This is one of the best rants about our current situation that I’ve read in a long time. The author is correct that we used White Phosphorous in Fallujah, and not for “illumination”.
I remember watching the macho movies and television programs of the ’80s during my childhood. Without fail, the “enemies” in those offerings – typically Russians or Middle Easterners – were ruthless tyrants who would stop at nothing to accomplish their goals. Torturing hostages. Murdering innocent women and children. Committing unspeakable depravity.
Because, in today’s “with us or against us” environment, I can honestly say that if you voted for Bush, if you still support this man, than you are just as guilty of these crimes against humanity as he is. And I don’t care how you came about your support for Bush, whether he appealed to your moral values, your economic interests or even your desire to share a drink with the guy.
And now we have Haditha to deal with. Have we forever lost our moral underpinnings? All I know is that it will take us just as long to recover from what Bush and his ilk have done to our reputation as it will take our society to recover from his domestic policies.
Bush is President NOW, and his policies are what is creating this entire situation NOW.
I assume you consider the Iraqi war the “situation”. So other than holding Iraq responsible for the UN agreements it made after they attacked Kuwait and having the intestinal fortitude (unlike the UN) to actually do something about it, what policies are you refering to?
“don’t care if Truman ate babies – he isn’t the President now.”
you missed the point….. I mentioned WW2 to refute the point that America is so much worse than we once were…. war is war, fight to win or dont fight at all.
I would go to Canada, but there Immigration laws are way too strict and difficult to get around.
So are Mexico’s, from what I’ve read…
There has not been 1 terrorist attack on Americans in 5 years now. Seems like we are doing something right. I prefer to let our brave soldiers take the fight to the enemy, instead of waiting around for them to destroy a major city.
“… take the fight to the ememy…”
Yes, and I am sure that is why so many Afghani’s and Iraqi’s are happy to have American “liberators” in their midst…
They are well aware now, if they weren’t initially, that we are only staying there to keep the two “fronts” in the ‘War against Terror’ safely away from American soil.
By now it must be obvious to them that we don’t care how many of their cities are destroyed, or how many of their civilians are killed, as long as it keeps us safe…
We are trapped maintaining troops in both countries, for fear that the terrrorists will once again strike us at home if the troops are withdrawn.
No wonder Bush stated that it would be for another President to withdraw our troops from Iraq.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11941620/
At least he has admitted that his “Bring it on!” comment was a mistake.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060526/ts_nm/iraq_dc_137
“There has not been 1 terrorist attack on Americans in 5 years now. Seems like we are doing something right.”
Is that a serious remark? No one has broken into my house in the past 5 years either, doesnt mean I’m doing anything right, just means no one has tried to break in.
Not having a terrorist attack in the past 5 years just means no one has tried to launch a serious attack against us.
#36 “U.S. forces killed two Iraqi women – one of them about to give birth – when the troops shot at a car that failed to stop at an observation”
What’s your point?
– Sean
Sean –
You sound like someone who says “why are we putting so many people in jail, when our crime rate has fallen so dramatically?”
So how many Iraqis were actually killed by WP?
Not having a terrorist attack in the past 5 years just means no one has tried to launch a serious attack against us.
I tend to agree with that, but with this administration being so secretive they could have stopped a plot or two – but be unwilling to let anyone know…
5-years does seem a liitle early to congratulate ourselves, since it was 8-years between the b@st@rds’ initial, failed attempt to topple the WTC towers [ in 1993] and their 2nd try [in 2001].
Planning a large scale terrorist attack takes a while, they’ve learned that many small bombings don’t do a whole lot but one big one well organized will throw us into chaos. Wait a while, another will happen. They achieved so many of their goals on 9/11 thanks to the overreactions of our government. And to those who think we will eventually win this, you’re missing something. This is a perpetual war, there will always be terrorists. So long as there are people who are willing to fight for what they believe in and don’t have a full army to back it up terrorism will exist. Why? Because it’s effective even with only a few people and weapons.
