For those who still don’t understand why the Iraqis are shooting at us, and base all their support of Bush’s policies on the Ends-Justifies-the-Means philosophy (Saddam was bad, therefore what we did was good), and don’t comprehend why the world doesn’t love us, I offer the following recollection:
I spent several weeks of my life in Romania in connection with some movies I wrote that were filmed there. And whenever I went anywhere with whatever Romanian guide was assigned to me, the guide would always bring up Ceausescu. Ceausescu was the Romanian dictator from the mid-60s through to the late 80s, finally overthrown by his people in fierce battle in 1989 and subsequently executed. Wherever we would go, guides would say, “And this was a palace Ceausescu was building before we overthrew him.” “And this was where Ceausescu’s favorites were housed before we overthrew him.” The fact that they had taken charge of their lives and tossed out a parasite–a parasite the U.S. had supported until the mid 1980s, by the way–was a source of great national pride.
The Iraqis have no national pride. They’re the United States’ bìŧçh. To seize control of your destiny engenders pride. To have someone do it for you and then not leave causes frustration, self-loathing, and anger directed at your intended liberators. And outside of the country, it’s seen as presumptuous and arrogant.
Get it now?
PAD
• 
Thus, we should have let the German people overthrow Hitler rather than get involved, so that the German people could have a sense of national pride.
Jeez, next thing you know, you’re going to be advocating that the Iraqi’s be allowed to hold free elections among candidates that they select & thereby form their own government.
/scarcasm off
Mr Price, please check your history book – Hitler declared war on us after we declared war on Japan when they attacked Pearl Harbor. Saddam didn’t declare war on us, nor did he attack the U.S..
Thus, we should have let the German people overthrow Hitler rather than get involved, so that the German people could have a sense of national pride.
Actually, the popular thought at that time was that we should have stayed out of WWII. We had no business in it (given that, and we had no business in the biggest cluster at all… WWI… which we did until the last year of the war). There was even a popular support of Hitler brewing out there.
It took Japan bombing the Hëll out of us, and as stated above, Hitler declaring war on us… a truly stupid move in perfect hindsight.
I agree with PAD here… helping someone claim their own is different from taking over and saying here… you owe us big time.
Travis
Maybe I’m crazy, but I seem to recall that Hitler was ELECTED Chancellor of Germany. The idea that the German people as a whole were oppressed isn’t quite accurate. There was, in fact, quite a lot of popular support for Hitler…which isn’t to say all Germans supported him.
My point is that if you like your leader, you have no desire to organize a revolution. Castro’s folks keep saying “
No need to sound so condescending. Get it now? I don’t think you do.
PAD,
I’d distrusted the war in Iraq, Mr. Bush, and jingoist patriotism for specific reasons unrelated to the one you brought up…but it’s a dámņ good reason nontheless.
For those not getting the point…imagine if the French had entered heavily with troops and ships during the American Revolution, and then set up our government for us.
For further study, I recommend reading Amrose Bierce, HL Mencken, George Orwell and Mark Twain. For extra credit, review Bill Mauldin’s work, before and after WWII.
People, please keep things in perspective! Hitler actually invaded Germany`s neighbours and was most definitely a threat that became bigger and bigger. I am actually surprised that efforts hadn`t been made MUCH sooner to stop him for good.
A much better example would be East Germany after WWII. Not unlike Iraq under Saddam, people weren`t starving but they were oppressed. There were no executions in the DDR as in Iraq but on the other hand, there was the Iron Curtain and people trying to leave WERE often executed if they didn`t die by stepping on mines. There was the secret police, the STASI (state security service), not unlike the Ba`ath party.
All of this is now part of history, thanks to non-violent peace movements and pressure also from abroad. It took a long time but this dictatorship fell. Even today, there are significant economic differences between former East and West Germany but it is a stable region and people are indeed better off.
The USA would never have invaded because it would have been extremely unwise, politically. The USSR was much too powerful. I don`t think they will attack Korea or Israel/the Palestinians either, for the same reasons. But countries like Iraq are no real threat for the US military and the same applies to Iran and Syria who recently have been warned by the USA again, now that the official war in Iraq is over.
The UN has obviously no teeth and the USA is the only super power left: This means they do what they want with the countries that can`t fight back hard enough to cause real problems for the USA. Or who don`t have powerful friends and allies or are important to the USA for trade or other reasons.
The USA marched into Iraq without being invited, without being properly prepared to what has to be done to rebuild the country. Afghanistan may be free but it is still a mess. I am afraid, Iraq will have the same fate. Who is next?
No weapons of mass destruction have been found to date. It has been revealed that a lot had been exaggerated. The heroic story of saving Private Lynn (I think that was her name) has been proven to have been a propaganda lie and I certainly don`t understand why in general, people in the USA don`t share the disgust about the treatment of the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay.
