A response to Ron Suarez’ A New Ann Arbor City Council Resolution to End the War in Iraq?
A response to Ron Suarez’ A New Ann Arbor City Council Resolution to End the War in Iraq?
Note: the antiwar resolution mentioned on Ron’s site was passed by the Ann Arbor City Council in March, 2007.
Ron said:
I received this request from Michigan Peaceworks to support a new Ann Arbor City Council resolution that would hopefully push Congress to bring an end to the war in Iraq…
Here is their [Michigan Peaceworks] Proposed wording for a City Council Resolution:
We urge Congress to move in a bi-partisan way to address war policies in the Middle East. The United States now spends more on military defense than all other nations combined, but the world is less safe than when we embarked on our present policies. It is time for Congress to provide leadership by:
* re-establishing its on-going, joint authority with the President over war powers and war expenditures
* using Congressional appropriations authority to protect our troops by establishing conditions for their mobilization and deployment, conditions and time-lines for their return home, and needed assistance to veterans of our recent wars
* providing international humanitarian leadership
* developing a humanitarian budget to meet non-military needs of the worlds’ people, including our own
* using Congressional oversight to help strengthen international cooperation in peace-building…But, I could use help identifying other government officials who could use a nudge in the correct direction.
John Dingell. He often wears red.
His recent antiwar resolution, HR 3938 sounds good at first in that it reportedly withdraws the use of force authorization. The full text was not yet on Thomas when I wrote this. But the 2009 timeframe is too long. And this is a political cover for Dingell in that it distracts from what matters, which is his votes for the appropriations for the wars. Dingell’s resolution won’t pass both houses, and if it did it would be vetoed. He knows that.
If a majority of the House would refuse any more defense authorizations the war would end. Soon. Maybe some mainline Democrats want the war to continue. It is good for the business of the people who give them money. One hopes Dingell would not be in this category.
We need to focus in the short term on amending or defeating war appropriations. Resolutions like the proposed council resolution and HR 3938 give political cover to mainline Democrats who feel pressure from an increasingly frustrated public. But they don’t end the war. They give it political cover to continue.
What does Peaceworks mean that Congress should “move in a bi-partisan way?” Isn’t that kind of like a three-legged sack race? Seriously are the Democrats supposed to wait to defund the war until the Republicans turn into a pro-peace, anti-war party? This is a poor idea at best.
The Peaceworks resolution’s reference to “joint authority” between the president and Congress over “war spending and war powers” is inaccurate. The Constitution reserves these powers to Congress alone.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; ….
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; …
US Constitution, Article I, Section 8
The president is an executive of the People, who acting through their Legislature, make the laws and raise taxes. We rely on the President to obey and fairly enforce the laws, not to ignore, make, or break them. The president is not a sovereign. Bush is not “King (or warlord) of America”.
We oppose:
HR 2638: Making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, in committee.
HR 2642: Making appropriations for military construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, in committee.
HR 3222: Making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, resolving differences.
And we need to oppose any more continuing resolutions like Democratic sponsored H.J.RES.52: Making continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2008, and for other purposes, which Bush signed September 29, 2007.
Bush and the House and Senate Democrats like Dingell and Stabenow are pretending to disagree over the war to appeal to their base constituencies, while they are collaborating in continuing to fund it. I don’t have the same issue with Carl Levin, he and John Rockefeller have been fighting very hard behind closed doors on the war, concentration camps, and surveillance issues for a long time now.
What’s the cost to the citizen? Tens or hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead; Thousands of American casualties; Military suicides and fragging incidents on the rise; America’s democracy and reputation in ruins; and $8,000 per person in the US through the next ten years. Or, if you want to look at it another way, $80,000 per person in Iraq. We could have bought all of Iraq intact for less than what it is costing to destroy it.
Feel-good resolutions without the force of law are a distraction and an impediment to holding our legislators accountable for real effective actions to end this garrison state of permanent war and neoconservative-neofascist oppression.
A New Ann Arbor City Council Resolution to End the War in Iraq?
