I didn’t comment on the fact that Cheney and Bush (with a comment about where they work) believe that they are not required to follow laws, and as such, are not subject to the regulations and sanctions that those laws require; but this is hilarious. Since Cheney doesn’t think that he is a member of the executive branch, they are introducing a bill to limit the funding his office gets from that branch. LOL. Can’t have the paycheck if you don’t work there, buddy.
Additionally, it just really gets my goat that not only are there people still think that the war in Iraq had something to do with 9/11, but the cover ups and perjury that has been going on for the last 6 years is still not seen as real. I just don’t get people. If Cheney and Bush are not held accountable for the crimes that have been committed under the guise of “executive order”, what message does that send to the rest of the world? The people of the world are already tired of our BS, and if we just keep letting the president’s office rape the middle east, we are certainly going to lose some of the fledgling sympathy they have for those of us that don’t agree with what he is doing. I think that, even if it is just a slap on the wrist, and no one is actually removed from office (oh, but how awesome would that be), they should both be impeached. I mean, if you commit a crime, you should have your day in court, right? Why is it then, that the president and the vice president are immune to that? They aren’t, and I am crossing my fingers that someone with the balls to do it is going to step up and make it happen.
We seriously need to ask ourselves what we are gaining by staying in Iraq. Seriously, what do we seek to gain? Are we preventing violence in the Middle East? No, we are causing it to become more concentrated and organized. Are we saving the people of Iraq? No, we caused a civil war, and we are killing them to get them to stop it. Are we helping the people of Iraq, Palestine, Israel, or Iran do anything to better their lives, and enrich their countries? Not that I can tell, because we are making ourselves more and more of a threat each and every day. It becomes clearer and clearer to me each day, that Iran, Iraq, and the other “dangerous” nations in the world aren’t the threat; we are. We are doing to them exactly what we want to prevent them doing to us. It doesn’t change that fact, just because you call it something else, like “helping them rebuild”. Whatever.
While I think that it is important to help prevent violence in the world; when is the time that you actually investigate what your role in that prevention is? When everyone is dead? The whole thing just frustrates me, which is probably why I haven’t said much about it lately.
I can only DREAM of the day that politicians aren’t elected because of their donations and campaign contributions, and as such, we have have a true democratic government that is built by, and for, the people. Until then, none of OUR best interests will ever be in the forefront of anyone’s minds other than our own. That’s enough to make you want to just move somewhere secluded, where you hope you can remain untouched by all of this corruption, greed, and thirst of power. We will be the cause of our own demise, and watching it happen is sickening; especially when we have the ability to stop it.
I guess the greedy really will ruin it for the rest of us that just want to live, breathe, and be happy. Gah.
Are you serious? “It becomes clearer and clearer to me each day, that Iran, Iraq, and the other “dangerous” nations in the world aren’t the threat; we are” Why don’t you go live in Iran for a few days and see how long you last. Good grief…
You really are a moronic nitwit if you believe what you just wrote Homosexuals are rampently murdered in Iran - do you not follow current events? - Obviously not, by your post.
The President of Iran wants to kill you, me and every other American. He also wants to kill all Jews and destroy Israel. He says so himself - pay attention! I guess that matters not to you. It is all bogus. Only the evil empire of Bush and Cheney are out to get you.
Get your head out of your rectum and pay attention. It is ignorant people like you who give me less hope for our country.
Technically, the veep is *not* in the executive branch. The executive branch is vested solely in the powers of the president, and Cheney is only the successor to that office in the event of presidential assassination.
He does, however, cast tie-breaking votes in the Senate… which really put his role in the legislative branch.
Where his funding comes from is a trivial issue (SPOILER: it *all* comes out of your paycheck, well before you get it.) A congressman playing funding games is only funny until you realize he’s wasting everybody’s fucking time when there are a lot more serious things going on that could use the time on the floor.
Regarding the Constitutional structure of things? Cheney is entirely right.
