Excluding war opponents who were right all along from the Iraq debate...

[Wetzelbill]

Here is the NY Times ad taken out before the war by over thirty foreign policy experts and scholars who opposed the invasion of Iraq. Look at the list of names and think if you've seen any of them asked for their opinions on the 5th anniversary of the war. Or think about how many tv appearances they have made over the years. Or how many op-ed pieces any of these individuals have had in prominent newspapers.

Then think about how many times we've been force fed the likes of Bill Kristol and Fred Kagan and all these other clowns who have been wrong about everything day in and day out for over 5 years now.

In this country, it doesn't pay to be right. It pays to be pro-war. Whether you were right or not is entirely inconsequential.

http://utdocuments.blogspot.com/2008/03/nyt-pre-war-ad.html

[DrDan]

1. there is no money in waging peace - never has been - never will be

[Wetzelbill]

8. that explains Richard Perle's career in a nutshell

[Bandit]

11. You are quite wrong about that

It is there is no money for certain sectors. In peace time america flourishes and almost all do very well as do other countries associated with us. In war only the war industry does well everyone else gets screwed because all the money is blown to smitherines.

[DrDan]

12. yeah - you are probably right

but war sure shifts the direction of the money - and does certainly lead to obscene profits in certain sectors

[Wetzelbill]

13. well yes that's true in many ways

I think though for the purposes of these guys who continue to get on television and promote war after war after war, promoting war like that is much more profitable than peace. I mentioned Perle earlier because he's the most obvious example. A blatant war profiteer who is always called upon as an "expert" and it gives him a forum to promote a war that he is personally cashing in on. That's so absurd, I don't even know where to start. :)

[Breeze54]

2. Exactly and last week, the NYT had only Iraq War supporters discussing the war.

:grr:

Many wrote letters to the NYT's editors addressing this very issue.
They were taken to task for only touting one point of view.

Good post, Wetzelbill and thanks for the reminder and the link.

:kick: & Recommended

[Wetzelbill]

9. Charlie Rose did something similar

He had pro-war and "anti-war" guys on. His anti-war spokesman both supported the idea of going to war. Just ridiculous stuff. And Chuck is pretty good as far as the media goes.

[malaise]

3. They were right about the war not being in the

national interest, but wrong about WMDs. They were also wrong about winning.

[chknltl]

4. Lest We forget: Representative Jim McDermott

A congressman from Washington State who was strongly against the war from quite early on. He had an ongoing study regarding the effects of depleted uranium oxide poisoning on babies born to exposed parents. This study predated even the run-up to the fiasco war. During the runnup he led a small group of fellow congressmen and doctors over to Iraq, did further research and reported back to America that this war that we were about to undertake had nothing whatever to do with WMD, it instead had everything to do with regime change and oil.

For his efforts he was labeled Baghdad Jim and all but ignored. He still works to pass legislation regarding depleted uranium oxide poisoning on our vets. No, he has hardly been called on to speak out anywhere...he reminds me of Dennis Kucinich in that he is eager to be heard but rarely finds himself a podium to speak from and utterly no news coverage for the few times he does get a few moments to speak. He is a quiet, kindly man and a medical doctor. I am honored to have him as my congressman and as one of my personal heroes.

I suspect that he would be delighted to speak out on the radio if given the chance...as should each and every person on this list Wetzelbill. These are people well, WELL worth listening to. Are you getting this Rachel Maddow, Thom Hartmann, Randi Rhodes, and Ed Shultze?

[Wetzelbill]

7. McDermott and DK definitely stand out

All good points.

[Echo In Light]

5. Scott Ritter

http://www.democracynow.org/2006/10/16/scott_ritter_on_target_iran_the

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Ritter

[Wetzelbill]

6. yup Scott Ritter

he was relegated to stomping the hell out of minor peons on small panels in town halls etc, for a few years, and that guy had the WMD situation down to an effing T. I emailed him once and mentioned how it must feel good to be right, but that it has to be a bitter pill because Iraq was such a bad deal all around, and he expressed his lamentation about how nobody listened and alot of good people have been maimed and killed as a result.

[Echo In Light]

10. A blonde CNN pundit said he was "drinking Saddam's Kool Aid."

I recall him getting slammed on MSM, but didn't really connect with who he was until Mark Crispin Miller's outstanding book, Cruel & Unusual: Bush/Cheney's New World Order.