WHO ARE WE?

The Alaska Progressive Review strives to present information that we feel will aid in developing more sane, just, and sustainable political, economic, social, and environmental policies at all scales. Effective changes in this light by this country can not be undertaken without acknowledging and dealing with one of the greatest criminal and tragic events of the past 30 years. One in which we are all involved, and must work to put an end to, and heal the victims of.

There is no doubt now, that the invasion and occupation of the sovereign country of Iraq, begun in March, 2003 by our country, was illegal according to domestic and international law. The reasons given initially, that Saddam Hussein and his government proposed an imminent threat to this and other countries because of their possession of "weapons of mass destruction", was a smoke-screen for the real reasons.

** Investigative Reporter Greg Palast, in his book, Armed Madhouse, after interviewing numerous U.S. governmental officials (posing as an oil industry researcher), and oil industry figures, states that the invasion and occupation of Iraq was undertaken, with Saudi Arabia's blessing.http://www.amazon.com/Armed-Madhouse-Baghdad-Orleans-Sordid-Secrets/dp/0452288312/ref=

Not so much to gain direct control and ownership of Iraq's oil, but to eliminate Sadam Hussein's control of it, as he was causing too much instability in the pricing of oil by his manipulation of Iraq's production/export. In addition, for all the usual other benefits, raised oil prices for oil industry profit expansion, other military-industrial corporate profits, and rallying of the masses around the administration as they scapegoated Iraq for the 9/11 attacks.

While most progressive-oriented people knew from the start that the Iraq war/occupation was based on lies, some hard evidence of that was needed to help convince others. The Downing Street Memo serves that purpose very well. What is it? There is a web-site devoted to spreading the word about it.
http://downingstreetmemo.com/

In their words,

"The Downing Street "Memo" is actually the minutes of a meeting, transcribed during a gathering of many of the British Prime Minister's senior ministers on July 23, 2002. Published by The Sunday Times on May 1, 2005 this document was the first hard evidence from within the UK or US governments that exposed the truth about how the Iraq war began.

Since that time, much more information has come to light through leaks of secret government documents and the accounts of an increasing number of people who have witnessed the administration’s wrongdoing firsthand.

There is now in the public record a large body of evidence that vividly illustrates:

Bush’s long-standing intent to invade Iraq
Bush’s willingness to provoke Saddam (in a variety of ways) into providing a pretext for war
The fact that the war effectively began with an air campaign nearly a year before the March 2003 invasion and months before Congressional approval for the use of force
The administration’s widespread effort to crush dissent and manipulate information that would counter its justification for war
The lack of planning for the war’s aftermath and a fundamental lack of understanding of the Iraqi society

Even as the Bush presidency winds down, a recent Senate investigation final report shows how the administration manipulated information to overstate the WMD threat and conjure up a connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Quaida that did not exist.
A majority of the American people now believes that the president intentionally misled our nation into war, and many more believe the sacrifice made in Iraq has not been worthwhile. This web site is intended as a resource to document the truth about how we were misled into war, so that we might avoid such a mistake in the future."

Knowing that this war/occupation is illegal, and that hundreds of thousands, possibly even as many as 1.2 million Iraqi citizens have been killed (and 3-4 million driven from their homes) because of it, and over 4500 American and British soldiers, we need to ask ourselves, what is going to be done about it? If nothing is done (which at this point seems likely), what does that say about us, as citizens of the country responsible for it?

The Alaska Progressive Review does not want to engage in sensationalism or needless displays of human suffering. Yet, because of the tight control the corporate media in this country has of the flow of information from Iraq, pictures like this are essential to remind us of what modern warfare really means. Since World War I, and the advent of aerial bombardment and other enlightened technological advances, 80-90 percent of wartime casualties have been innocent civilians. Regardless of who is in the right or wrong, this is what happens. It is thought that one of the reasons for widespread opposition to the Vietnam War, besides the draft, was images of dead and dying civilians, children even, in circumstances like that of the poor Iraqi child shown here. A lesson which the powers that be keep in mind.