[War-baiting comments redacted]
Phyllis and M, since you are the same person (IP addresses ya’ll), I will address both of your comments together. With regards to your quoting my statement about the US being the danger, do you see where I said that Iran was no threat to anyone, ever? Because I am pretty sure that isn’t there. What I said, was in reaction to what is currently going on. What you are inferring from it, is more of an all or nothing sentiment; because I said we have some stake in the pissing off of Iran, leading them to WANT to BECOME a threat, then you assume that I think that things are all gum drops and lollipops over there. The point is, Iran is no threat to us right now (again, they are becoming one, because of what we are currently doing… not to mention the past, but whatever). And, if they became an imminent one, it would be solely because of our actions. If you can’t understand that, I am sorry that it is over your head.
With regards to your comments about Iranians being against homosexuals, I don’t believe I even came close to covering that in this post because it is beyond the scope of the subject I was writing about; this war and our part in it. While I do think that Iran is a bad place with some bad people, it doesn’t mean that we have the right to just kill them all and move on. Do I hope that we can all become peaceful? You bet! Do I think that it is reprehensible that people are killed for being gay? More than you will ever imagine. However, if you think for one second that the things this government is doing to those people isn’t making things much, much worse, then it is you that have your head up your ass, and it is you that is clearly lost touch with what is going on in this world.
Additionally, the President of Iran is one man, who represents an extreme. There are Christians that live in this country that want to do the same thing to homosexuals, but I don’t think that it would be appropriate to wipe them out as well; you have to work with people in order for them to change. Is it going to be tough? Of course, and we need to work on that now. Going about it violently, and certainly in a manipulative manner, in the way we are currently doing, only pisses them off more.
Finally, with regards to the killing of homosexuals in Iran, can I ask you what we, as a nation, have done about that, and, equally as important, what we are currently doing about it? Because from where I am sitting, it looks like nothing. If you have a problem with something that someone is doing, you do something about it, and if you go about it the wrong way, there will be consequences. If you do nothing but complain, what good are you actually doing? Point is, if we wanted to help, we would, but we haven’t.
Nothing good comes of war, and it is the same case here. I am sorry if you are too out of touch to realize that; and that, is what really brings less hope for this country. Those of you that are willing to believe what you are spoon fed by the media, and believe that we are doing what’s best for ourselves and the rest of the world. Please, do yourself a favor and gain a little perspective; it would really help you understand things outside of your current realm of understanding.
Finally, in the future, post under the same name, it doesn’t fool me into thinking there are two of you that disagree with me.
Eater, while I totally see where you are coming from (a technicality), it is pretty widely understood that the cabinet of the president is part of the executive branch; especially because they carry out the orders he passes down. Since that is the case, and especially due to the shaky language about it from the government itself, I believe that his statement not only represented a belief that he was above the law and above regulation, but that it illustrates just how their quest for absolute power is not only scary, but real. As for him being the head of the Senate, that illustrates the duality of our government, and does not nullify his place in the cabinet, and as the carrier-outer (god I can’t believe I typed that) of the executive branch’s decisions.
As for the parading around the Senate floor, I do agree that it is ridiculous. I even found it funny. BUT, that is how politics works, and regardless of how much we can’t stand politicking for politicking’s sake, it can’t be avoided, unfortunately.
I see that you convienently ignored this
http://gayorbit.net/?p=2459
Yep Bush caused it - will I see you at Tehran Pride Next Year?
M, again, that is NOT what this post is about. It is about the crimes Bush and Cheney have committed under the title of executive officers. Additionally, it is a response to what our presence in the middle east is actually doing.
I have blogged about that very incident before, because as I am now, I was appalled. Perhaps you need to gain a little more perspective, and stop being so all or nothing with things. Read what I wrote in the post, and if you want to talk about that, cool, but if not, it would probably best serve you to spend your time doing something else. If you want to see what I had to say about that incident, here is a link to the post that I made then; perhaps that can quell your thirst for my reaction to that atrocity (and perhaps, even more, allow you to focus on what I was saying with THIS post).
And I don’t even know where you were going with that last sentence.
Actually two of us did post - I was so incredulous of your thoughts about Iran, et al being good and America being the enemy I had to share it.
But while we are at it exactly what crimes did Bush & Cheney commit?
WTC I, Khobar Towers, African Embassy Bombings, USS Cole and 9/11 happened all before we entered Iraq. Just curious where you are getting your information or misinformation?
Perhaps it is a split personality disorder type thing? Either way, I never said Iran was good. Never. You said that. I also never said America was the “enemy”, but you are correct, we are an enemy to the people of Iraq, Iran, and any other nation that is threatened by what we have done, and continue doing. Read what I write, and comment on what I said; it will save me the trouble of having to point it out to you over and over again.
