Rob's+Page

=  =

= = = The War In Iraq: What is going on? =

The US is currently involved in a very controversial war in Iraq. The government is accused of not telling the American public all of the information and statistics based around this war. Many people believe that we are fighting this war for no reason, and that we should be pulling our troops out of Iraq. The problem with this situation is that if we pull our troops out of Iraq, all of the work that we have put in over the past years will have been for nothing, and all of those soldiers who have died, will have been for nothing. President Obama has presented his evacuation plan for the soldiers in Iraq and wants to bring them home before 2011, the only problem is that we need to strategically plan this evacuation, so that we do not essentially un-do the work that we originally went to Iraq to do. The debate of wether or not we should be in Iraq at this point, is senseless, because we are already there. What the US needs to focus on now are its goals of when, why, and how to get our troops back home safely. The main concern of the American people is that we don't entirely know why we are there, and the majority of America wants to get out as fast as possible.
 * __Brief Summary__**__:__

__** Mainstream Media Example 1 : **__

=Obama Sticks to a Deadline in Iraq= Maya Alleruzzo/Associated Press American and Iraqi soldiers provided security in Mosul for the March elections. American combat forces are to be withdrawn from Iraq this summer.

=
By [|PETER BAKER] and [|ROD NORDLAND]======

Published: April 27, 2010
New York Times [|FULL ARTICLE]

__** Key Points/Ideas form Article **__ - When [|President Obama] approved a plan to withdraw combat forces from [|Iraq] this summer, it was based on the assumption that a newly elected government would be in place by the time Americans headed home. Fourteen months later, that assumption is exploding but the plan remains the same. -The delay and messy aftermath of the Iraqi election mean it may be months before the next government is formed, even as tens of thousands of American troops pack to leave. Yet Mr. Obama has not had a meeting on Iraq with his full national security team in months, and the White House insists that it has no plans to revisit the withdrawal timetable. -The situation presents a test for Mr. Obama’s vow to end the war, perhaps the most defining promise he made when he ran for president. -By sticking to the deadline, Mr. Obama effectively is abandoning the thesis he adopted on the recommendation of military and civilian advisers in February 2009 that a large American military presence was needed long enough to provide stability during the post-election transition. -“We see no indications now that our planning needs to be adjusted,” said Ben Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser to Mr. Obama. -“We did anticipate an extended period of government formation,” -“their growing capacity to provide for security, which of course is critical to ending our combat mission at the end of August.” -For Mr. Obama, shifting the deadline would prove complicated for both logistical and political reasons. -The original plan anticipated Iraqi elections in December and the formation of a new government at least 60 days afterward. Instead, the elections did not take place until March and produced a near tie between the parties of Prime Minister [|Nuri Kamal al-Maliki] and former Prime Minister [|Ayad Allawi]. And now the two are fighting through the courts and recounts. -“I am a little bit nervous,” Mr. Crocker, now dean of the Bush School of Government and Public Service at [|Texas A&M University], said in a recent interview. “The elections were later than expected and there were very close results between Maliki and Allawi, which suggest it’s going to be a very long process. We may not even have a new government until we’re at the August deadline. I’d like the U.S. to retain the original flexibility.” (former American ambassador to Iraq) -“I’m for a shift away from the current rigid deadline to something more flexible, more reflective of the fluid and tense situation in Iraq, where the last thing the Iraqis really need is for the United States to be focused more on exit than anything else at a moment of high political uncertainty,” (Meghan L. O’Sullivan, a former deputy national security adviser) -“I feel very comfortable with our plan,” General Odierno said on “Fox News Sunday” last week, “and unless something unforeseen and disastrous happens, I fully expect us to be at 50,000 by the first of September.” -Staying longer would mean only that Americans could be enmeshed in deciding between Mr. Maliki and Mr. Allawi -“I don’t see why we should be picking sides in a top-down civil war,” (Michael E. O’Hanlon, a scholar at the [|Brookings Institution])