In this connection, other anti-American sentiments are coming to the surface again, like the death penalty and the right of Americans to bear arms. Should the USA actually execute foreign (for example British) prisoners, this will be a complete disaster.
No, Bush is not Hitler but nevertheless, I think it is time that he is stopped.
As a Canadian I have noticed that The US will let you do whatever you want in your country as long as it doesn’t interfere with American interests.
Absolurely.
“Thanks for kicking out a brutal dictator who has maimed, tortured, and killed many of us, bankrupted us, and drug us into constant war with our neighbors.
We appreciate your sacrifice of you sons and daughter so much so that we will kill one to two of them everyday while they try to restore order and rebuild our country so we can be safe and rebuiild our country so we have a future. Just leave. We’ll call you when we need more of you to die fighting our battles for us.”
Still to writing funny books. International politics isn’t your forte.
“My point is that if you like your leader, you have no desire to organize a revolution.”
Which doesn’t matter if you don’t like him and cannot. You forget that Saddam had his own SON executed for ostensibly plotting against him. The man had a virtually impenetrable network of informants and spies. People knew dámņ well they didn’t have a chance. One of the reasons the Soviet system did fall was that, when push came to shove, the army didn’t have the stommach to fire on their own, unarmed population. The Chinese army had no such reservations at Tiannanmen(sp?) Square. Want to bet Hussein’s goons would have held back? Especially after gassing the Kurd who had foolishly listened to the encouraging words from the US, which subsequently let them out to hang when Hussein fought back. This is not conducive to people standing up and saying enough. It works in countries where the ‘oppressors’ are [relatively] ‘reasonable’ about it (British in India, for example) but gets you squashed real fast when dealing with a nutbar such as Hussein.
> Castro’s folks keep saying “
No need to sound so condescending. Get it now? I don’t think you do.
Oh, whatever minor “condescension” I might muster can’t compare to the barrage of everything from arrogance to name calling (and everything in between) routinely hurled at me on this blog by those with opposing views.
Sauce for the goose, as it were. Honk honk.
Still to writing funny books. International politics isn’t your forte.
Nor is writing coherent sentences yours (could you possibly have meant “stick to writing”). I do, however, do reasonably well with common sense. In your fabricated quote, you might have wanted to add “Not that we actually *did* call you to fight our battles for us, and we cowered in fear while you bombed us. And we didn’t ask for your help, but since you felt constrained to do so, thanks loads, now get the hëll out of our country.”
But that wouldn’t have served your purpose.
Again…honk honk.
PAD
“Again…honk honk. PAD”
I wish you hadn’t written that. Now I get visions of someone standing on the side of a busy road, holding up a sign…
“Honk if you agree with PAD.”
*honk*
😎
As for someone else’s comment about Hitler being elected so obviously not everyone was oppressed there, they should read SOLDAT by Siegfried Knappe (and Ted Brusaw) which recounts the 1936 – 1949 period from the point of view of a German footsoldier who fought in all the major Wermacht theatres of operation. It is hard to dismiss as unconvincing or selective memory the way we see people being swept up into the ardour to right what was injustly done to them not all that long ago in Versailles and then find out that their rulers had led them down the proverbial garden path but by then the mechanisms were in place (Brown Shirts et al) to ensure no one dared complain about it.
Mr. David,
While I agree that the manner in which the US liberated and subsequently occupied Iraq has damaged their pride and created a feeling of resentment, I don’t believe it’s the primary reason of why “they’re” shooting at us.
The problem with your argument is that the overwhelming majority of post-war attacks have been limited to less than 1% of Iraq’s area — the “Sunni Triangle,” as it were. Most of the people attacking US troops are holdovers from the old regime and tribes loyal to Saddam; in other words, people who had a lot to lose in the fall of the old regime and nothing to gain in a new, democratic one.
Now, this isn’t to say that a lengthy occupation wouldn’t create such a widespread resentment to the point where the common Iraqi will rebel, but that is not the case right now. When you’re saying that “they’re” shooting us, understand that “they” consist of a small, predominantly Sunni minority whose political interests are in conflict with the idea of a liberated Iraq.
Alex
Here’s a good quote for you: “The problem with the world is that stupid people are cocksure, and intelligent people are full of doubt.” It’s always amazed me at how utterly loyal the supporters of this war have been, how completely unwilling to question literally any action of the administration’s policy. I have had several long arguments with co-workers about the justification for the war. It is amazing how quickly they will change their story to match the tune of the administration.
In the beginning it was all about the weapons of mass destruction. Sadam was massing huge stockpiles of hidden weapons, and he was going to use them any day on the US allies in the area, and he’d eventually be able to use them on us. Then, as the war progressed and Sadam failed to use the WMD on US troops, the story changed; obviously he wouldn’t use them because he would lose the international support that he had gained when the US launched its highly unconventional, unconstitutional, and irregular preemptive war.
