has been "cheering from the sidelines" for war for the past few months.

* If you're itching for a good dose of war propaganda, your first stop should always be the Wall St. Journal editorial pages. See examples here and here.

* Rahul Mahajan argues that an Iraq war will be illegal, with or without a UN Resolution.

* There were another batch of protests around the world against the war today. See a summary of today's activities. If these protests don't work, direct action is the next step.

* Michael Tomasky explores "how the right-wing media shot a true story down, and how the bulk of the mainstream press accepted those terms." He's referring, of course, to the Observer's story about American spy operations against members of the UN Security Council. In general, the American press has dropped the ball on the runup to Iraq.

* Will the war begin on March 18? I doubt it.

* More astroturf from the Republican party! Yay! Recall this.

* More anti-French idiocy.

* The CSM reports on the impact of Bush linking 9/11 and Iraq.

* Robert Dreyfuss asks, "Is Iraq the opening salvo in a war to remake the world?"

* Here's an interesting primer on war and the economy from a libertarian perspective.

* "A former military aide to General Norman Schwarzkopf has warned that a US-led war against Iraq could turn into a disaster that echoes the bloody debacle of Somalia rather than the relatively painless 1991 Gulf war," reports the Independent.

* UN personnel in Iraq are being told to get ready to evacuate. I wish they would listen to my advice.

* The ever-brilliant Paul Rogers explores the myth of a clean war – and its real motive.

* The White House jumps whenever the Weekly Standard says to. But we already knew that, right? With Bill Kristol at the helm, the Standard is practically the right arm of PNAC.