Here's a little something to ponder. Your editor used to serve as a medic in our nearby volunteer fire department several years ago, while considering a career change. During those duties I got to know how our emergency medical services work here in Fairbanks, Alaska. We have around 20 emergency room beds in our main hospital, Fairbanks Memorial. The Fort Wainwright Army Base hospital probably has a similar amount. 40 beds for a population center of about 90,000 people. When 750 cruise missiles rained down on Baghdad in March of 2003, a city of 6.5 million, how many emergency room beds and doctors do you think they had? In a city decimated by sanctions and failing infrastructure, without as advanced of a medical/emergency services system, as in this country.

Fairbanks has 1/70th the population of Baghdad, suppose 11 cruise missiles rained down on it. Places like the federal courthouse downtown, the power-plant along the Chena River, and buildings on the Air Force and Army bases, which have military housing nearby. Don't forget, cruise missiles do not necessarily hit their targets directly, and can be off by hundreds or thousands of feet, for many reasons. That would guarantee hundreds, possibly even a thousand or more immediate casualties in Fairbanks. Do you think any city this size could handle that? What do you think happened in Baghdad that night and the following several days, in March, 2003. Reports and images of truckloads of casualties were never seen in this country, but they were in much of the Middle East. DO NOT CLICK ON THIS LINK if you don't want to see real images of what the Iraq War/Occupation has brought to innocent civilians. http://mindprod.com/politics/iraqwarpix.html

Every society raises its children with basic ethics, that it is wrong to lie, hurt others, and certainly to kill. And that killing of others, when not in self-defense, is murder. Why shouldn't these standards also apply to governments and nations as well? Well, at one time they did. After World War II, when the main architects of the Nazi Party and power structure were tried during the Nuremburg Trials. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials. One of the main things to come out of this process, were the Nuremburg Principles, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Principles, one of which Principle VI, is given below.

Principle VI
The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:
(a) Crimes against peace:
(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).
(b) War Crimes:
Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of slave labor or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
(c) Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.

The Democratic Party of this country has already stated many times, that impeachment of President Bush and/or Vice President Cheney, who, along with their colleagues and advisors, are the architects of the Iraq tragedy, is "off the table". Why? Is it because they are equally implicit, since most of them voted for the initial authorization of use of force, in 2002, knowing, deep at heart, that the justifications were false? But most of them voted for it anyway to maintain political office and all that entails. President-elect Obama has never said in any way that this tragedy is wrong, and must be ended at once.

But there is at least some discussion and effort to begin the process to indict and prosecute those responsible for these incredible crimes.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vincent-bugliosi/the-prosecution-of-george_b_102427.html.

The above link describes a book written recently by Vincent Bugliosi, the retired District Attorney for Los Angeles County. He is most well-known for being the prosecutor in the notorious Charles Manson murder trial in the 1970s. He lays out the case that President Bush should be tried for murder in a court of law. Who better to make that informed kind of decision?
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2008/09/19-2. This link describes an article, whereby Vincent Bugliosi and Charlotte Dennette, a candidate for the Vermont Attorney General, propose to begin the indictment process.

"George Bush and his people have gotten away with thousands and thousands of murders," Bugliosi said, citing both American and Iraqi deaths in the five-year-old war. "We, the American people, cannot let him get away with this."
Bugliosi said any state attorney general or local district attorney can bring criminal charges against Bush once he leaves office early next year. He said Vermont could take on the soon-to-be ex-president by bringing conspiracy to murder charges against him, using his own public statements during the build-up to the Iraq war as evidence.

Unfortunately, Charlotte Dennette didn't win the Vermont Attorney General position. But, the important thing is, other people in similar positions, can start the indictment process. And officials must be pressured to do this. Because if not, the rest of the World will think that the American people accept what was done in Iraq by the Bush/Cheney regime.