Then, as the war stretched on and Bush declared victory, the justification for the war completely changed. Let’s forget the WMD. They weren’t important. The administration started whining about how they “needed more time” to find the weapons (even though they refused to allow the United Nation’s more time to find evidence when they begged for it in the first three months of this year). Suddenly the justification became overthrowing an evil dictator and liberating an oppressed people.
Never mind, of course, the literally dozens of countries that are ruled by dictators who oppress their people. It doesn’t hurt that Iraq contains the second richest oil fields in the world (second only to Saudi Arabia) and that Bush Jr. had a grudge on behalf of his father. Justification didn’t matter.
I also think that the position of Republicans is an interesting one to behold. While Clinton was in office it was all they could do, for eight consecutive years, to constantly attack him and discredit him. They spent most of his term in office looking for evidence to prove real estate fraud, and the best they could do was prove that he’d had extramarital affairs (something Larry Flynt was able to prove wasn’t restricted to the Democrats). They impeached him for refusing to admit to the American people that he’d received…favors from an intern. Then, when Bush gets into office, suddenly the Republicans stand together and claim that it is unpatriotic to ever question the judgment of a President in office; that questioning him and putting him on trial during times of war is an incredible breach of etiquette. And the fact that Bush and his administration knowingly lied and deceived the people to gain support for a war? Well, that pales in comparison to Clinton’s infidelity, doesn’t it? You’ve got to have your priorities!
Phinn
I’m another Canadian, and I’m appaled at the constant negative reaction to PAD’s words.
One thing I’ve noticed from American views (some, not all. I’m not going to generalize.) is this view of “If you’re not with us, you’re against us.”. So, every time Peter states a disagreement with some US policy, people label him “partisan” or “a bleeding-heart Liberal”.
Firstly, we Canadians must be a nightmare to you folks in the US… our governing party are the Liberals! Mind you, many of us are unhappy with the current person in power; he’ll retire in early 2004 and someone else will replace him – and probably get re-elected. Why? Because the other parties have lousy ideas for the country.
The difference is: they are ultimately governing. “Dubya” isn’t. He’s just following the same party tenets established at the party convention: “Look at our weapons! Here’s the list of all the wars we started – and won!”.
Your economy is downhill. I just have to see how strong the Canadian dollar has become to yours to know. Medical science is at a near standstill – but look at all these wars we’ve won!
That Saddam is a monster is not in doubt. That the war’s reasons were BS is becoming more and more certain. That Bush has been doing a bad job is something not in question at all.
Neither is the fact I’ll now get the same treatment as The Dixie Chicks for not mindlessly following Bush also isn’t in question. Nor is the fact that folks will continue to blast Peterfor not agreeing with the party line – and that’s sad.
As far as trying to topple a tyranical regime without resorting to military force, that’s what we had been trying to do in Iraq for the past 12 years with UN sanctions. Before Bush decided to take out Saddam, support for these sanctions was waning, with countries like France trying to have them dropped because they claimed they were responsible for the suffering of the Iraqi people, while at the same time French oil companies were signing contracts with Saddam. I doubt any money from France actually helped feed starving Iraqis. Of course, Saddam had no blame in the suffering of his own people, even though his non-compliance with UN resolutions was the reason for the sanctions. I sincerely believe that the only way to remove Saddam from power was through force.
However, I have serious problems the way we went about it, and the way we are attempting to rebuild Iraq. We should have taken Saddam out in 1991 or given support to the rebellion that came about after the Gulf War. The way the Bush acted confirms the image of the American government as arrogant and oblivious to the concerns of the rest of the world. I think this war, whose main purpose was to get the US military out of Saudi Arabia, could have been conducted in a mouch more organized manner with more popular global support if given more lead time. But, that’s an academic argument now. Now we’re up šhìŧ creek no paddle in site.
Phinn – Don’t forget, the administration, via Rumsfeld, said “We know where they are, they are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north of that”.
So we have a right to overthrow rulers who don’t divert dollars directly to the benefit of their people? What about the fact that the US is the only industrialized nation that does not provide health care for all of its citizens? What about the fact that our government would rather buy another bomb than provide healthcare for newborn babies? What about the fact that the administration has consistently cut back on schooling, federal funding for states, veteran’s benefits, and just about anything that doesn’t either 1.) buy another bomb, or 2.) go directly into the pockets of people who are already immensely wealthy.
What about the fact that the nation’s unemployment rate is at the highest level it has been in 10 years while the average salary of CEOs has gone up 17% in the last year? Or the fact that the budget surplus that Bush inherited turned into a massive debt but he continues to cut taxes to provide huge breaks to the wealthy (yes, I’m sure his cut on capital gains taxes is doing a lot to put food on the tables of the recently unemployed)? Or the fact that his administration gladly looks the other way while modern day robber barons loot their corporations for millions of dollars, raid retirement funds, and use off-shore “incorporations” to avoid paying taxes? Or a leader that actually dares enemy troops to attack and kill our soldiers while he sits safely thousands of miles away?
