Go to A Distant Drum of the Coming Revolution
- Add a comment
- Go to Senate Democrats Call for Withdrawal from Iraq, Outline of Endgame Plan
Damon, I am merely carrying your observations about Iraq to their absurd conclusions. Okay, I'll take it at face value that you do not praise Saddam., and I applaud that. But all I ever see from you is complaining and attacking America, not a word of criticism about what went on in Iraq under Saddam. Given the fervor of your criticisms of America, one could easily conclude that you saw nothing wrong whatsoever with the Baathist regime.
That is precisely what makes me so angry about the anti-war left. There is no objectivity, no perspective whatsover. Everything is the fault of the evil America and the evil Bush. The horrors of terrorism, al Qaeda and the Saddam regime are at best ignored or, at worst, justified and excused. I wouldn't come down in you, Damon, nearly as hard as I do if you would step up and condemn the evils that were perpetrated by the Saddam regime. For you to not do this, after so many words of rage about all the evil America is committing, leaves you open to being regarded as sympathetic to Saddam and the terrorists.
(By the way, you mention sanctions: Had Saddam complied with the sanctions, most or all of this would have been avoided. But he played the United Nincompoops like a fiddle, bilking them for billions in graft.)
You mention torture of terrorists. I have a question for you. Should a terrorist suspected of having knowledge of a plan to detonate a nuclear, chemical or "dirty" weapon in a big city, your side of the pond or ours, be apprehended, how would you propose extracting knowledge of that plan if doing so was the only means of preventing the deaths of tens of thousands of people? Are your principles so pure that you would sacrifice tens of thousands of people to keep your conscience clear concerning one terrorist?
Being of Irish descent, I have always been grieved by IRA violence, and I apologize for the remark that you know nothing of terrorism. Allow me to clarify: You seem to believe that Islamic terrorism did not exist prior to the condtiions I cited. (Another by the way - fraudulent American charities have also helped underwrite Palestinian suicide bombers and al Qaeda. Does such criminal and fraudulent activity make all America complicit in these terrorist activities?)
Thank you for the link. Yes, that is interesting. But what was more interesting was your claim that the commentary provided somehow differs from what is reported in the former mainstream news media. It is ludicrous to claim that the news media over here says anything in support of the Bush administration, as you imply it does. Another thought: What evidence do you provde that this guy is credible, and that reports that contradict him are not?
FWMystic, believe me, a lot of conservatives are entertaining the idea of branching off on our own. The real hard core conservatives aren't that pleased with Bush's leadership of the party - too much kissing up to the Democrats, at least uintil now, too much spending, nothing done about border security. Be that as it may, the RINOs are in the minority, but there are enough of them to be a pain in the arse.
posted by
WriterofLight
on November 17, 2005 at 6:19 PM
| link to this | reply
Spin Meister!
If almost everyone in your party is a RINO, then maybe YOU need to form a new party, because there won't be very many true believers left.
posted by
fwmystic
on November 17, 2005 at 5:02 AM
| link to this | reply
Despite...
...your spin, I have never claimed Saddam was good, or Iraq was perfect. Those are entirely your fabrications, so don't try to put them in my mouth.
You're clearly confused about pre-war Iraq, though. I doubt you've spoken to as many Iraqis as I have about those times. Healthcare was excellent (pre-sanctions, anyway), water was fresh and readily available (not sewage, as your ridiculously suggest) and the power was there for ALL. Here's a fact for you to ignore; after Gulf War I, when we took out a lot of power stations, Saddam had everyone back online inside three months. We did the same this time around but now, under the leadership of Bush, and with no-bid contracts for Halliburton, it's been THIRTY months, and there is still four hours of power outage in Baghdad for every two hours of power.
Go figure.
I have never defended terrorism - again, that's a construct in your own mind. But if you think that the American military should torture the torturers, imprison without trial those who used to imprison without trial, and use chemical weapons in a country America invaded because of its use of chemical weapons, then you have a very, very strange map of the world.
"You apparently believe that there was no terrorism before Iraq was invaded, or before Bush was elected in 2000 at the very earliest." That made my chuckle. I live in a country that has just come through more than thirty years of terrorism from the IRA in Ulster. And where did the vast majority of funds come from that allowed the IRA to bomb and shoot and maim? That's right - from NORAID, and American 'charity'. So don't talk to me about terrorism, dude. I was ducking bombs in Belfast before you'd even heard the word.
"The terrorists are losing the war by attrition." Another cracker. Here's an alternative view. American military briefers still stand up regularly in the Convention Centre in the Green Zone and announce the insurgents are on the run - as they've been saying for more than two years now. The building also houses the National Assembly, and a better guide to military reality in Baghdad is that every few months an additional line of razor wire or sandbagged fortifications - there are currently seven lines - is erected to protect the Centre.
This might make interesting reading for you. Open your eyes. Look beyond your TV screen. The world is not as Fox News want you to think it is.
Wake up.
D
posted by
DamonLeigh
on November 17, 2005 at 3:21 AM
| link to this | reply
Welcome, clearlypercieved and Malcom!
All perpectives are welcome here.
Let's start with Damon, who I wish would post more often because he makes this so easy.
Ah, the bliss of the benevolent dictatorship. Surely life under a tyrant is peaceful. The rape rooms, the torture chambers, the palaces paid for with billions of dollars of graft, the collapsing infrastructure, all were so peaceful. The faces of the dead in the mass graves simply radiated peace, if you ignored those faces frozen in the contortions of torture or nerve gas. The terrorists who were trained and given safe haven were the very emisarries of peace, as were the Palestinian suicide bombers Saddam bankrolled. Of course you were secure living under Saddam, so long as you didn't dare breathe a word of dissent. And surely the rivers that ran with raw sewage were a wonderful water supply, and the power was always on in the palaces. Do you yet realize how ludicrous your defense of Baathist Iraq sounds? You clearly have no grasp of the value people place on liberty. You are the newest recipient of the WOL Challenge: Go tell the Iraqis what a happy land they lived in under Saddam.
