Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Joshua Micah Marshall

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:03 PM
Original message
Joshua Micah Marshall
Edited on Mon Dec-29-03 07:04 PM by WilliamPitt
I wanted to jump in quickly and remind y'all what a great journalist looks like.

===

Practice to Deceive

Chaos in the Middle East is not the Bush hawks' nightmare scenario--it's their plan.

By Joshua Micah Marshall

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0304.marshall.html

Imagine it's six months from now. The Iraq war is over. After an initial burst of joy and gratitude at being liberated from Saddam's rule, the people of Iraq are watching, and waiting, and beginning to chafe under American occupation. Across the border, in Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Iran, our conquering presence has brought street protests and escalating violence. The United Nations and NATO are in disarray, so America is pretty much on its own. Hemmed in by budget deficits at home and limited financial assistance from allies, the Bush administration is talking again about tapping Iraq's oil reserves to offset some of the costs of the American presence--talk that is further inflaming the region.

Meanwhile, U.S. intelligence has discovered fresh evidence that, prior to the war, Saddam moved quantities of biological and chemical weapons to Syria. When Syria denies having such weapons, the administration starts massing troops on the Syrian border. But as they begin to move, there is an explosion: Hezbollah terrorists from southern Lebanon blow themselves up in a Baghdad restaurant, killing dozens of Western aid workers and journalists. Knowing that Hezbollah has cells in America, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge puts the nation back on Orange Alert. FBI agents start sweeping through mosques, with a new round of arrests of Saudis, Pakistanis, Palestinians, and Yemenis.

To most Americans, this would sound like a frightening state of affairs, the kind that would lead them to wonder how and why we had got ourselves into this mess in the first place. But to the Bush administration hawks who are guiding American foreign policy, this isn't the nightmare scenario. It's everything going as anticipated.

In their view, invasion of Iraq was not merely, or even primarily, about getting rid of Saddam Hussein. Nor was it really about weapons of mass destruction, though their elimination was an important benefit. Rather, the administration sees the invasion as only the first move in a wider effort to reorder the power structure of the entire Middle East. Prior to the war, the president himself never quite said this openly. But hawkish neoconservatives within his administration gave strong hints. In February, Undersecretary of State John Bolton told Israeli officials that after defeating Iraq, the United States would "deal with" Iran, Syria, and North Korea. Meanwhile, neoconservative journalists have been channeling the administration's thinking. Late last month, The Weekly Standard's Jeffrey Bell reported that the administration has in mind a "world war between the United States and a political wing of Islamic fundamentalism ... a war of such reach and magnitude the invasion of Iraq, or the capture of top al Qaeda commanders, should be seen as tactical events in a series of moves and countermoves stretching well into the future."

In short, the administration is trying to roll the table--to use U.S. military force, or the threat of it, to reform or topple virtually every regime in the region, from foes like Syria to friends like Egypt, on the theory that it is the undemocratic nature of these regimes that ultimately breeds terrorism. So events that may seem negative--Hezbollah for the first time targeting American civilians; U.S. soldiers preparing for war with Syria--while unfortunate in themselves, are actually part of the hawks' broader agenda. Each crisis will draw U.S. forces further into the region and each countermove in turn will create problems that can only be fixed by still further American involvement, until democratic governments--or, failing that, U.S. troops--rule the entire Middle East.

...more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. I love JMM....
mainly cuz he responds to my emails in a very nice way ;)

oh, yeah, he's a damned good journalist, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Northwind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. Ah, the same POS who wrote a hit peice on Dean
He's trash.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. lol...
a hit piece.

We'll have him rounded up and brought to the re-education camp immediately. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jerseycoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. Anybody who calls Dean on his bull is trash
I see. :eyes:

Is this the hit piece you mean?

I don't care if Dean says he'll endorse whoever wins. He's playing the defection card. And that crosses the line.

I don't doubt that it would be hard to reconcile some Dean supporters to another Democratic nominee. But that's not the point. By saying it, he's leveraging it, and encouraging it.

The price of admission to the Democratic primary race is a pledge of committed support to whomever wins the nomination, period. (The sense of entitlement to other Democrats' support comes after you win the nomination, not before.) If Dean can't sign on that dotted-line, he has no business asking for the party's nomination.




Great to see you, Will. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. That's the one. Ain't it sweet ?
Josh is my first stop everytime I log on.