Wouldn’t you consider a regime that makes every effort to line the pockets of the already super rich, while cutting back programs to help the needy to be fairly oppressive and evil?
The cut on veteran’s benefits is the one that really gets me. The whole time the administration whines about supporting the troops, it’s working behind the scenes to stab them in the back.
Phinn
Taken from the blog of Will Shetterly:
“War is an instrument entirely inefficient toward redressing wrong, and multiplies instead of indemnifying losses.” Thomas Jefferson
“Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.” Thomas Jefferson
“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” George Washington
“The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home.” James Madison
“It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority.” Benjamin Franklin
Great point PAD, people appreciate freedom more when they actually work, sacrifice and die to get it. Those who bring up WWII overlook the fact that to rebuild Germany and Japan in our image we literally pounded them into the ground. We crushed the German will to fight by waging war not only on their army but also on their civilian populations, they call that terrorism today. Was it horrible and barbaric? Yes. Was it worth it? Definitely. In Iraq we didn’t destroy the people’s will to fight, we just rolled in and took over. I fear that even if we do get Saddam, (there are reports that we’ve killed his sons) the Iraqis will keep fighting.
“While Clinton was in office it was all they could do, for eight consecutive years, to constantly attack him and discredit him.” – Possible Hypocrite
Did those of you who are against this war protest the War in Kosovo in 1999, when President Bill Clinton went into Yugoslavia without the consent of the UN? In 1999 reports of bloodshet increased and the Clinton administration came to the conclusion that it could be nipped in the bud through decisive military action. A historically conscious president, aware of the perpetual blemish that will accompany his name in every school book published hereafter as a result of his impeachment, seeks to salvage his wounded presidency. Seizing the opportunity to redeem his administration as a champion of the oppressed, the Clinton administration used his close partnership with liberal allies in Britain and Canada to press upon more reluctant partners the urgency of limited action in the region. Confident that an expedient and politically advantageous victory could be achieved, and bolstered by a fierce propaganda campaign that could silence even the most cynical, the American led NATO forces began bombing Yugoslavia in late March. Ignoring those facts which were not convenient to the advancement of their cause, dignitaries in Brussels, Ottawa, Washington and London led the masses to believe that they could end six centuries of conflict in two weeks. the U.S led coalition pointed to dramatic stories of suffering on the part of ethnic Albanian refugees to justify its continued involvement in the conflict, ignoring the “collateral” damage toll in Serbian lives. Pressed by critics who sought to end the war once and for all, whether it be through withdrawal or decisive and potentially politically damaging action on the ground, the commander who fled his responsibility in a similar war thirty years earlier persisted in his view that he could act with impunity against a battle-hardened nation without dealing with the guilt of shed American blood. In Canada, were protests in most major cities against the war by those who feard for the lives of friends and relatives in their homeland were occurring daily. Where were you liberal protesters then? When your socialist cousins were marching the streets did you care? Or did you just watch your CNN-sterilized news with total faith in liberal leader?
So I ask you again, did you protest Kosovo in 1999? No?
How about Somolia? …..
PAD, could you explain then why Kofi Annan wants us to send troops to Liberia? And why Howard Dean wants us to send troops to Liberia? And why a large number of Liberians want us to send troops to Liberia?
They had what, 30 some years to do it, and they didn’t. Chances are they would never have been able to do it themselves.
It will always be a left/right issue.
Kudos to James Tichy for a solid post.
The Herald (Glasgow, Scotland), December 28, 1999.
Iraq tempts bin Laden to attack West
Exclusive. By: Ian Bruce, Geopolitics Editor.
THE world’s most wanted man, Osama bin Laden, has been offered sanctuary in Iraq if his worldwide terrorist network succeeds in carrying out a campaign of high-profile attacks on the West …
Now we are also facing the prospect of an unholy alliance between bin Laden and Saddam. The implications are terrifying.
“We might be looking at the most wanted man on the FBI’s target list gaining access to chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons courtesy of Iraq’s clandestine research programmes.”
The U.S. intelligence community has been squeezing bin Laden’s finances steadily for several years. His personal fortune of anything up to
Deutsche Presse-Agentur. February 17, 1999, Wednesday, BC Cycle
Opposition group says bin Laden in Iraq
DATELINE: Kuwait City
An Iraqi opposition group claimed in a published report Wednesday that Islamic militant Osama bin Laden is in Iraq from where he plans to launch a campaign of terrorism against Baghdad’s Gulf neighbours.
The claim was made by Bayan Jabor, spokesman for the Teheran-based Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI).
