Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt?

Thought this post was interesting comparing the "Three New Deals" which came out in the early 20th century, and how Roosevelt's plan for government intervention in our lives was similar to that of Hitler's and Mussolini's. I might buy the book...

-----------

Thanks Free! Great review. When i have time to pick up a good book that's not required for class that will be near the top of my list.

The important focus should be on why we didn't follow the same path while under many of the same pressures. Could one of the reasons be the placement in Europe of Fascism as the antithesis of Communism (even though many of their policies were undeniably similar)? In the US both creeds were placed in opposition to the liberal tradition. Each had their proponents but were not necessarily seen as the counterbalances to each other. An ardent anti-communist in Europe seemingly had to turn to the fascists for support because the liberal institutions had lost so much of their own 'legitimacy' with the population.

Different Lenses, Different Sentences

Here is one more example of how, no matter how 'informed' we are in this information age, we are still at the mercy of the fog of war and journalism. The same event can, at the twist of a pen, be a war crime, an unfortunate accident or a reason for celebration. In this case, the death of 25 Iraqis receives slightly different coverage by 4 different sources; the Times--a South African syndicated paper; the New York Times; the Long War Journal--a well informed, 'counter-terrorism' blog; and Reuters.com. A well educated and discerning reader would finish any one of these articles with very different perspective on what really happened near Baqubah earlier today.

Here's a call (and it goes for myself as well) to widen your news net, question your preferred sources, and take them ALL with a grain of salt. In such situations the exact truth is, and will always be, hard to determine. I have just taken the first four paragraph breaks from each story, because in reality that is often all that is read. Merely including alternative information at the tail end of a story can be enough to maintain journalistic integrity, but in my eyes is still a little questionable.

Women and children killed in US raid
AFP Published: Oct 05, 2007
he first four
At least 17 Iraqis including women and children were killed in a US air raid near the city of Baquba today, Iraqi officials and witnesses said.

"Seventeen people were killed, 27 were wounded and eight are missing including women and children," a defence ministry official told AFP.

US helicopters attacked the village of Al-Jaysani, near the mainly Shiite town of Al-Khalis, around 2 am (2300 GMT), destroying at least four houses and killing up to 25 people, witnesses said.

Ahmed Mohammed, 31, said he had travelled with 15 wounded from the area to the City Medical Hospital in Baghdad.

Accounts Differ on U.S. Attack That Killed 25 Iraqis

By ALISSA J. RUBIN: Published: October 6, 2007

American troops backed by aircraft support attacked a Shiite town north of Baghdad at dawn today killing at least 25 Iraqis the military described as criminals who were involved in the transport of weapons. But Iraqis at the scene said the dead were innocent, though armed, civilians.

The military said it was searching for an insurgent leader believed to be associated with the elite Iranian Quds Force, which American intelligence sources believe is working in Iraq to foment violent activity by some Shiite militias.

Iraqis at the scene gave a sharply divergent account, saying the Iraqis killed had been trying to defend their town from Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, the homegrown Sunni militant group that American intelligence believes has foreign leadership. Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia has been active in the Diyala Province, but so have militias associated with the anti-American Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr.

“The residents were defending themselves and the town,” said Uday al-Khadran, the mayor of Khalis, the district in which the fighting occurred.

US kills 25 Special Groups fighters in Diyala
By Bill Roggio: October 5, 2007 7:03 AM

Coalition special operations forces continue to attack the Iranian-backed Special Groups operating inside Iraq with the same ferocity as it attacks al Qaeda. Twenty-five Special Groups fighters were killed during an engagement northwest of Baqubah this morning during a raid on a Special Groups leader.

Coalition forces called in an airstrike on a building after taking “heavy fire from a group of armed men fighting from defensive positions.” Special Groups fighters attacked Coalition forces with AK-47s and RPGs, and spotted what appeared to be a fighter “carrying what appeared to be an anti-aircraft weapon.” At least 25 terrorists are believed to have been killed in the airstrike.

“Coalition forces were targeting a Special Groups commander believed to be associated with members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard – Qods Force,” Multinational Forces Iraq reported. “Intelligence indicates that he was responsible for facilitating criminal activity and is involved in the movement of various weapons from Iran to Baghdad.”

Multinational Forces Iraq has gained a clearer picture on the Qods Force supported Special Groups command structure in Iraq after the capture of Mahmud Farhadi on September 20. Farhadi has been positively identified as the Qods Force commander of the Zafr Command, one of the three region units subordinate to the Ramazan Corps.

IRAQ WRAPUP 4-U.S. military says kills 37 Iraqi militants
Fri 5 Oct 2007, 17:07 GMT

In the Baquba operation, support aircraft were called in when U.S. soldiers came under attack from militants, with one insurgent thought to have an anti-aircraft weapon.

"Perceiving hostile intent, support aircraft engaged, killing an estimated 25 criminals and destroying two buildings," the U.S. military said in a statement.

Police and hospital sources said 25 people were killed and another 35 wounded in the U.S. air strike in the village of Jezan al-Imam near Khalis, a town northwest of Baquba. They said four houses were also destroyed.

Police sources said most of the dead were men, disputing Iraqi television reports that women and children were among civilian casualties.

Iraq: Post Surge, Pre-withdrawal

Linda Robinson has written a telling article about the current situation in Iraq and the difficulties of the upcoming months. Her analysis seems to fit well with what I have been reading from embedded reporters, military interviews and some Iraqi blogs. The surge is working in a limited way, but "what next?" is the question weighing on everyone's minds.

"during a three-week trip to Iraq in late August and early September this year, I found that Iraq has pulled back from the brink of all-out civil war. The death toll among Iraqi civilians had fallen to 1,600 in August, according to figures cited by U.S. Gen. David Petraeus. The violence is still far above the levels of 2004 and 2005, but the hoped-for breathing space has been created. Platoons of U.S. and Iraqi soldiers stood guard along the fault lines between Baghdad’s Shiite and Sunni neighborhoods, thwarting the worst sectarian violence. After aggressive U.S. military operations this spring, al Qaeda in Iraq is playing defense, and Shiite extremists have been debilitated. Nuri al-Maliki’s government has grudgingly begun to hire Sunni volunteers into the police force. And, in a barely publicized development, it has decided to rehire 5,000 former officers of Saddam’s military and give 40,000 others civilian jobs or full pensions.

To be sure, the level of violence in Iraq is still unacceptably high, and these real but fragile gains are easily reversible. Most importantly, the so-called surge has yet to enable the Iraqi government to reach a national agreement on sharing power and resources among Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds. That’s no surprise: It was the September reporting deadline that created an unrealistic expectation that reconciliation and all the key legislation would be in place by then. Still, even with most political benchmarks largely unmet, General Petraeus seems to have bought himself more time on what he calls the “Washington clock.”

As many have stated, eloquently or not, the important focus should be how we leave Iraq, not why or even necessarily when. Letting domestic politics force a hasty pullout is just as dangerous as letting bull-headed stubborness keep our troops abroad while they merely act as lighting rods. Patience and farsightedness are key, and I pray we have enough of both.