If you need to ask what crimes they committed, I suggest you spend a little time with the internet and do some research. Perjury, obstruction of justice, negligence, and I hate to mention it, but murder are a few that pop into my mind. As for the events you are referring to, it appears that things happen in an independent bubble for you. Perhaps that is the problem; I see things as complex and having many different facets of influence, all of which affect the world-system, and apparently, you think that all things happen independently of anything else. That is a different issue altogether, frankly, one that I don’t have time to try and educate you about.
Additionally, it really strengthens your labeling of what I write as “misinformation” if you actually show how I have been wrong, rather than just saying that I am. Again, this will require a little research on your (or your other side’s) part.
duane, I believe you were proven wrong. Ready to admit this one?
dave, where?
The part about the VP not being part of the Executive Branch at that Iran is not a threat to us.
Come on Duane you are smarter than that. That is like me saying Hillary is crazy go to google and type in Hillary is crazy see for yourself.
I still go back to we live in the greatest country in the world, even with our faults, and Islamic Jihadist and their beaten down citizens are the enemy. They kill each other and they would like to kill us all. Islam ain’t for gays - did you see their float at Pride this year.
I only hope you will truly open your eyes to the real enemy.
Bush & Cheney are certainly not perfect and hate this war just as much as anyone else, but we are in a fight for our values and our lives - trust me on this one. I only hope that we will all come together and realize what it is going to take to defeat this evil enemy and it isn’t dialogue bud.
I encourage you to go back and study some history - particularly war victory and see what has worked - that is what we (the West and supporters of freedom and liberty) will end up having to do to win this battle.
Islamic Jihadist want us all dead - gay, straight, black, white, women, kids, etc - they do it everyday and they will do it again until defeated with or without Bush/Cheney or the poor Iraqi kids who got killed last week just for being Sunni or Shiite or Kurd.
As a person who has had this war directly inpact her life, I have to say I do not agree with the situation. But we are making a difference in these countries. Not huge, but some, maybe not enough to keep us over there. Schools are being built, hospitals, homes, and a police force is being assembled. Talking about the good things that the soldiers and civilians are doing does not make for good TV so it isn’t mentioned. We are not the enemy in Iran and Iraq. The enemy are these rouge groups that are insistant on controlling these people. For every middle eastern citizen saying we are the devil there is one that is glad to see us roll through their town. Our leaders have made many mistakes concerning this war and they should have to answer to the American people and the soldiers they sent overseas - like my husband.
We didn’t start anyones civil war - those wars have been going for years. No it is never okay that innocent people are being killed, but our country inadvertantly kills far less than these terrorists. I am a die hard democrat, I never voted for Bush BUT, I am a women whose has been raised on the military and I will support my troops and my country until the end. Which hopefully Hilary Clinton will take care of that.
Ahmadenijad does not want to kill every American and there is no supporting evidence for that assertion. Secondly, there is some ambiguity over his remarks about Israel. Juan Cole, a well regarded and respected specialist/academic on the Middle East, has more on this subject. (For what its worth and it should go without saying, I completely agree with Cole’s point about Iran’s reprehensible domestic policies, which some here mentioned as well.)
As far as Iran being a threat to us, Iran (or its antecedents) has not invaded or attacked another country in several centuries. Off the top of my head, since WWII the U.S. has militarily attacked directly or by proxy Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Loas, Iraq, Panama, the Dominican Republic, Cuba, Nicaragua, Libya, Honduras, El Salvador, Lebanon, Iran, Colombia, Somalia, Haiti, Sudan, Turkey, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. That does not include the much longer list of countries the U.S. has attacked by supporting and training forces actively committing atrocities, economic strangulation, political destabilization and so on; such as our support for Pinochet’s coup in 1973, Indonesia’s invasion of East Timor, Arbenz in Guatemala 1953, etc.
Iran does not have any military bases outside of its country. By one count, we currently admit to over 700 military bases in 130 countries around the world, the number is probably closer to 1000 since many are not listed (for example, Camp Bondsteel is not listed) or in some countries several bases are counted as one. We currently spend approximately as much as the rest of the world combined on military, not counting the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.
