The Road to Success

"Before we can set out on the road to success, we have to know where we are going, and before we can know that we must determine where we have been in the past."
--President John F. Kennedy

During this month of September, our nation is engaged in important discussions about what we might do to find the "road to success" in Iraq. General Petraeus spoke to congress yesterday; congressional leaders are speaking to the media today; and the president will address the nation later in the week.

Is it a coincidence that these discussions are taking place during the week that the nation remembers the September 11, 2001 attacks? Or might it be part of the administration’s on-going attempt to connect the two, and to replace reason with emotion? I believe that it is fair – indeed, important – to note that the administration’s WHIG (White House Iraq Group) engaged in a purposeful effort to convince the American public that Saddam was connected to 9/11, and that the invasion of Iraq was a patriotic action necessary to insure our safety.

When we mention the purposeful lies that were used to justify the war in Iraq, most republicans (and sadly, many democrats) will say that what happened in 2002-’03 is not important, and that because we are there now, we must focus exclusively on how we find that road to success. Yet, as President Kennedy noted, we cannot hope to do that without determining why we are where we are today.

Two things are clear: there were forces within the administration who were intent upon invading and occupying Iraq long before 9-11, and these same forces purposely lied to the American people about yellow cake and mushroom clouds in order to advance their plans. Thus, the question that we must answer, in order to understand why we are in Iraq today, is: what were the real reasons the neoconservative forces in the administration had for invading Iraq before 9-11?

If, for example, they desired a base in the Middle East outside of Saudi Arabia, which happens to contain a large supply of oil that they might exploit, then we must consider if these same goals influence the current policy. If the goal is a stable Iraq (much less a democratic state), then we need to consider if that is realistic with a US military presence, and US control of Iraqi oil resources?

The neoconservatives had documented their plan to prevent any other nation from playing the role of a "global power," and even as a competing regional power. Today, we hear the administration and its puppets saying that the US must prevent Iran from exercising too much power in Iraq’s future. Why? Is it realistic to think that Iran is not going to be a regional power in the Middle East? If Iran has relations with both Russia and China, is it intelligent to think that the US should, or can, prevent Iran from exercising influence within Iraq?

If our national purpose is to help stabilize Iraq, then the US should be withdrawing its troops, and allowing the international community to assist Iraq in repairing the terrible damage that the Bush-Cheney administration has done. The road to success can not by-pass a role for any of Iraq’s neighbors.

But if our nation’s mission still is based upon the true reasons that the administration had for this war of occupation, what General Petraeus said yesterday has to be viewed in that context; what many of the elected members of congress are saying to the media is meaningless; and President Bush will say later this week will simply be more of the same lies that are intended to appeal to emotion, rather than reason.

recommended

.. and fear.

that if the majority of people are still at least partially influenced by the administration's ongoing purposeful lies, that it will be difficult to have a national purpose based on truth.

Even Moses regretted it.

Happy to k&r something thoughtful.

the democratic party needs to reconsider how they will deal with the administration on the war issues.

for fear that the truth of what really happened there will get out.

Lie built upon lie built upon lie. And completely collapsible as lies tend to be in the end. But they just discard one and throw out another as needed. Wash, rinse, repeat.

You are completely correct about them again trying to connect staying in Iraq with 9/11.
It is a cynical and manipulative juxtaposition of the two meant to create that connection in people's minds. And it bypasses reason since this kind of juxtaposition doesn't require arguments that connect the dots, which is important since the dots don't really connect. No reason required, just connection by proximity. And just as false as everything else they've done.

The question is, will these motives become apparent to the public at large?

Congress take seriously their duty to inform the public. It fits into the same approach as was mentioned on my thread "Primary Concerns" earlier this week -- the democratic candidates should focus, for at least a significant part of one debate, on discussing the threats the "war on terrorism" poses to our Constitution. Without these types of conversations between elected officials and the public, it seems the chances of finding the road to success is remote.

I can, and have, speculate(d), but none of those solutions are satisfactory.

We must know the truth and nothing but the truth and armed with that truth we can elect officials who will do our bidding with our bidding being the stabilization of our government and the treating of the worlds populations with respect and dignity.
rec.

have had more success at spreading violence and death, than the democratic party has been in stopping them.

Out and out lust for power fueled by greed, planned , aided and abetted by the neocons here and Israel. I heard this morning that Israel bombed and possibly invaded Syria last week. Was it on the news, widely reported? No! The first I heard of it was on CNN this morning. Immediately I thought of Wurmser and others who have been hell bent on invading Syria for at least a decade.

As for the 9/11 coordination, finally, one of the questions being asked loudly this week, though not loudly enough, is why haven't we captured Bin Laden. According to a writer from the NY Daily News ( a * loving paper) is that he isn't living in a cave somewhere, but in a compound.

Usama bin Laden is one of the best measure of what a dismal failure this administration has been. I've said this before, but it seems worth repeating on this day: if Al Gore had assumed the office he was elected to in 2000, the events of 9/11 would not have taken place in the same manner. And if John Kerry had won in 2004, bin Laden would be dead today.

Well folks since I am the newbie let me walk to the edge of this branch and throw a few conspiracy theories at you.

First the question brought up earlier was "where is Bin Laden?". I think its a two fold answer. The game is oil and real estate and we are talking about amounts of money that most of us can ever truly envision being part of. So on one hand it is not profitable to find Bin Laden because the excuse for global colonization would have to take a different angle.... such as they have WMD...oh wait already been used as well. Speaking of profit by waging a false war we are guaranteeing that the next generation of individuals in the middle east will have issues with the US and thus keep the arms sales up and give the news something to create fear with. Now on the other hand the party that is in power when he is brought in will have an ace up the sleeve for untold elections. I can almost see a similar situation as Carter faced when Reagan came in and took credit for the release of hostages....though on a side not PBS had a special that claimed the Canadians actually did it but where willing to give the US credit on the global stage.

Do you folks remember in the 80's when the US boycotted the olympics because of the USSR involvement in Afghanistan? I'm not saying that Bin Laden and Bush are having slumber parties but something is shady.

As far as 9/11 goes that was a horrible day for those at ground zero/those with any empathy for mankind and for the rest of america simply because it exposed a ferocious open attitude towards the rest of the world. What I am curious about is the Pentagon, how come that is never used as a rallying point for blind nationalism. What shows our primitive mind set...I believe....is that we are able to rally around 9/11 like a mob in a monster movie but conveniently overlook the hundreds of thousands of dead CIVILIANS world wide who have died from our shock and awe carpet bombing techniques.

With all that said how does america step up to the plate and take responsibility for her war crimes in an effort to avoid future violence?

If the mission was about 'stability' then the most pernicious influence on the violence and unrest (our troops) should be removed from the mix. Bush's own campaign to consolidate U.S. power and influence in Iraq is in competition with all of the other struggles in Iraq by residents (and neighbors) which are made more legitimate just by virtue of geography.

I think what about our political reconciliation? How long is it going to take and what is it going to take for our political leaders to own up to this mistaken war?

If bush & cheney loved this country they would apologize. They will not do this. Until we can come to terms as a people with this, we will not be able to get on any road to success anywhere.

:kick:

Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi held a big press conference about Petraeus's Testimony which was ONLY SHOWN on C-Span and where they broke to go back into the hearings.

There were media asking Reid/Pelosi about what the Dems thought about the speech and what their plan was. Reid gave a lenghty introduction where he said the "Company" mispeaking that he meant the "Congress" and something about how the Republicans just keep "lecturing the Democrats over and over" and how "they don't have the votes because the Republicans just keep lecturing" and Pelosi finally got her say and she said "we don't have the votes...but we have an agenda for the American People who elected us to work for them" and she added .."one thing was to deal with this war and so far we are working hard to do this for the people."

I hit my remote to see if either CNN or MSNBC were covering this live Presser from our Dems to counteract what Petreus was saying up there on "The Hill" and there was nothing but commercials.

I'm still processing what this means...but my gut reaction coming across this on C-Span (and that it wasn't covered elsewhere) and the (what i saw as weak replies with mistakes in statement and flustering) was NOT GOOD...so I won't say more... Just trying to say what I heard...

:toast:

you've sent this out as a LTTE... it deserves an audience beyond DU.

k&r

to rebuild Iraq and restore its people to some level of sane and sustainable life. And there's a need for an accountant to send the bill to the U.S. of A. -- the White House, in particular. Metaphorical musing, I know, but you gotta have a dream!

:kick:

is stunning. Almost no one is clearly describing what is going on and talking about how to deal with it.

What would JFK do?

I think this is interesting in the context of the speech Bush will deliver tonight.

Does the Road to Success Lie Through Failure? It Can, According to Billionaire Bill Bartmann by Patrick Porter
Most people don't value their failures...but Bill Bartmann does. In fact, when it comes to failure and success, no one knows the ropes better than he does. If that seems a little exaggerated, it's not. Among other life changes, Bartmann pulled himself from abject poverty to become the 25th wealthiest man in America.

"I've had a very interesting life," Bartmann says. "I've gone from being unemployed and almost unemployable, to employing more than 10,000 people. I've gone from being a million dollars in the hole and bankrupt to being over a billion dollars to the good."

And that's just the beginning. Bartmann, who has earned recognition from numerous institutions, as well as a permanent place in the Smithsonian Institute's Museum of American History, says his mission is to share his success strategies with as many people as possible.

"I've seen both sides of success and failure, and I've seen both of them up close and personal," says Bartmann. "It's because I've seen them, and have learned some things during my journey, that I want to share the things I've learned with the hope that it will provide some value for the people in the audience."

Because he's known more than his share of hard times, Bartmann says he teaches people how to react to adversity in a way that makes their lives better.

"Most of us don't know how to react to the things that happen to us. We go into shock," he says. "We want to grab a bottle or grab a gun or grab a razor blade, because we fall into despair or despondency. I show people none of that stuff is necessary."

Bartmann also says the way to dealing with adversity is deceptively simple.

"The simplest way to deal with adversity is to raise your self-confidence. If you can do that, then when things happen around you, you have the strength and the resolve to be able to deal with them honestly and straight-up," Bartmann says.{/b]


http://www.customdesignpostcards.com/articles61/does-the-road-to-success-lie-through-failure-it-can-according-t.html