How Many Additional Dead Americans Was Saddam Worth?

On the fifth anniversary of the Iraq invasion, ABC’s Good Morning America aired an interview with Vice President Cheney on the war. During the segment, Cheney flatly told White House correspondent Martha Raddatz that he doesn’t care about the American public’s views on the war:

CHENEY: On the security front, I think there’s a general consensus that we’ve made major progress, that the surge has worked. That’s been a major success.

RADDATZ: Two-third of Americans say it’s not worth fighting.

CHENEY: So?

RADDATZ: So? You don’t care what the American people think?

CHENEY: No. I think you cannot be blown off course by the fluctuations in the public opinion polls.

This opposition to the war is not a “fluctuation” in public opinion. The American public has steadily turned against the war since the 2003 invasion. According to a new CNN poll, just 36 percent of the American public believes that “the situation in Iraq was worth going to war over — down from 68 percent in March 2003, when the war began.”

Even though he doesn’t care what the American public wants, Cheney still thinks he is able — and entitled — to speak for the American public. Last month, Cheney declared, “The American people will not support a policy of retreat.” If Cheney were actually listening to the “American people,” he would know that 61 percent actually supports the redeployment of U.S. troops.

Is Bush and Cheney on a "War Hunt" ?. Now they are talking about Iran.

Last week Mr Bush signalled once again his readiness to deal with Iran when he said the Iranian leadership has "declared they want a nuclear programme to destroy people". This simplistic and inaccurate statement was made on a US government radio broadcast beamed into Iran. The truth is that no one outside the small group made up of the US president, the VP and their closet confidantes really knows if this is just sabre-rattling or an attempt to prepare the public for imminent military action.

This is precisely the problem. Given their track record - manipulating intelligence to hype the threat posed by Saddam Hussein in Iraq in order to launch a war that has caused incalculable misery, destabilised the region and allowed Iran to gain much greater influence - why should this bunch be allowed to decide whether it is appropriate to begin another war, which likely would have far worse consequences for the entire world?

The US military's Joint Chiefs of Staff is probably the best qualified to make this judgement, and despite the fact that it is almost unprecedented for active military commanders to publicly disagree with their commander-in-chief, they have let it become known through media sources that they are opposed to military action against Iran, for a variety of reasons.

Other military leaders, both active and retired, have suggested that the threat posed by Iran has been vastly overblown. The recent resignation of Admiral William Fallon as chief of US Central Command overseeing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is believed to have been forced, as a result of his very public view that military action against Iran would be both unnecessary and unwise.