The U.S. currently occupies two countries on Iran’s borders. We have been conducting very aggressive maneuvers in the Strait of Hormuz with 2-3 aircraft carriers, openly practicing bombing runs on Iran. We have publicly threatened to nuke them, numerous high profile American politicians, like John McCain, and presidential candidates have explicitly made this threat. I am going to cut myself off here because I don’t get into all of it, just mentioning that there are other perspectives with a lot of empirical evidence to support their views.
I think you might want to, as well. Although I don’t support some of the decisions made by the administration, the situation is obviously not as simple as “get out now - we screwed up.” To think like that only makes one appear ignorant, one-sided and ill-informed.
duane, you keep chastising people because of their ‘all or nothing’ statements yet it seems you’re all or nothing when it comes to all or nothing statements… hypocritical? me thinks so…
I totally support our soldiers as well as our country (though I do not nor will I ever support Shrub or Cheney), but I have to say I agree with Duane that the reasons we are over there are unclear because of this “administration”. Any good we have done over there will be out of the scope of the media because of all of the secrecy the Shrub administration and all of the misleading of the American public (WMDs for instance). I read a similar article about Cheney’s office yesterday and I applaud the Democrats for wanting to limit his funding to that of the Senate presidency. What is the saying about having your cake and eating it too?
My understanding from the beginning of the Shrub administration is that Cheney has tried to increase the powers of the Executive branch since they have been in office. In my opinion, our forefathers set up three branches of government to put in place a set of checks and balances and if you tilt the scales and give one branch more power we are headed for disaster. Can we say King Shrub? I personally do not want to see that happen!!
As far as Iran goes, we are not at war with Iran though we probably should be INSTEAD of with Iraq. Yes it is terrible what Saddam did to the people in his country, so let us start a war there and kill thousands of Iraqi citizens (many more than Saddam killed) as well as thousands of American soldiers. How does that make us any better than Osama? As I have stated on this site before, in MY OPINION Shrub is a terrorist (by FBI definition) and he and Cheney will one day pay for their deeds I HOPE!!
OOPS!!
“How does that make us any better than Osama” I meant Saddam, of course, I guess it would apply to Osama too….
Dave, again, you are wrong, not I. The President appoints advisors to carry out executive orders over the different departments controlled by the executive office. Cheney is one of those advisors. Even the language in the Consitution suggests that he is, even if not in full fledged “stature”, subject to the rules and regulations of the executive office. Also, I didn’t actually say that I thought he was in the executive office in this post; I was commenting on the fact that they are going to limit his funding. As far as Iran not being a threat to us, that isn’t what I said. I said that they weren’t a threat to us. They are now because of what we are doing now. Again, read what I wrote, and don’t infer what you want from it.
Actually the Constitution states that the Presidential candidate with the 2nd most amount of votes from the Electoral College would hold the position of Vice President. It wasn’t until the 12th Amendment that it was established that the Presidential Candidate’s running mate would hold the office of VP.
M, when you say,
I only hope that you will open your eyes and see that Iraq citizens are not the enemy. In fact, they had nothing to do with 9/11. Right now, the “enemy” that we are fighting, are the people of Iraq that are banding together with Al Qaeda to get us out of there. We created this enemy, and we are causing them to band together and get stronger. If you can’t understand that, I am sorry, but it doesn’t make it any less true.
As for the rest of your comment, you make no sense whatsoever. Perhaps you should look at history, to see the reasons for war in the past. This war has been compared very closely to Vietnam, and as with Vietnam, we are causing more harm than good. We have no business being there. If we really wanted to attack those that are a threat to us, we would change our strategy; but again, that would take a perspective that is currently lacking in our actions.
Finally, I am tired of you going on and on about the Islamic extremists; they are not everyone in the middle east. When you say things like:
you are justifying killing everyone to kill the few that are actually a threat. That is a dangerously sadistic mentality, one that I hope that you can change.
Vanessa, I agree that the military isn’t the enemy, but the people that we are currently trying to “calm down” who are at war with each other (and us), were stirred up because of our presence. The civil war in Iraq started while we were there, and was a result of our presence.
It doesn’t mean that you don’t support the troops to question what our presence in Iraq means. I am totally 100% with you in my support for every troop, and I will never waiver on that for a second; but it doesn’t mean that I won’t question our motives and actions while we are occupying someone else’s country.