I do agree that Bush has handled the war poorly, but the real problems with the administration are the domestic policies and precidents they are creating. The war has done one thing well for them, it is a great distraction from domestic affairs. Any time someone wants to talk about why there are “Free Speech Zones” or why wiretapping is suddenly acceptable someone just points and says “Theres a war in in Iraq! There are terrorists! Controversy!! LOOK!” And everyone gets all pissy and argues about that instead.
Think about this, the war in Iraq will end. Eventually we will pull out. If not during the next presidents term, then the one after it. But the laws, policies, and precidents set today will last for decades unless people start noticing, and telling the government to reverse them. But, odds are once we pull out of Iraq many of the changes will be forgotten with the war, but will continue to be in effect.
#44 Frank, you’re comparing apples to bowling balls.
8 years? Forgetting the embassy bombings or the attack on the Cole?
#51
You’re right, Bush didn’t lie to us. He really though there were WMD. Incompetence is so much better.
You should really look up “Nuclear Radiation” hopefully it will change your mind about the whole nuke thingy. The basic story is this: we nuke them; nuclear radiation screws the planet; we live on said planet; problems.
The only reason other than WMD (which didn’t really exist so much as they… didn’t) is that the UN said stuff and Iraq ignored them so someone needed to smack Iraq. Well, the funny thing about the UN is that it’s an internation governing body. And the rules about which weapons to use are also from an internation governing body. So, I sense conflict within your post. Also, the US ignores the UN harder than Iraq ever could (check out a thing called Cuban Embargo)
Maybe I’m wrong, and there was another reason we invaded Iraq that bush said and wasn’t a lie or “misinformation”.
Smartalix –
I see six PDF documents, listing several dozen dead, most of whom are unidentified.
I see no mention of cause of death.
8 years? Forgetting the embassy bombings or the attack on the Cole?
No, not as such.
I was just addressing the context of two earlier comments…
Part of Brad’s comment in #34 was: “There has not been 1 terrorist attack on Americans in 5 years now.”
And Sean’s reply in #42 included: “Not having a terrorist attack in the past 5 years just means no one has tried to launch a serious attack against us.”
Brad’s comment lead me to assume his use of “Americans” is meant to imply “civilians in the 50-states & D.C.” [e.g. Oaklahoma City or 9/11] – but, that is just an assumption.
Sean’s use of “serious attack” and “against us” also colored my response…
…in that neither the Cole nor Embassy attacks have the same feeling of “bringing the war to us” or “attacking us” that 9/11 does for me. And those attacks – frankly, and quite unfairly to all the people who suffered from them – pale in comparison to 9/11 for me.
Question: How many terrorist attacks on American soil have there been in the last… say 50 years?
1) Yup, there was 9/11
2) The previous bombing of the WTC
3)… um.. help me out?
Lone nutjobs don’t count. Those aren’t terrorists – they are extremists, crazies, or other such people. Terrorists and terrorism have particular meanings and usages… so help me out… how many?
It’s not like the USA has had a terrorist group attacking it before (IRA, ETA, etc… all in countries in Europe). I’m intregued as to what any other attacks on US soil were…
#56 “How many terrorist attacks on American soil have there been in the last… say 50 years?”
Exactly. That highlights the point I made that just because we haven’t had a terrorist attack in the past 5 years, does not mean we’re doing something right.
I think you have to be seriously brain dead to think otherwise.
– Sean
#56 How many terrorist attacks on American soil have there been…
From what I’ve read of AB CD’s previous comments, I just assumed he meant the U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania… since embassy grounds are considered their home nation’s “soil”…
A similar argument can probably be made for a naval vessel, especially a warship.
I think there have been other terrorist attacks before, though probably none as big. There’s rumors of an Islamic/Iraqi connection to Oklahoma City as Terry Nichols flew to the Phillippines before the attacks, and some new intel came from a mobster locked up with one of the WTC bombers(Check out wnd.com for details). I think there have been some planes hijacked by terrorists too.
59 — why not just automatically preface your remarks with something like, “here’s a bunch of stuff I believe — even though there’s little or proof of any of it!”