That’s not me asking, actually. That’s the cover story in the current “Rolling Stone,” issue 999. (It’s dated May 4, so i don’t know how much longer it’ll be on the stands.) It’s a detailed, scholarly overview of the Bush administration as provided by one of the country’s leading historians. As much as Bush supporters will cry foul, it is difficult–if not impossible–to argue with the thorough, reasoned and historical comparisons of Bush with other presidents…those deemed both the greatest successes and the greatest failures. Recommended reading.
PAD





“Collateral damage, my favorite euphemism.”
Nevertheless, I would like to think there is a difference between killing a child accidently because he or she was in the wrongplace in the wrong time, while trying to hit a legitimate target, and targeting the child deliberatly.
Wars today often involve armed men in civilian clothing operating inside civilian polpulation. Even the most well meaning army will hurt some civilians. I think the American army was well meaning when it went to Iraq. The Israeli army was not. It is not well meaning enough. I don’t know enogh about how the US is doing.
However, two things should realized. (1) That for people who lose someone, the fact that it wasn’t deliberate doesn’t make much diffirence. (2) Many Muslims consider collateral damage casualties to be deliberate targets. So as far as they are concerned the west is targeting civilians.
(Although Palestinian terrorists tend to be more vindictive in response to the death of one of their leaders or fighters than the death of innocents).
Today the Americans don’t deliberatly attack civilians
I hate to say it, but Shock & Awe and Fallujah are 2 recent examples of civilian populations being targeted.
And if this absolutely insane administration goes ahesd with it’s plans to use nukes in Iran, there is NO way to say civilians aren’t being targeted.
From CNN:
When asked which man was more honest as president, poll respondents were more evenly divided, with the numbers — 46 percent Clinton to 41 percent Bush — falling within the poll’s margin of error.
And this was the most favorable statistic for Bush.
I say again: Daaaaymn!
Unfortunately, collateral damage is an unavoidable symptom of urban warfare waged with more and more powerful (not to mention more and more concealable) firearms.
It was quite different in the old days. Warfare was conducted in the field, between two armies, and on the occasion when civilians were noticed at all, well, it doesn’t do a whole lot of good to massacre peasants. Who’s going to work the land you conquer then? Anybody who took up a sword did so with the understanding that they were becoming a combatant and would be treated as such.
Sadly, many of the “advances” in warfare make it a lot harder to tell civilians from combatants.
Just my two cents…
-Rex Hondo-
So… are we getting any closer to impeaching Bush?
Or is the government (with Bush’s blessing) keeping a database of all of our phone calls, and possibly e-mails as well, not enough of a step toward Fascism that nobody will notice?
So… are we getting any closer to impeaching Bush?
Hopefully not. As has probably been mentioned here somewhere before, even if he gets removed from office, the Presidency first goes to…
# The Vice President Richard Cheney
Then…
# Speaker of the House John Dennis Hastert
Then…
# President pro tempore of the Senate1 Ted Stevens
Then…
# Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
We might as well wait it out, as the alternatives are no better.
Craig said Or is the government (with Bush’s blessing) keeping a database of all of our phone calls, and possibly e-mails as well, …
Be careful, your blog posts are being monitored too and reported back to Uncle Sam.
Just when did Uncle Sam become the creepy uncle that smells like Budweiser and Vaseline who we have to worry about trying to touch us wrong?
-Rex Hondo-
Just when did Uncle Sam become the creepy uncle that smells like Budweiser and Vaseline who we have to worry about trying to touch us wrong?
Jan. 5 2000 =(
Why can’t we impeach this fûçkër yet?
“Federal Source to ABC News: We Know Who You’re Calling” (http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/federal_source_.html)
Every time the administration admits to something, it turns out to be at least one-hundred times worse.