We aren’t at war with the Iraqi citizens. We’re at war with the Islamic extremist which most definitely pose a threat to every American citizen and our way of life. Do you honestly believe that if we packed up our troops today and brought them home that all those wackos that have said they want us dead, the West ruled by Islamic law, and the complete annihilation of Israel will all of a sudden go, “Rock on! See you guys in the Olympics! I love you man!” Hardly…
Lori,
Not only did I not say “get out now - we screwed up”, I never even hinted that this was the correct course of action. What I DID say, was that I think that is imperative to examine what our presence in the middle east is doing, and what we seek to gain from being there. I am asking for us to question our actions, past, present, and future, and then come up with a plan that will have the most positive benefit for everyone.
I hope that you can see the perspective that I am saying, rather than inferring what you think I am saying, and then proceeding to call me ill informed, when it is clear that I am not saying what you thought.
Dave, again, my comments are not all or nothing; what you are doing is inferring all or nothing sentiments from what was NOT said. That is like me saying, “hey, I LOVE chocolate”, and then you chastise me for hating vanilla. Listen to what I DO say, and focus on that; because it is what I am saying that I want to discuss. Just because I don’t say that the sky is blue, does not mean that I don’t believe it is so.
wow… you are totally making no sense now (not that you were making ground-breaking news before). Just give it a rest.
That’s weird, because the insurgents that we are fighting are the Iraq citizens who are banding together to overthrow our control of their country. If you can’t see that, you are blind. Additionally, I don’t think that the blood spilt in the streets of Iraq every day is always Islamic extremist blood, dave. Again, you are going all or nothing on things, and focusing more on what wasn’t said, rather than on what was.
Additionally, I didn’t say “pack up the troops and bring them home”; what I did say, was examine what we seek to gain, as well as what we have done, and are doing in Iraq. To just “stay the course” (as we are doing), is just stupid.
duane, the insurgents are attacking Iraqi citizens. Not us. Regardless, innocent people die in every war. It’s war, not a peaches and cream parade. We are not controlling their country. We are there to support the government the Iraqi citizens formed and the leaders they elected.
How am I being all or nothing this time? I think that’s just your template for responding to me.
Oh right, I forgot you weren’t planning to to reference anything written on this single-authored blog besides this particular post.
The only thing clear is your consistency at contradicting yourself.
dave,
They are Iraqi citizens themselves.
Wrong. In fact, military personnel that we have trained are turning against us and joining the insurgent militias. They are attacking us too dave. Or do you believe that those roadside IEDs were meant for someone else?
You’re right; but it isn’t for a lack of trying. If they would stop fighting back, we would be controlling their country, which is what we are trying to do. In fact, the surge of troops (all of them in fact), was to do just that; control their country.
Wait, didn’t we tell them they had to do this, even though they didn’t want to? Didn’t we form that government for them, and force democracy on them? Because we did. It is pretty much a consensus that Iraqis would rather have Saddam than what we have done “for them”. Again, you are wrong, because you cannot force a country to accept democracy; especially if they didn’t want it. The government that “they” formed is a farce at best; which is why it isn’t stable enough to take control over the country… hence our involvement…
This time, you were not being all or nothing. You stated your retorts clearly, without inferring something that wasn’t written in my response. That is what I would like to see more; focus on what I did say, and not the million other things that I didn’t say. Do so, and you will get less of the “all or nothing” response from me.
Wow, you and Andy must be in cahoots to police my blog for me. I didn’t realize that I wasn’t allowed to have varying degrees of an opinion, and even (shock awe gasp!), change that opinion if I should so choose to. If I am writing something in a post, and don’t specifically refer back to another post, it would be assumable to most that I am talking about that particular thing, and not every other thing I have ever said about it or anything else in the past.
Additionally, the very thing that you are saying I am being inconsistent about, specifically the “get out of Iraq now!”, I have never clearly stated that I wanted an immediate pull out with no thought, planning, or consideration of what would happen after we left. In fact, to the contrary, what I HAVE consistently said, is that we need to leave Iraq, because what we are doing is making things worse. Again, just because I don’t clearly lay out the step by step thought processes that I have with regards to what needs to happen with regards to said pull out, doesn’t mean that the tought process doesn’t exist. Again, you focus on what wasn’t said, rather than what was (and in this case, what was said before, and has remained consistent, but whatever).