Nice to see you Will. Keep on keeping on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. Very well said, Jersey! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jumptheshadow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
22. He hit the nail on the head about Dean
It's just common sense: If you run for the party's nomination then you are pledging full commitment to the ultimate nominee.

This could only be construed as a "hit piece" by unreasonable people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drfemoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #8
29. I keep ASKING THIS
The price of admission to the Democratic primary race is a pledge of committed support to whomever wins the nomination, period. ... If Dean can't sign on that dotted-line, he has no business asking for the party's nomination.

WHERE are the signed pledges from the other eight? Has anyone heard a WHISPER that they would support the nominee?

Dean has said it and said it and said it .. even said it during a debate.

But Josh doesn't CARE:
I don't care if Dean says he'll endorse whoever wins.

Talk about your lose/lose situation. Not only have none of the other candidates qualified for inclusion into the Party (by Josh's rule), Dean's doesn't COUNT!!!

STUNNED is my permanent mental condition. Just lobotomize me and get it over with. PLEEZE ..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DancingBear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Plus ca chance, plus c'est la meme chose

eh Will?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clarknyc Donating Member (393 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. I don't always agree with JMM
But I respect him tremendously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tandalayo_Scheisskopf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
3. Josh is a treasure.
One of the most reasonable men in a largely unreasonable world, with one of the clearest and most objectively ethical viewpoints available today. I must read his blog every day, just to make sure that someone sensible is still writing.

A few more years and he'll be as good as you. ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bicentennial_baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:08 PM
Response to Original message
4. Indeed William!
I love Josh's writing!

Hey, how bout those Pats?! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
5. great article
watched him yesterday on CSPAN (it was a rerun) and he took Perle to task over many mis-statements. Good guy in my book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
6. Why is Saudi Arabia off limits?
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Military Brat Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:26 PM
Response to Original message
11. Question: "Who is Josh Marshall?" Average American: "Huh??"
Edited on Mon Dec-29-03 07:28 PM by Military Brat
The best and the brightest remain unknown to the self-absorbed masses.

Edited: Hey, WP!! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Postman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
12. in a nutshell: "the ends justify the means" according to the neo-cons
Marshall doesn't mention the Euro factor in all of this invasion stuff.

The threat of Saddam switching payment for oil to the Euro vis-a-vis the US Dollar had no relation to all of this? The fear factor for the US gov't was the trend of other OPEC states following suit. Isn't this one of the reasons why Hugo Chavez of Venezuela is a target? He has also "threatened" to switch...

Iraq: Baghdad Moves To Euro
http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2000/11/01112000160846.asp

Venezuelan switch to €uro upsets Washington
http://www.agitprop.org.au/nowar/20030618_carson_venezuela_euro_switch.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
14. I have never thought he was a great journalist
but since he has a recent hit piece against Dean I suppose his credentials must be propped up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lancdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. A hit piece?
Aren't we being a teeny bit oversensitive? :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Droopy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:38 PM
Response to Original message
15. Wierd you should mention this piece in particular
I read it back when it first came out and I think it's the only article I've ever read by him. I was impressed that he was saying this at a time when many Americans were screaming for blood. I printed out the article and gave it to my dad to read. It didn't impress him much, he thought it was all conjecture, but it helped me to get through to him about how I felt about the war. I was pretty nervous about telling him I was against it and this article helped me open up a dialogue with him about it. He was for the war and I didn't change his mind, but at least he knew where I stood and he respected what I had to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Malva Zebrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
18. I have read him over time many times
but how much of an impact can and does he make? I am tired of this web blogs and protests being touted as something really, really innovative and mind boggling. They are merely "diaries"

If he is worth anything then let him emerge as a hero of the left beyond his web blog and take some action rather than writing a diary.

I have nothing too much against him at all, and he is pretty much laid back and often times right on the button, but blogs do not make for a presidential win or even for a contest.

They are, in a sense, ego directed and oriented writings that are only popular with a few who would agree who are more than likely, "yes" men , and with a few that would adore the blogger and shill or promote him/her. We do NOT have to accept that as that which give us some sort of something to latch on to in hope. We can all write, actually if we put our mind to it and have the time.

It does not go over with those of us who are more mature and more likely to not cheerlead for any one blogger. It is good that he writes, but, we do not need to adore him because of that.


