Yes, There Were Mainstream Voices Against the War

As the 10th anniversary of our tragic (criminal) attack on Iraq nears,  and my new book on the subject circulates, I've been highlighting the journalistic malpractice that helped make the war inevitable.  So just for a moment, let's note at least a couple of voices who spoke out against (there were more than you think).

Precisely 10 years ago this weekend, Jimmy Carter wrote an op ed for the NYT  declaring that the pending invasion simply did not meet the definition of a "just war."  Excerpt:  "Our apparent determination to launch a war against Iraq, without international support, is a violation of these premises. As a Christian and as a president who was severely provoked by international crises, I became thoroughly familiar with the principles of a just war, and it is clear that a substantially unilateral attack on Iraq does not meet these standards."

And the same day, Maureen Dowd broke with most of her NYT colleagues in opposing the war, with such as this:

It still confuses many Americans that, in a world full of vicious slimeballs, we're about to bomb one that didn't attack us on 9/11 (like Osama); that isn't intercepting our planes (like North Korea); that isn't financing Al Qaeda (like Saudi Arabia); that isn't home to Osama and his lieutenants (like Pakistan); that isn't a host body for terrorists (like Iran, Lebanon and Syria). 

Plus, surprise, the Times editorial urged caution on the invasion:  "When the purpose is fuzzy, or based on questionable propositions, it's time to stop and look for other, less extreme means to achieve your goals."  More:  What U.S. troops killed in Iraq partly due to media malpractice look like--as 4000+ dots. 

Greg Mitchell's influential book "So Wrong For So Long," on the media and the Iraq war, was published today in an updated edition and for the first time as an e-book, with preface by Bruce Springsteen.