Dingell bill sets date for Iraq pullout
War costs may total $2.4 trillion
See also, Bush on Iraq: ‘We’re Kicking Ass’
Letter to the youth of America
Scanlyze tag: Stabenow
Copyright © 2007 Henry Edward Hardy
Follow-up on Resolution calling for Ending the Iraq War by Ann Arbor Democratic Party
Here’s a follow-up to Resolution calling for ending the Iraq War:
This is the text of the letter sent to Senators Levin and Stabenow and to Congressman Dingell on or about January 20 as provided to me by Susan Greenberg, Ann Arbor Democratic Party Chair [minor reformatting to fix word-wrapped lines from email–HH]:
Date: Saturday, January 20, 2007 4:04 PM -0500
From: [address removed for privacy reasons]
To: stabenow@senate.gov
Subject: Ann Arbor City Democratic Party urges end the warAnn Arbor City Democratic Party, P.O. Box 4178, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106
734/480-4986, aadems@comcast.netJanuary 20, 2007
The Honorable Debbie Stabenow
133 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510Dear Senator Stabenow:
It is now time for the Iraq War to end. Despite the election results in
November 2006, the Bush administration seems hell bent on implementing the
McCain Doctrine ? a serious escalation in the number of US troops deployed
in Iraq. The American people, the people of the state of Michigan and
the people of the 15th district in Michigan support an end to this conflict
forthwith.The Ann Arbor City Democratic Party asked me as chair to send this
letter to ask you to strongly and publicly support an end to the Iraq war. No
good can come from the continued US presence in Iraq. No good can come
from the additional loss of life an escalation in the war is likely to
cause.Due to the malfeasance of the Bush administration, the US has no viable
option other than to as swiftly as possible end US military involvement
in this most misguided engagement.We strongly encourage you to use all tools at your disposal to compel
the US government to end our nation’s involvement in the Iraq war.Sincerely,
Susan Greenberg, Chair
Ann Arbor City Democratic Party
I called Senator Levin and Senator Stabenow in Washington to see if they had received, read and responded to the resolution and letter from the Ann Arbor Democratic Party organization regarding the Iraq War. Neither senator’s staff seemed to know what I was talking about.
I got a big run-around from Stabenow’s people, had to call three times and was told the first two that they were too busy to look for the resolution or tell me if Senator Stabnenow had yet seen it or replied. I had to remind them that I worked as a campaign volunteer for the Michigan Coordinated Campaign for six months last year helping to re-elect the Senator and ask if they would prefer that I table a resolution censuring her or asking for her expulsion from the party at this month’s State Convention before they suddenly found the motivation to locate the letter from Chairperson Greenberg they had had for almost two weeks.
Still waiting to hear from Justin at Levin’s office.
Dingell I know got our message because his wife Debbie was there to represent him at the meeting on Jan. 13 and endured some somewhat rough handling on his behalf. She also read a long letter from him which I’ll see if they can/will provide for posting here.
I wrote down some of the things said during the debate (paraphrased and mostly unattributed unless someone can provide me the names):
We support our young men and women in the Army and Navy.
Our children are dying.
I am losing my students to this war.
We urge that this war be ended this year.
No public involved in war wins — both sides lose.
Armies cannot establish democracies or establish societies.
We need to replace US troops with an international force.
We [Democrats] don’t want to own this war.
We ask that you rescind the Iraq War Authorization Act, PL 107-243 [that was me–moving to strike and replace language calling for immediate halt to funding–motion failed]
We ask that the United States government utilize diplomatic means to resolve international issues.
Any mother mourns the loss of her son or a daughter in war equally; wherever she lives; in Iraq or America, be it a grand palace or a hut so rude. [That is my poor paraphrase from memory from a very moving speech from former Congressman Ray Clevenger, D-Mich].
I’d also say many of us had tears in the eyes during this debate and I do now again thinking of it.
We debated passionately for two hours until we were told our room reservation was up and the University of Michigan was kicking us out. Then we voted in the affirmative, with the no votes split about equally between those who thought the resolution too strong and those who thought it too weak. My motion for unanimous consent was shouted down.
