We’re Harry Too (+ Open Thread)

There’s no news from Iraq that chills me quite as much as hearing that three of our soldiers are missing, possibly two soldiers and their Iraqi interpreter, and that there’s a massive search ongoing in the “Triangle of Death,” a Sunni insurgent stronghold about 20 miles south of Baghdad. Five U.S. soldiers were killed in the attack.

We don’t know yet who these soldiers are but it’s instinctive to feel an immediate, anxiety-filled bond with them. Much as Prince Harry’s fellow soldiers have bonded over debate that Harry’s tour in Iraq would endanger others in his cavalry regiment because he’s such an obvious target. Last night, Bill Moyers poignantly told the story of Harry’s comrades, at the beginning of his remarkable program that ranged from Condoleezza Rice’s lies and half-truths about Iraq, to comparisons of the Iraq war with Vietnam, to a devastating essay on the cost of the war.

There’s angst that other members of his regiment will be put at graver risk because of his celebrity. So guess what his comrades — his fellow soldiers — are doing? Rather than petition the Queen to keep the young man home, they have gotten shirts printed up with the words across them: “I’m Harry.”

In other words, the commoners and the Prince are in this together: one for all and all for one. What a notion — that war should be the great equalizer, that no one’s son or daughter is privileged from duty or danger.

I wonder how the last four years might have been different if only our president had asked sacrifice from everyone. Instead, mostly folks from the working class and professional soldiers are doing the dying, while the rich spend their tax cuts. War on the cheap, except for those fighting it.

I found the site that is selling the t-shirts: ImHarry.com.

The New York Times has a couple important stories today:

• “Billions in Oil Missing in Iraq, U.S. Study Says“: “The report reinforced longstanding suspicions that smugglers, insurgents and corrupt officials control significant parts of the country’s oil industry.”
• “Majority of Iraq Lawmakers Seek Timetable for U.S. Exit.”

  (It should be noted that Alternet reported this story on Wednesday, pointing out that the rest of the media was ignoring the report: “More than half of the members of Iraq’s parliament rejected for the first time on Tuesday the continuing occupation of their country. The U.S. media ignored the story.”)

Because it’s so astonishing, I have to add the beginning of Bill Moyers’ interview last night of historian Marilyn Young whose new book is “IRAQ AND THE LESSONS OF VIETNAM: OR, HOW NOT TO LEARN FROM THE PAST.”

Moyers showed excerpts of Charlie Rose’s interview this week of Condoleezza Rice, with this observation:

My friend and colleague Charlie Rose conducted a remarkable interview this week with Condoleeza Rice. It was mesmerizing because as Charlie pressed her with questions about an endgame in Iraq, Secretary Rice’s language seemed as removed from reality, as it was four years ago before all the blood and chaos that has followed America’s invasion.

Among Rice’s jaw-dropping claims were these:

SECRETARY RICE: America’s credibility remains, I think, strong. Yes, people are concerned. For instance, the issues about the intelligence in Iraq, that’s been somewhat difficult to overcome. I’ll be very, very straightforward with you on that.

CHARLIE ROSE: On weapons of mass destruction?

SECRETARY RICE: Yeah, yeah, because people now say when you give them a brief, “Are you sure?” And yes, that’s an issue and you say, well, it wasn’t just America’s intelligence services, of course, that thought that he had weapons of mass destruction; this was a worldwide intelligence problem, because the UN thought he had weapons of mass destruction.

SECRETARY RICE: The United States is in Iraq because the Iraqi Government asked us to be there and they asked us (inaudible) a UN Security Council mandate. Now, everybody understands the Iraqis are not yet able to secure themselves. And no one — I can tell you, when you go into the region and you talk to people, the first thing they say to you is: You’re not leaving, are you? Because they are concerned that if the United States withdraws precipitously and leaves a vacuum there, that it’s going to filled by al-Qaida, it’s going to be filled by extremists from Iraq and it’s going to be filled by neighbors playing games against one another.

SECRETARY RICE: our friends in the neighborhood need to know and the Iraqis need to know that we are not looking to leave Iraq. That’s not why this President went into Iraq and it’s not how –

CHARLIE ROSE: Ever?

SECRETARY RICE: Charlie, we are not going to leave an Iraq that is not capable of defending itself and with a foundation for future reconciliation.

CHARLIE ROSE: Do you believe you’ll have the support of the American people to do that?

SECRETARY RICE: I think that.

Imagine when HER book comes out in, what, 2010? (And if publishers decided George Tenet was worth $4 million, what do you think Rice will get? Double that?)

Larry Johnson and his friends had better keep their pencils sharpened.

You can read Marilyn Young’s reactions to Rice’s remarks at the Bill Moyers’ Journal site (which features full transcripts, video, and a blog). And you can see the video of the entire interview of Condoleezza Rice at Charlie Rose’s site.