Bin Laden “recently settled in Iraq at the invitation of Saddam Hussein in exchange for directing strikes against targets in neighbouring countries,” Jabor told the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Rai al- Aam … Taleban leaders in Afghanistan, where he had been living, said they lost track of him. Media reports have speculated he sought refuge in Chechnya, Somalia, Iraq, or with a non-Taliban group in Afghanistan.
Jabor, who was interviewed in Damascus, Syria, said Iraq began extending invitations to bin Laden six months ago, shortly after the United States bombed his suspected terrorist training camps in Afghanistan after linking him with the August 7 bombings of U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and in Dar-es-Salam, Tanzania.
The United States indicted Bin Laden for the embassy bombings and has offered a five million dollar reward for information leading to his capture. Bin Laden’s disappearance has coincided with stepped up threats by Iraq against neighbours Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Turkey for allowing the United States and Britain to use their air bases to carry out air patrols over two “no-fly” zones over northern and southern Iraq ….
– – – – –
Associated Press Worldstream. February 14, 1999.
Taliban leader says whereabouts of bin Laden unknown
… Analysts say bin Laden’s options for asylum are limited.
Iraq was considered a possible destination because bin Laden had received an invitation from Iraqi President Saddam Hussein last month. And Somalia was a third possible destination because of its anarchy and violent anti-U.S. history ….
– – – – –
San Jose Mercury News (California). February 14, 1999 Sunday MORNING FINAL EDITION
U.S. WORRIED ABOUT IRAQI, BIN LADEN TIES TERRORIST COULD GAIN EVEN
DEADLIER WEAPONS
U.S. intelligence officials are worried that a burgeoning alliance between terrorist leader Osama bin Laden and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein could make the fugitive Saudi’s loose-knit organization much more dangerous …
In addition, the officials said, Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal is now in Iraq, as is a renowned Palestinian bomb designer, and both could make their expertise available to bin Laden.
“It’s clear the Iraqis would like to have bin Laden in Iraq,” said Vincent Cannistraro, a former head of counterterrorism operations at the Central Intelligence Agency …
Saddam has even offered asylum to bin Laden, who has expressed support for Iraq.
… (in) late December, when bin Laden met a senior Iraqi intelligence official near Qandahar, Afghanistan, there has been increasing evidence that bin Laden and Iraq may have begun cooperating in planning attacks against American and British targets around the world.
Bin Laden, who strikes in the name of Islam, and Saddam, one of the most secular rulers in the Arab world, have little in common except their hatred of the United States …
More worrisome, the American officials said, are indications that there may be contacts between bin Laden’s organization and Iraq’s Special Security Organization (SSO), run by Saddam’s son Qusay. Both the SSO and the Mukhabarat were involved in a failed 1993 plot to assassinate former President George Bush …
“The idea that the same people who are hiding Saddam’s biological weapons may be meeting with Osama bin Laden is not a happy one,” said one American official….
– – – – –
Associated Press Worldstream. February 13, 1999; Saturday 14:32 Eastern Time
Bin Laden said to have left Afghanistan, whereabouts unknown
… It is very unlikely bin Laden could remain in Afghanistan without Taliban officials knowing his whereabouts.
Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden, who has expressed support for Iraq.
U.S. officials believe bin Laden masterminded the Aug. 7 bombings of its embassies in Kenya and Tanzania …
Bin Laden urged devout Muslims to attack U.S. and British interests in retaliation for their joint assault on Iraq.
U.S. officials demanded that the Taliban hand over bin Laden, who has been indicted in a U.S. court on murder charges in connection with the bombings. But the Taliban had refused.
– – – – –
The Bulletin’s Frontrunner. January 4, 1999, Monday.
Defiant Saddam Looks To Provoke U.S.
… Time also reported, “For now, the White House will respond to each provocation by counterattacking the offending battery.”
Saddam Reaching Out To bin Laden.
Newsweek (1/11, Contreras) reported, “U.S. sources say (Saddam) is reaching out to Islamic terrorists, including some who may be linked to Osama bin Laden.” …
(Osama bin Laden was) calling for all-out war on Americans, using as his main pretext Washington’s role in bombing and boycotting Iraq.” In a Newsweek interview, bin Laden said that “‘any American who pays taxes to his government,” is a legitimate target.” Newsweek reported, “The idea of an alliance between Iraq and bin Laden is alarming to the West,” although “Saddam may think he’s too good for such an association.” However, “Now that the United States has made his removal from office a national objective….
– – – – –
The White House Bulletin. Copyright 1999. Bulletin Broadfaxing Network, Inc.
In a Newsweek interview, bin Laden said that “‘any American who pays taxes to his government,” is a legitimate target.” Newsweek reported, “The idea of an alliance between Iraq and bin Laden is alarming to the West,” although “Saddam may think he’s too good for such an association.” However, “Now that the United States has made his removal from office a national objective, he….
– – – – –
United Press International. January 3, 1999, Sunday, BC cycle.
UPI Focus: Bin Laden ‘instigated’ embassy bombings
… (The Taliban) government in Afghanistan says the Saudi does not have the money to finance projects in the country. Newsweek also reported that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has been making new overtures to bin Laden in an attempt to rebuild his intelligence network and to create his own terror network….
From James Tichy: “the commander who fled his responsibility in a similar war thirty years earlier”
I’m always amused to see conservatives bring up this little tidbit. Clinton opposed the Vietnam War on philosophical grounds and, so, did not serve. The Resident, however, was a hawkish supporter of said war, but also did not serve in country. He used familial influence to jump over hundreds of more qualified candidates to enter the Texas Air National Guard. And he didn’t even serve there. The Resident actually went AWOL for the last year and a half of his time with the National Guard, failing to report for duty or even let his commanding officers know where he was. Again, thanks to his family and friends, nothing bad happened.
And now this cretin is leading us into unjustified, pre-emptive wars, wars in which the sons and daughters of our fellow citizens are dying. And still conservatives have the nerve to say their guy has the credentials to lead.
“The problem with the world is that stupid people are cocksure, and intelligent people are full of doubt.”
The problem isn’t that the intelligent people are full of doubt. It’s that they’re paralyzed by that doubt and do nothing or next to nothing. The longer the U.S. does nothing or next to nothing concerning Arab dictatorships (y’know, our *enemies*), the more they end up like their impotent neighbors to the north, constrained as they are by their virtually nonexistent military.
But who needs security when you have your own inefficient and outdated health care system (but at least it’s universal! And if you live in the Toronto area, and were unlucky enough, it came with free SARS! Oh, and it’s not free, either–let’s send that myth to its grave), foolish ‘hate speech’ laws, high tax rates, government funded daycare (because why should parents take care of their own children?), and a gun registry that is likely to cost $1 billion dollars before it runs its course?
I think we could all learn a lesson from Canada, but only from its more conservative writers (has anyone here checked out Mark Steyn lately–great stuff!), who seem to have the heads screwed on straighter than your average American conservative scribe.
-Dave O’Connell
“The problem with the world is that stupid people are cocksure, and intelligent people are full of doubt.”
The problem isn’t that the intelligent people are full of doubt. It’s that they’re paralyzed by that doubt and do nothing or next to nothing. The longer the U.S. does nothing or next to nothing concerning Arab dictatorships (y’know, our *enemies*), the more they end up like their impotent neighbors to the north, constrained as they are by their virtually nonexistent military.
But who needs security when you have your own inefficient and outdated health care system (but at least it’s universal! And if you live in the Toronto area, and were unlucky enough, it came with free SARS! Oh, and it’s not free, either–let’s send that myth to its grave), foolish ‘hate speech’ laws, high tax rates, government funded daycare (because why should parents take care of their own children?), and a gun registry that is likely to cost $1 billion dollars before it runs its course?
I think we could all learn a lesson from Canada, but only from its more conservative writers (has anyone here checked out Mark Steyn lately–great stuff!), who seem to have the heads screwed on straighter than your average American conservative scribe.
-Dave O’Connell
Anthony X, that’s a very nice selection of news stories you’ve got there. However you ignore two important facts.
1.) Most of the “intelligence” regarding a Saddam/Bin Laden team-up comes from the INC and Iraqi defectors who have shown to be of questionable honesty.
2.) I notice you left out any reference to the Feb, 2003 Bin Laden tape where he urged Iraqis to overthrow the “socialist” Saddam.
I have also noticed that Bush takes resposiblity for declaring war on Iraq because at the time of the war it was supported by a vast majority of people in the US, however the reasons for delcaring that war, i.e. the WMD (I really really hate that word) were in error. Now that it has come to light that there isn’t vast amount of hidden weapons Bush is trying to deflect the blame to others. So my point is Public behind him he takes credit, Public not behind him blame someone else. Whatever happened to personal responsiblity?
Actually this doesn’t just happen in the Us but all over the world. Any Political party in power wants to stay in power and will do almost anything to sway the public to their cause.
On a side note I totally agree with the fact that Saddam needed to be kick out of power, but the US sure has a double standard with their dictators.
Rick Jones, really
Thank you for your coments, but feel free to address what my post was actually about.
But who needs security when you have your own inefficient and outdated health care system (but at least it’s universal! And if you live in the Toronto area, and were unlucky enough, it came with free SARS! Oh, and it’s not free, either–let’s send that myth to its grave), foolish ‘hate speech’ laws, high tax rates, government funded daycare (because why should parents take care of their own children?), and a gun registry that is likely to cost $1 billion dollars before it runs its course?
As for our Health Care system it may need help but it if FAR superior to anything in the US. Hospitals in the US are about making profit and how do they make the profit? By making deals with the Insurance agencies. And how do the Insurance agencies make profit? By selling insurance to people and not paying out for them.
The main reason that there isn’t any universal health care in the US is because it wouldn’t make people money. This is also what is happening in Canada. The Government here is eroding it’s tax base by getting out of business and this is making it so that the government has less money to spend on social programs such as health care.
And here is the biggest argument for our Healthcare system. If you are poor you are not going to get turned away at the door of a hospital because you don’t have insurance.
Take a look at some of the European countries to see how universal health care and free education should be here in Canada and the US. All I can say is that I know that the way things are in Canada aren’t perfect but they are infinitely better then the US.
I make it a habit to question any military action. Not once did I say that I was a Clinton supporter, I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy and complete, total, utter about-face stance that the Republicans took once one of their own was in the office.
We went from a group of people willing to delve into any aspect of the president’s life (no matter how private, personal, and unrelated to the job) to a political group that now constantly waves a banner of “executive privilege” as an excuse to seal any documents that might shed light on their shady practices.
The administration doesn’t even bother to hide the favors that it extends to wealthy friends and lobbyists, offering lucrative contracts to Cheney’s old county to clean up the chemical fires in Iraq even though they were not the lowest bidder, and will likely only subcontract to a company that is more capable of handling the mess (that we created by the way) after taking their cut.
It’s also nice to see that, within days of taking oil wells in Iraq, the US was already formulating a generous plan in which the oil in Iraq would be pumped and sold at HALF the going rate, meaning that all of the US oil companies selling it at hugely unjustified inflated prices (oil prices are higher than ever, but there is absolutely no shortage of supply…I wonder why that is?) and make twice the profit that they now make, all while claiming to be doing the Iraqi people a service by giving them 50% of the value of their only domestic product.
What conservatives fail to understand is that it is not “us against them”. It’s not the left versus the right. It’s one of the reasons (one of the many, many reasons) why the Democratic Party is so weak today. The would be supporters of the left see the same flaws in their political leaders as they do in the GOP, whereas the folks on the right blindly follow anything that their brave leaders tell them to, even if the story changes several times and is the exact opposite of what they were preaching the last time a Democrat was in the office.
It’s unfortunate that one political party can be made so strong from a loyalty that springs from utter blindness and ignorance while the other suffers due to lack of vision and strong leadership. No wonder voter apathy is at an all time high; we have to make the choice between the lesser of two evils and it just doesn’t feel like a choice worth making.
Phinn
Re: Rick Jones, really comments
He used familial influence to jump over hundreds of more qualified candidates to enter the Texas Air National Guard. And he didn’t even serve there.
He served in Houston from 1968 to 1972.
The Resident actually went AWOL for the last year and a half of his time with the National Guard,
He did not go AWOL. Only the U.S. military can determine if a soldier goes AWOL, and in Bush’s case, they didn’t determine that.
failing to report for duty or even let his commanding officers know where he was.
He actually was supposed to serve in Alabama after his fourth year to help with a Senatorial campaign, and while he did have a habit of not showing up, he did make up the time. This is not uncommon for the ANG to allow their people to make up missed time. He wasn’t pulling strings to get out of duty, as your post implies.
While these discussions are enjoyable to read, they are also frustrating because it seems that not enough focus is put on questioning the source of the information from which they are making their opinions. I do not take what Dan, Pete or Tom say for granted (that is, if I listen to them).
PAD, while I appreciate the your recollections of Romania, I don’t think you can jump to the same conclusion for Iraq. Maybe, if the Iraqis had overthrown Saddam, they would feel the pride of liberating themselves. But we will never know. And now some very small minority is using guerilla tactics to take out our soldiers while we try to create an environment where the Iraqis can enjoy a non-dictatorial government. To say that we are being targeted because we did the job for them is a stretch, at best.
He actually was supposed to serve in Alabama after his fourth year to help with a Senatorial campaign, and while he did have a habit of not showing up, he did make up the time. This is not uncommon for the ANG to allow their people to make up missed time. He wasn’t pulling strings to get out of duty, as your post implies.
Which is exactly why the ANG was such a lucrative place for rich fathers to place their sons, and why the Bush family pulled so many strings to get Dubya in there.
Phinn
[B]
Nor is writing coherent sentences yours
[/B]
Hilarious. I point out that you are not qualified to make such a conclusive statement and international relations, and hurl back a schoolyard taunt. Beautiful. Truly.
If you must know, I am legally blind. Typing isn’t my strong point. However, I got my point across, and your response shows an emotional immaturity which speaks volumes more than I ever could.
[b]
But that wouldn’t have served your purpose.
[/b]
You know nothing of my “purpose,” nor apparently, any historical context regarding the aftermath of war in countries that have been oppressed.
[b]
Again…honk honk.
[/b]
Indeed.
You may, of course, mock my poor use of HTML tags while you are at it.
As for our Health Care system it may need help but it if FAR superior to anything in the US.
That’s about as untrue as statments get. How do you figure? Why do wealthy Canadians come to the US for heart bypasses and other major surgery? Because the medicine is good and there’s no wait. Our system isn’t perfect, but it’s far better than any socialized program.
The main reason that there isn’t any universal health care in the US is because it wouldn’t make people money.
Well, yeah. We’re a capitalist, market-based economy, in spite of the Clintons. You should try it sometime.
And here is the biggest argument for our Healthcare system. If you are poor you are not going to get turned away at the door of a hospital because you don’t have insurance.
Do you truly think this happens in the states? Or are you guessing because you think we’re evil? The reality is there are plenty of government health programs for poor US citizens.
Take a look at some of the European countries to see how universal health care and free education should be here in Canada and the US.
Broken beyond repair? People dying while waiting for operations? Governments going broke because they can’t pay for a socialist agenda? Thanks, but Europe can keep that.
All I can say is that I know that the way things are in Canada aren’t perfect but they are infinitely better then the US.
Regardless of what measuring stick you use, that’s wrong.
Do you truly think this happens in the states? Or are you guessing because you think we’re evil? The reality is there are plenty of government health programs for poor US citizens.
actually this happens. Alot.
That’s about as untrue as statments get. How do you figure? Why do wealthy Canadians come to the US for heart bypasses and other major surgery? Because the medicine is good and there’s no wait. Our system isn’t perfect, but it’s far better than any socialized program.
The only reason that this has happened is because the Canadian Government isn’t puting enough money into Health care as they once did. If you would have read my earlier post you would have read that The government is not spending nearly enough on our social programs as they once did. The could have afforded this spending on social programs if they would have stayed in the business sector and made money that way, but no they went for the quick gain back in the 80’s and made money for now instead of keeping the business and making money over a longer period of time.
And I don’t hate Americians I just don’t like how your government and your companies think that the rest of the world has to be run the same way America is run. I also don’t really care for your government system.
It’s worth pointing out that AnthonyX’s list of articles is copied from frontpagemag.com (authored by “Anonymous”) and used by other oh-so reliable sources as newsmax.com.
The actual articles don’t seem to be online so it’s tough to verify them. However, from reading them over, most seem to be repeating the same single rumour.
Despite my support of our troops, our President, and the cause in Iraq, PAD’s point is a good one and a valid one.
However, I do not believe leaving would be the best option. Typically when a nation in Iraq’s economic position is left alone, they just erect a government that’s worse than before…. typically.
This is fascinating. Always is. But if you’re looking for one of the most persuasive, intelligent, well-documented and researched opinions out there right now, I point you to Newsday’s “Tilting at Windmills.”
PAD, you might appreciate it, as you have used Don Quixote before in your own writing.
If anyone else agrees that George Bush and Don Quixote have a few things in common, check out the following link:
http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-vppin153372005jul15,0,1147490.column?coll=ny-news-columnists.
You won’t be disappointed.
It looks like the Iraqi oil was divided up long before the liberation.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/07/18/national1810EDT0716.DTL
i interupt this bickering for some GOOD news..Odai and Qusai are DEAD!!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,92591,00.html
Well, yeah. We’re a capitalist, market-based economy, in spite of the Clintons.
I don’t know what drugs you have been taken, but the Clintons, those vile, enemies of humanity that people who lean right call them were more republican than democrat.
He was as capitalistic as Lott, Newt and the gang… even more so. Because he understood that our government is for sale. And went about selling it at the best possible price. From Chiquita Bananas to NAFTA, there was nothing and noone who would not make money.
Clinton made the Democratic party into the Republican party with a liberal veneer before our eyes, and most democrats lauded him for it.
Of course, he had some great spin doctors.
As a Populist, I think Clinton did more harm than good. The Democrats have tried to jump down the middle, getting more and more conservative as the day goes on.
Personally, Jim Hightower said it correctly:
“There’s nothing in the middle of the road, except for yellow lines and dead armodillos.”
Travis
That line should have been “I’m a Populist and I think Clinton did more harm than good.”
Travis
“Do you truly think this happens in the states? Or are you guessing because you think we’re evil? The reality is there are plenty of government health programs for poor US citizens.
actually this happens. Alot.”
So, are you basing this on actual events that you have witnessed or documented, is is this statement based just anecdotal evidence? Where I live, in Louisiana, there are places where anyone can get free health care: Earl K Long Hospital in Baton Rouge, and Charity Hospital in New Orleans. You may have ot wait a while, but that’s no worse than it is in Canada or Britain or anywhere else with socialized medicine.