I would like to give credit to Dana Barton, Tim Colenback, Kathy Linderman; and Carlos Acevedo; who submitted the two draft resolutions we used to forge the resolution which was passed. And thanks to Susan Greenberg for getting me the copy of her letter as sent.
see also: Resolution calling for ending the Iraq War
Copyright © 2007 Henry Edward Hardy
Najaf: What happened to the children?
What happened to the ‘terrorist children’ captured in the Glorious Battle of Najaf? I suggest you contact your elected representatives and the responsible agencies and ask as I am. I am looking forward to a call-back from Senator Levin’s office next week.
Apparently a substantial number of those ‘hundreds’ injured, captured or killed in the day-long slaughter by US and Iraqi forces may have been non-combatants, women and children.
Stratfor provides some interesting additional information regarding the Najaf Incident and raises some pertinent questions:
Geopolitical Diary: Deciphering the An Najaf Battle
January 31, 2007 03 00 GMT…Not only is this perhaps the most bizarre incident in almost four years of incessant violence that has ravaged the country, the government’s version of what allegedly transpired raises more questions than provides answers.
- How could a cult evolve into such a major threat without getting noticed?
- If this was an obscure cult, why were government forces unable to deal with it on their own?
- From where did the group acquire such a large cache of weaponry?
- Given the deep sectarian differences, how can extremist Shia and jihadists both be part of the group?
- Why would a Shiite religious group risk alienation by engaging in the murder of the clerical hierarchy, especially during the holy month of Muharram?
These and other such questions indicate the government is withholding a lot of information. However, Stratfor has received some information that provides insight into the circumstances leading up to the battle.
We are told the al-Hawatim tribe wanted to organize its own Karbala procession during Ashurah but that a rival group with considerable influence prevented it from doing so. A number of tribesmen were killed at a checkpoint operated by this influential group, including a senior tribal sheikh. The tribe then launched a retaliatory attack that led to the battle. The fact that a large number of those arrested are women and children [emphasis mine–HH] lends some credence to the report that the fighting was related to Ashurah ceremonies.
Stratfor apparently only provides this article to subscribers or google searchers, so google on: “Geopolitical Diary: Deciphering the An Najaf Battle”.
Mike Whitney raises some more good points in Palestine Chronicle:
Mike Whitney: Whitewashing the Massacre in Najaf
The US military is now being used as an “enforcer” in tribal and clan-based disputes. This will make it even more difficult for Washington to prove that its honest broker who can reconcile the differences between the between the warring factions.
By Mike Whitney
PalestineChronicle.comSo far, there are 2 things that we can say with certainty about the massacre of 250 Iraqis outside Najaf on Monday. First, we know that there is no solid evidence to support the official version of events. And, second, we know that every media outlet in the United States slavishly provided the government’s version to their readers without fact-checking or providing eyewitness testimony.
This proves that those who argue that mainstream news is “filtered” are sadly mistaken. There is no filter between the military and media; it’s a direct channel. In fact, all of the traditional obstacles have been swept away so the fairy tales which originate at the Pentagon end up on America’s front pages with as little interference as possible.
In the present case, we were told that “hundreds of gunmen from a ‘messianic cult’ (Soldiers of Heaven) planned to disguise themselves as pilgrims and kill clerics on the holiest day of the Shiite calendar”. We are expected to believe that they put their wives and children in the line of fire so they could conceal their real intention to lay siege to the city. (AP)
This is absurd. How many men would willingly drag their families into battle? In truth, these same tribes make the pilgrimage to Najaf every year to express their devotion to Imam Hussein and to celebrate the Shiite holiday of Ashura. There was nothing out of the ordinary in their behavior.
Gulf Times says:
US military still probing cult battle
Published: Saturday, 3 February, 2007, 10:33 AM Doha Time
BAGHDAD: The US military said yesterday it was still investigating who its troops and Iraq’s security forces fought last week in clashes in which hundreds of people were killed.
The Iraqi government’s account of the battle near the holy city of Najaf has generated conspiracy theories among bloggers sceptical of its suggestion that those killed were members of a messianic Muslim cult plotting to kill top Shia clerics.
“We are investigating who we engaged there. We are not going to say anything as there is still an ongoing investigation,” US military spokesman Major Steven Lamb said, adding that this was standard practice after any major engagement.