__Key Points/Ideas from Clip__
-2 minutes of coverage per network per week -CBS, ABC, NBC -US networks show tornado warnings, cyclones, floods, EVEN celebrities -The networks do not see the War in Iraq as “News Worthy” -The networks will show what will get the most views (which apparently is not he war) -More than 1,000,000 Iraqis killed -Multiple news sources reported these statistics, but NOT the major networks -The Pentagon “We don’t do body counts” -5, 000, 000 displaced Iraqis -Human disaster worse than 9/11, worse than Katrina -Still not “News Worthy”

__** Mainstream Media Source 2: **__Remarks of Senator Barack Obama The World Beyond Iraq Fayetteville, NC March 19, 2008 As Prepared for Delivery

[|Full Speach]

media type="youtube" key="iKzJm4EbCRU" height="385" width="480"

__** Key Points/Ideas form Obama’s Speech **__ -Just before America's entry into World War I, President Woodrow Wilson addressed Congress: “It is a fearful thing to lead this great peaceful people into war,” he said. “...But the right is more precious than peace.” Wilson's words captured two awesome responsibilities that test any Commander-in-Chief – to never hesitate to defend America, but to never go to war unless you must. War is sometimes necessary, but it has grave consequences, and the judgment to go to war can never be undone. -War was necessary, the President said, because the United States could not, “live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder.” -there was no hard evidence that Iraq had those stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction -This war has now lasted longer than World War I, World War II, or the Civil War. Nearly four thousand Americans have given their lives. Thousands more have been wounded. Even under the best case scenarios, this war will cost American taxpayers well over a trillion dollars. And where are we for all of this sacrifice? We are less safe and less able to shape events abroad. We are divided at home, and our alliances around the world have been strained. The threats of a new century have roiled the waters of peace and stability, and yet America remains anchored in Iraq. -I am running for President because it's time to turn the page on a failed ideology and a fundamentally flawed political strategy, so that we can make pragmatic judgments to keep our country safe. That's what I did when I stood up and opposed this war from the start -So when I am Commander-in-Chief, I will set a new goal on Day One: I will end this war. Not because politics compels it. Not because our troops cannot bear the burden– as heavy as it is. But because it is the right thing to do for our national security, and it will ultimately make us safer. -I will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. We can responsibly remove 1 to 2 combat brigades each month. If we start with the number of brigades we have in Iraq today, we can remove all of them 16 months. After this redeployment, we will leave enough troops in Iraq to guard our embassy and diplomats -What I propose is not – and never has been – a precipitous drawdown. It is instead a detailed and prudent plan that will end a war nearly seven years after it started. -My plan to end this war will finally put pressure on Iraq's leaders to take responsibility for their future. Because we've learned that when we tell Iraq's leaders that we'll stay as long as it takes, they take as long as they want. We need to send a different message. We will help Iraq reach a meaningful accord on national reconciliation. -Let me be clear: ending this war is not going to be easy. There will be dangers involved. We will have to make tactical adjustments, listening to our commanders on the ground, to ensure that our interests in a stable Iraq are met, and to make sure that our troops are secure. -Now we know what we'll hear from those like John McCain who support open-ended war. They will argue that leaving Iraq is surrender. That we are emboldening the enemy. -The central front in the war against terror is not Iraq, and it never was.