I like him--except he is just too little to make any sort of a dent right now. I would choose an Amanpour over a Josh. I know the urge to write is irrestible to those who are so inclined, and there needs to be someone who will read it and be enthralled, but, if it does not go further than a web blog, what good is it other than to rope in a "dedicated" and adoring following? Some are roped in and others will be more inclined toward actually seeing some results

I , and many like me, are not "dedicated" to blogs or to adoring at this point in time. They are amusing, true,and even interesting, but do NOT have the power we need right now to crush Bush. What will be the POWER to crush Bush is, incredibly, money. Sorry state of affairs, I think but nevertheless, a reality and a sore obscene one at that.

They, the blogs, are sort of like ego directed mirrors by people, who are no doubt sincere and obvously passionate in their angst, but who have no power whatsoever other than their blogs which do not, to be honest, have much power at all.

It is time to support those who DO have some power. Those are the ones who have the money or who have the ability to rake it in, and that is the sad fact as it occurs in our country when it comes to an election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Couple of things
1. He writes for the Washington Monthly, which is no blog.

2. Good blogs are read by heavy-hitters all over the place. I spoke to Joseph Wilson this afternoon for a piece I was writing, and he went on and on about Marshall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. Well, JMM did the BEST coverage about WIlson
anywhere! JMM is a great, great writer, analyst, and thinker. I read his blog everyday and it is always a pleasure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Malva Zebrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #19
26. I know that Will, but heavy hitters are not read by the ordinary person
it seems,as much as we think it would benefit them to do so.

Like a little tete a tete, these things and connections become like an elitist club -- or a mutal admiration society between writers. That is not all that bad but perhaps it is not appropriate right now.

I may have not given Marshall his earned due,and it may seem arrogant as I have certainly never written a column such as Marshall, but at this point, myself and many persons like me, don't really care about the pundits and the mutual admiration societies or their blogs or the Wahington Monthly.

It is going to take more than that I think. Or less than that, depending upon how you view it.

That is not to disparage these talented analysts and writers,certianly they do have an important place for some, but I cannot see where the impact occurs on the common man--I cannot see an impact much at all, for that matter. Sorry--I know there is a place for it, but I think we are beyond that now if we want to reach the ordinary citizen. We have, as far as I am concerned, arrived at foggy bottom.

Wilson,whose speeches I have watched a few times, and who is articulate and apparently intelligent, no doubt, is extremely qualified to speak on that level and is to be respected for his patriotic contributions,and I do, indeed respect his expertise, but, how many of us are a "Wilson" or a "Plame" How many of us live in that style? We are, after all, only human beings trying to survive , and we have had our voice taken away from us by those who are far more powerful -- who have the power to run our lives, without our consent, as a matter of fact.

That is the frustration--and no Wilson, or Marshall, can get it back by blogging a web page or by a country club society. Someone needs to come along and be a real, loud mouthed, shocking mensche. That is what my gut instinct tells me.

I suppose my point is that the common man, at one point, needs to be wooed and cajoled on the common man's level, to spur him on to defend his rights or to defend his or her own concepts of how this country functions democratically.

That is not, as far as I am concerned, done on a blog, or in the Washington Monthly right now. It is just too obscure, unread and weak, no matter how talented the writer at this point in time.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. You miss the point...because I didn't make it
Those heavy-hitters read Marshall, and then write about it themselves. It's research for a lot of people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vi5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
20. He is the enemy and must be stopped...
He said bad things about Howard Dean.

He is no longer on our side but has in fact been exposed as a freeper sent to infiltrate the left.













sarcasm off
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
23. William Rivers Pitt
Coincidence?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SahaleArm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Point? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neverforget Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
24. Hit piece? I can only imagine what Rove has in store for Dean
because this mild criticism is nothing for the mud and the kitchen sink that will be thrown at Dean should he be the nominee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donna Zen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 10:48 PM
Response to Original message
28. Question about Ken Pollack episode
Shortly before the war began, Marshall did a several part interview--two or three days--with Ken making the case for war. Marshall at that point seemed to lean toward agreeing with Pollack, and cited the main themes that Pollack was making.

I've often wondered, given Marshall's knowledge of PNAC and their ultimate plans, why his tone changed. I'm assuming, in a world where nothing should be assumed, that Marshall is friendly with Pollack, and swayed by part of the thesis.

Any insights Mr. Pitt? Really, it confused me, and was actually slightly "off putting."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC