Archive for the ‘Iraq’ Category

O’Reilly: “We Didn’t Invade Iraq”

Posted by Matt Ortega | April 30, 2008 | Comments (0) »

FOX News commentator Bill O’Reilly continues masquerading whatever it is that he does on television under the banner of “news” and “journalism.”

Last night, O’Reilly unveiled a new defense on the continued American involvement in Iraq, just two days before “Mission Accomplished Day” on Thursday: “We didn’t invade Iraq.”

Yesterday, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly made the incredible claim that the United States never invaded Iraq: “We didn’t invade Iraq.” He added, “It was a declaration of war, it was a declaration to enforce the first Gulf War Treaty.”

First, the United States did not declare war on Iraq. Congress authorized President Bush to use force against Iraq. In fact, the U.S. has not declared war against any nation since the Second World War. The U.S. declared war on other nations five times and Iraq was not one of them — in 1991, or 2003.

Second, the maneuvers that led to open warfare are immaterial to the point that a nation was, in fact, physically invaded by another nation. In fact, O’Reilly himself referred to the invasion on a number of occasions, as well as the Bush administration.

Third, there is no such thing as the “First Gulf War Treaty.”

O’REILLY: [W]e liberate Iraq — liberate Kuwait, all right, and then we have a treaty, and the treaty says U.N. weapons inspectors are allowed to do X, Y, and Z, and 17 times Saddam says — violates those. Now you can understand why the United States government might be a little teed off about that. […]

O’REILLY: But do you understand that when you have 17 violations of a treaty, a war treaty, that you basically have to take action?

BLIX: Well, you’re talking about a war treaty. It was a cease-fire. It was not a war treaty.

O’REILLY: Oh, come on. Now don’t play semantics here, sir.

BLIX: Second — all right. I’m trying to be precise. You are imprecise.

“Semantics!”

Most free-thinking people who are aware of O’Reilly’s track record and loose handling of the facts would take the opinion of former United Nations weapons expert Hans Blix over a cable television commentator who worked for Inside Edition.

The kicker: after O’Reilly’s back and forth with guest Warren Ballentine, he says to him: “It was a declaration of war, it was a declaration to enforce the first Gulf War Treaty, which you don’t know anything about, Mr. Ballentine.”

Priceless.

Bring Them Home — From the South?

Posted by Matt Ortega | April 9, 2008 | Comments (0) »

In attempts to justify a prolonged, likely permanent, American encampment inside Iraq, conservatives continue to make silly comparisons.

The most first and most common comparison points to the continued U.S. presence in Germany and Japan following the collapse of the Third Reich and the Japanese empire in the Second World War, or Korea following the three-year war on the peninsula in the early 1950s. Stupid, I know, but that is what they claim. (For why this is a stupid argument, there is plenty of reading on that subject.)

The conservative blog, Red State, unveiled a new and even dumber argument. From their e-mail to supporters:

Clearly McCain was talking about a peace time standing presence … Someone should ask the Democrats if they think we’re still at war with the confederacy, the Germans, and the Japanese given all the standing American armies in the South, Germany, and Japan.

Here is what Bill Scher wasted fifteen seconds of his life writing:

But hey, at least Germany and Japan are like Iraq in that they are other countries.

I can’t believe I am wasting 15 seconds of my life to type this, but having military bases in Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina does not constitute a permanent occupation. Does RedState really believe that 140 years after the Civil War, American troops have a “peace time standing presence” in the American south?

There you have it — the “Union” is still occupying the “Confederacy” because, apparently, the “Confederacy” never applied nor were accepted back into the “Union” during Reconstruction.

April 9 marks the 143rd anniversary of Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s surrender that effectively ended the Civil War.

Quote of the Day

Posted by Matt Ortega | April 9, 2008 | Comments (0) »

The costs of leaving Iraq are debatable. The costs of staying are completely knowable. And they are getting higher and higher, and higher.

-Senator Joe Biden (D-Delaware)
(The American Prospect, 04/08/08)

(Hat tip: Rafael Noboa)