Scoop has an Ethical Paywall
Work smarter with a Pro licence Learn More
Top Scoops

Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | Scoop News | Wellington Scoop | Community Scoop | Search


Mary Pitt: Much Ado About Nothing

Much Ado About Nothing

by Mary Pitt

The elephant called the Iraq Study Group has labored long and hard and, after keeping their secret until "after the election", has brought forth a gnat. They have utterly failed to discover a method for extracting W's grubby little fist from the cookie jar this time. Instead they have delivered another missive of pomposity which has nothing new to offer and can only prove one thing. We are in another quagmire and there is no way we can get out of it without being covered with mud. One does not walk out of a door with honor after walking in without any. This committee recommendation deserves only one title: "Too Little, Too Late".

This is typical Bush politics. When in trouble, appoint a prestigious investigative committee, make a lot of smoke, and then continue with the same foolhardy practices that started the problem. After 9/!!, a similar committee was named and they "investigated", failing to come to any realistic conclusion without having deposed any of the major figures in the administration, particularly not Bush and Cheney, and issuing a large tome of recommendations to prevent its happening again, none of which were instituted by the administration or the Congress. In this instance, they have re-written the Bible, solving all the international conflicts of history, but only if we accept the whole thing rather than "picking and choosing as if it were a fruit salad". So much for that, since Bush has already announced his intention to "cherry pick".

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading

Are you getting our free newsletter?

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.

Those of us who were aware of the events of the world for the past couple of decades warned against attacking the Middle Eastern countries, both Afghanistan and Iraq, particularly the latter. In their history, these nations have been "conquered" and occupied time after time and have worn out their enemy by the simple method of out-lasting them. They merely go on with their lives as if nothing had happened, living by their own rules and methods, informally enforcing their traditional roles and dealing with those who break their rules in their own manner, summary execution. Personally, I recall stating in a forum of mixed political persuasion that invading either of these countries would be tantamount to entering the lion's den and would end in the greatest defeat ever experienced by the American war machine and I suffered being berated as a "fraidy-cat peacenik" and "un-patriotic". It is small consolation to be able to say, "I told you so."

But, what should we expect? We went into Iraq with just a quarter of the forces that were used in the Gulf War, with no mechanism having been prepared for "re-construction" because, if you recall, Mr. Bush had said that he was "not into nation building". Once Saddam fell, those charged with control of that poor nation were concerned merely with stealing the taxpayers' money and enjoying the privilege of instituting any brain storm that occurred to them, because there was no constructive leadership at the top. There was no preparation for the invasion with insufficient military personnel, requiring the activation of the National Guard, many units equipped with old, unreliable vehicles which were anything but battle-ready, in order to have the minimal force which was used. The word "draft" became a dirty word, since the administration was well aware of the kickback that would have caused as wealthy people would realize that their own sons and daughters would be put at risk. It was more important to keep the consumer goods flowing so that the profits would continue to pour into the pockets of the multi-national corporations and, thus, the campaign funds into the coffers of the political parties.

The first proposal of the ISG to hit the dirt was, of course, the proposal to end the conflicts between Israel and its neighbors. This, the most important of the entire publication, is a hot potato which neither the administration nor the Congress dares to touch. The political hold of Israel on our government, through their lobbies and their campaign funding, is so strong that it cannot even be discussed without accusations of "anti-semitism". While Iran is threatened with annihilation for their attempt at developing nuclear technology, it is a well-known fact that Israel also possesses nuclear power, though discussion of that is also forbidden. Would it not express our good will if those nations were to be brought together in Jimmy Carter fashion and pushed to come to an agreement in eliminating this threat to Middle East peace?

President Bush is right about one thing. This war will go on and on and on! Not until after he leaves office and not before current members of Congress either see the light or are dis-elected, will any leader be found with the ability and determination to restore peace to the Middle East. We can only pray that the United States is still standing when it is over, despite the loss of the lives of our young people, the overwhelming indebtedness of our treasury, and the destruction of our own democracy. Never mind the idiotic plans to "re-deploy outside the country" or to "set a timetable". The only way our troops will ever leave Iraq will be to deploy to the border, cover their arses, and get the hell!


Mary Pitt is a septuagenarian Kansan, a free-thinker, and a warrior for truth and justice.
Huzzahs and whiney complaints may be sent to

© Scoop Media

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
Top Scoops Headlines


Join Our Free Newsletter

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.