__** Citizen Media Source 2: **__[|FULL ARTICLE] By: Mary Zerkel //(National Coordinator of the Eyes Wide Open and Cost of War programs within the American Friends Service Committee// ) **Posted: May 25, 2010 04:16 PM** **

[|$1 Trillion for Wars Makes No Sense By Any Measure]

** What is $1 trillion really worth? This May 30 at 10:06 a.m., we will reach another dubious milestone in our almost nine years of war. At that precise moment, we will have spent $1 trillion in operational costs for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, tracked by the National Priorities Project's cost of war counter. What is $1 trillion worth? NPP explains it this way: if you made a million dollars a year, it would take you a million years to earn $1 trillion. Of course, most Americans don't earn $1 million a year. In fact 9.9 percent earn nothing because they are unemployed. It's a shame that we have wasted that $1 trillion on war, rather than on a WPA-style program to repair our roads and bridges that could have hired those 15.3 million people out of work for $50,000 apiece. And on top of that, we would still have had a cool $235 billion left over to invest in clean energy, producing 3.9 million green jobs while reducing our reliance on fossil fuels, according to a study by the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Many such tradeoffs exist, tantalizing us with what could have been. For instance, with that $1 trillion we could have given 4-year scholarships at state universities to the 2 million freshmen currently enrolled - and do the same thing again in each of the next 23 years. Or we could have provided the estimated 500,000 homeless families across the U.S. with affordable housing - and done that each year for the next 17 years. In other words, $1 trillion has the potential to completely wipe out major domestic social problems that desperately need funding as we cope with the effects of the great recession. But some very different choices have been made. Runaway spending on the wars and the military in general, puts us in a situation where priorities like education, housing and many other vital domestic needs will be taking a back seat. Is war worth it? Congress is on the verge of approving yet another "emergency" war spending supplemental, this time for $34 billion to pay for the escalation of troops in Afghanistan. Last weekend (May 22-23) for the first time the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan surpassed those in Iraq. We're winding down one misguided conflict only to accelerate another. And we're doing so with borrowed money. For generations we will be paying the price of these wars with a diminished capacity to respond to the needs of people and communities in our own country. Sadly, our unfunded domestic needs are not the only cost of war. Why do we continue to spend in pursuit of a military solution in Afghanistan when nearly nine years of war should prove that it is not working? Imagine what spending a fraction of that money on building schools for Afghan girls, or rebuilding an infrastructure decimated by 30 years of war and occupation, could do for the "hearts and minds" we currently are trying to win through drone strikes and the spring offensive in Khandahar. The human and economic cost of the wars cannot be separated. In yet another sad convergence, we will reach this $1 trillion milestone on Memorial Day weekend. There is no way to quantify the tragedy of the lost lives of the U.S. soldiers and countless Iraqi and Afghan civilians. Each dollar spent on the wars not only was diverted from peaceful, productive projects, but also contributed to these lives lost. That is the greatest tragedy of all. Take some time this weekend to remember those who have died in Iraq and Afghanistan. And take a moment to let your members of Congress know that this out-of-control war spending is NOT worth one more dollar or one more life.

**__Comparative Analysis__** Citizen and mainstream media both take very different approaches pertaining to the War in Iraq. The majority of the mainstream media presents an unbiased opinion of the war. For instance, the first example of mainstream media that I choose was from the NY Times. In this article it discusses different opinions, and it does not side one way or the other. It uses quotes from respectable, important political figures to express the two different points of view. The second source of mainstream media I choose was a video from Time. This video was a speech that President Obama gave during his political campaign. Although this video is expressing Obama's opinions, the purpose of the video is purely to be informative, it is not to convince the viewers of Time, that Time supports the end of the War in Iraq. The first example that I gave of citizen media is a video that purposefully points out all of the flaws of the War in Iraq, in order to convince the public and viewers that the war is pointless and should be stopped. This video does not address the opposing arguments of the other side, and it also criticizes main stream television news from not giving the war as much attention as it deserves or merits. The second example of citizen media that I included is an article from the Huffington Post. This article says that the country has wasted $1 trillion on the war, when it could have spent this money on helping to improve our own country, especially after the recession that has left millions of people out of work. The major difference between mainstream and citizen media is that, mainstream addresses both sides, whereas citizen focuses purely on one side, with a specific opinion. When one is learning about a current issue it is important to obtain information from mainstream media and sources that voice the opinions of both sides of a topic, in order to get the most rounded and best information connected to that specific topic.