And, oh that appalling behavior by the American military. What say you about terrorists beheading thewir captives, about their blowing up mosques and butchering children, about their blackmailing and murdering American sympathizers? I can answer that for you: The same you have to say about the Baathists and the horrors they visited upon the Iraqis - not one blinkered thing. And what have you to say about the Iraqis being free for the first time in 40 years, about their newly ratified constitution, about public schools that are free to give the kids a good education instead of a bunch of Baathist propoganda, about hospitals rebuilt and improved, about the cleaning and sanitizing of water supplies? Again, not one damn thing, because you dare not admit the slightest thing that give the lie to your ranting.
Besides all this, you also have no understanding of Islamofascist terrorism. The anger of radical Muslims goes all the way back to the Crusades, but has been at its worst since the founding of Israel. You also seem to have fallen to the delusion that all we have to do is stick to our knitting and ignore the terrorists, and they will magically go away like a bad dream. Be it in Iraq or your home town, the terrorists make targets of the West wherever they can. Would you prefer that they carry out their violence in your town?
You apparently believe that there was no terrorism before Iraq was invaded, or before Bush was elected in 2000 at the very earliest. Does the U. S. S. Cole ring a bell with you? How about the barracks bombing in Beirut? Mogadishu? The first World Trade Center attack? How about decades of terrorism committed against Israel?
Another fact for you: The terrorists are committed to bringing down the West, and have been so for decades because of the West's support for Israel.
Here's another fact you ignore: 40,000 to 50,000 of these raging Muslims have gone to meet Allah because they joined the cause of terrorism. Again, one of those nasty little details you don't want to face. The terrorists are losing the war by attrition.
Yet another fact: The Sunnis and Shiites indeed united in voting for the constitution. The Sunnis now realize that they only hurt their interests by boycotting the first election.
Clearlypercieved, if you hate shams, the conduct of the Congressional liberals in revising history and distorting the facts must really be bugging you.
Malcom, I don't see what your comment has to do with the topic, but it's a good issue. answer? Far, far too long. What really angers me is hearing of our people in Iraq being insulted as Vietnam veterans were, and always by people of far less caliber than they.
Mystic - sorry to call you on this, but it was indeed the Democrats who called for the vote. The supposedly moderate Republicans - also known as RINOs, Republican in Name Only - joined them on it. Be that as it may, the resolution met a swift and merciful death.
Glenn - ??
posted by
WriterofLight
on November 16, 2005 at 7:54 PM
| link to this | reply
DamonLeigh,
I would preface all comments about the brutality of Saddam Hussein with the phrase: "they told us"! Just my take on the "boogy man" tactics! I remember when "Blacks had Tails"???
posted by
Glennb
on November 16, 2005 at 7:01 PM
| link to this | reply
Damon - you beat me to the punch again - good show!
It's not the senate democrats that are pushing the timetable – it's the moderate senate republicans. Little deatil this blogger failed to mention.
posted by
fwmystic
on November 16, 2005 at 5:31 PM
| link to this | reply
How many years did it take
for those who fought in Vietnam to be recognised as people rather than psychotic men of yesterday? How many soldiers are still seeking compensation for Gulf War Syndrome? How many WW1 boys who were shot because of their sheer terror are still awaiting posthumous pardons?
posted by
malcolm
on November 16, 2005 at 2:02 PM
| link to this | reply
Dammon
Well, I'm not necessarily into politics, but I do hate shams; and you have definitely made a point that is most difficult for those that don't want to "see" to see. For if these things that you've pointed out would be shams, then they woud then "see" the whole of shams, including themselves. Therefore they will to continue in illusion, but can't for too much longer.
posted by
clearlyperceived
on November 16, 2005 at 11:56 AM
| link to this | reply
You Still...
...insist on leaving that question mark in your title, don't you, when the rest of the world would have you remove it in an instant.
Bush IS an idiot - no question about it. As saul_relative says, that's a given.
Anyway, just to challenge a couple of points.
"The terrorists regard Iraq as the central front in their war against humanity. And we must recognize Iraq as the central front in the war on terror."
Bush really said that? Has he really that short a memory? Has he forgotten that Iraq was a peaceful place before he illegally launched the invasion? Has he forgotten that, while Saddam was undoubtedly a nasty dictator, at least under him the people were relatively secure; they could walk the streets safely; go to work and school; eat in restaurants; play in the parks; and know that when they went home, the power and the water supplies would be working. NONE of this is true today.
The only reason the "terrorists" regard Iraq as central is because the US-led invasion made it central! The appalling behaviour of the US military in Iraq - torture, abuse, Abu Ghraib, chemical weapons, indiscriminate killings, to name but a few - have angered Muslims around the world, making life more dangerous for us all. Thanks, Georgey. And any of them who are angry enough to take up arms are flocking to Iraq. Bush has created a perfect terrorist training ground, with the added advantage of 'live' Western targets. Brilliant.
And all his guff about the votes, the constitution, the forthcoming elections, shows a deep-rooted ignorance of the realities in Iraq. A constitution pre-supposes some form of agreement or unity within the country. When Sunnis and Shias dare not go into each others heartlands for fear of being killed, and when the Kurds distrust the other two immensely, that unity simply does not exist.
Therefore, the constitution is a sham, designed to bolster the Bush "administration" at home, and the forthcoming elections will be a sham, too, putting a US puppet into power under cover of a vote.
I really don't know how you keep falling for the bullshit.
D
posted by
DamonLeigh
on November 16, 2005 at 4:54 AM
| link to this | reply