But a week after the battle amid orchards and houses north of Najaf, mystery shrouds exactly who the fighters were and what triggered the day-long battle in which a US attack helicopter was shot down, killing its two crew.
Hundreds of people arrested in the aftermath, including women and children, are under guard. [emphasis mine–HH] Journalists were not allowed to visit the scene of the fighting until Thursday, four days after the battle, and only then accompanied by soldiers.
According to Middle East Online, almost 300 persons were taken into custody after the Najaf Incident:
Iraqi officials say nearly 2,000 civilians killed in raging sectarian conflict across Iraq in January.
By Hasan Abdul Zahra – NAJAF, Iraq
Iraqi authorities on Friday lifted a curfew imposed on Shiite Islam’s holiest city of Najaf in a bid to thwart attacks a day after 73 people died in twin suicide bombings in nearby Hilla…
On Sunday, Iraqi and US forces fought members of a Shiite sect north of Najaf, killing more than 250 “Soldiers of Heaven,” wounding more than 200 and arresting almost 300 [emphasis mine–HH].
See also: Keyword ‘Najaf’ on scanlyze
Copyright © 2007 Henry Edward Hardy
Resolution calling for ending the Iraq War
Resolution calling for ending the Iraq War
Whereas the midterm election is widely viewed as a rejection of the Bush Administration’s Iraq war.
Whereas the vast majority of the American people and the citizens of Michigan support a swift conclusion to the US military engagement in Iraq War.
Whereas the people of Michigan and the 15th Congressional District look to the Democrats elected to Congress to lead the fight to end the war in Iraq.
Whereas the President of the United States, George W. Bush is supporting an escalation in the war in Iraq and the increase in the US troop presence in Iraq.
Whereas the war will continue and soldiers and civilians will needlessly perish unless the Democrats in Congress move now to end this war.
THEREFORE HEREBY WE AGREE AND DECIDE
The City of Ann Arbor Democratic Party (AADP) hereby calls and petitions our elected Senators and Representatives to the Congress of the United States of America, to approve and authorize ending the Iraq war, in particular the funding and financing of the Iraq war, in a manner that safely brings our troops home immediately.
The AADP additionally asks the Chair of the Party on their behalf to send the following letter Senator Carl Levin, Senator Debbie Stabenow, and Congressman John Dingell:
Dear <name of elected official>
It is now time for the Iraq War to end. Despite the election results in November 2006, the Bush Administration seems hellbent on implementing the McCain Doctrine–a serious escalation in the number of US troops deployed in Iraq. The American people, the people of the State of Michigan and the people of the 15th district in Michigan support an end to this conflict forthwith.
The Bush administration will not end this war. No good can come from the additional loss of life an escalation in the war is likely to cause. Due to the malfeasance of the Bush administration, the US has no viable option other than to as swiftly as possible end US military involvement in this most misguided engagement.
We strongly encourage you to use all tools at your disposal to compel the US government to end our nation’s involvement in the Iraq war.
sincerely,
<Chair>, Ann Arbor City Democratic Party
Resolution submitted by Dana Barton, Tim Colenback and Kathy Linderman as amended and passed at the January 13, 2007 meeting, according to my notes (official meeting minutes not published or accepted as of this writing).
see also: Ann Arbor Democratic Party, http://www.aadems.org/
Copyright © 2007 Henry Edward Hardy
About Scanlyze
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Scanlyze is an online magazine of essays, commentary, satire, and analysis. Were we half as clever, for inspiration we would take Mark Twain, Ambrose Bierce, Swift, Montaigne, or Seneca.
“The men who create power make an indispensable contribution to the Nation’s greatness, but the men who question power make a contribution just as indispensable, especially when that questioning is disinterested, for they determine whether we use power or power uses us.”
John F. Kennedy, October 26, 1963
Show your support for Scanlyze!
Click the “Make A Donation” link below to make a donation through PayPal using either your PayPal account or any major credit card.
This site is semi-archival. I actively post on @hhardy01@mastodon.social.
Paypal or credit card donation
Copyright © 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 Henry Edward Hardy.
Recent Comments
Scanlyze 