What I believe, and what I have always believed and tried to portray, is that we need to develop a different strategy to achieve the so-called “goals” that we wish to achieve in the Middle East. I specifically spoke to that in this post, which builds on my previous posts, in saying that we need to both examine our perspective with regards to what we are doing in Iraq, and then come up with a new plan to determine what is best for everyone. Additionally, I always challenged what our mission was in Iraq, and question what we seek to gain from being there; which is directly related to why I think we should leave.
If you are going to continue to police my blog for me, I would like it if you could follow the facts, rather than just saying that I am being inconsistent, especially in cases where, even if it seems to you that I am, I am not. If you would like to discuss my thoughts and ideas for policies regarding Iraq, I would be more than willing to talk with you about them, because it is clear that you are missing a huge piece of my actual beliefs regarding them.
Debate should include some constructive alternatives. This is what’s fucked about political debate in our country today. Everybody’s so engrossed in hating figureheads, they’ve lost any hint of perspective on the issue.
Duane, what would you do if you were elected President in ‘08?
Dave, what would you do if you were elected President in ‘08?
You’ll have to juggle some tricky things, including but limited to:
1. Many citizens in the country will loudly disapprove of any military action, for *any* reason, and will loudly accuse you of being Hitler if you use it.
2. Your border-patrol agents might as well be Wal-mart greeters for all the effectiveness they display. Any attempts to improve the situation will be met with accusations of racism.
3. There’s a significant portion of the global population that, for whatever reason, wants to destroy you way of life through incredibly violent tactics. Their cultures have no anti-violence citizenry like you are subject to (see #1.) Oh, did I mention you have no border security?
4. Don’t forget, you’ll be inheriting a pretty shabby domestic situation.
4a. Public education is horrible.
4b. Health care is horrible.
4c. Tax system is horrible.
4d. Any number of special interest groups want your head on a sharp stick every time you make a decision. (See: labor unions, gay rights, anti-gay rights, pro and choice life, net neutrality, environmentalists, yadda yadda.)
On the upside, the economy isn’t bad right now. Yay for small favors.
I don’t pretend to have all the answers to these things. If I did, I’d probably just write them here and then go off to start my own talk show or something. However, what I do want to communicate is that leading a country like this is a pretty delicate balancing act, and more so now that it’s ever been.
It’s remarkably easy to find fault with a President. Or with your boss, or with your home-owners association president, or with any number of people who are in any kind of leadership position.
It’s remarkably difficult to truly appreciate all the circumstances that are involved with being in a leadership position. I don’t mean that any of you should forgive the short-comings of our leadership; quite the contrary. I mean that along with criticism of our government comes a duty to offer up constructive alternatives. The alternatives you present should take into account all of the delicate issues that are involved. Sniping at isolated issues is bad for everybody.
Eater,
I wholeheartedly agree. I have no idea what I would do if I were elected president, seriously. I don’t know what to tell them to do. But there are several that do know more about the right thing to do, and they are talking. All I want, is that the administration listen. We all know that mistakes are being made, and just to chalk that up to “delicate balances of management” doesn’t cut it; especially when lives are at stake.
I also agree that focusing solely on isolated issues isn’t helpful, but in this case, the war, this issue permeates every part of our lives, and we need to work it out. What I wrote this post for, and what I continually want to see, is some changes in the way things are done, especially because we know that they aren’t being done correctly.
Do I have all the answers? No, I never claimed that I did. However, I do think that it is important to point out that what is going on right now in the government of our country is crooked and we as the citizens of this country, should expect some changes to occur. No one is above the law, and the government needs to stop operating as if it is. Delicate balance or not, breaking the law is still breaking the law.
Cahoots! Andy, he caught onto us. Oh wait, didn’t you threaten to throw him out of the sandbox?
Just because people, who you accuse of continually taking your statements out of context, refer back to your own text to support an argument doesn’t mean they’re policing your blog.
Your paranoia is acting up again.
Duane actually we, Israel and the moderate Palestinians, Iraqis and Lebonese are all fighting a proxy war against Iran - they support Hezbollah, Syria, terrorist in Iraq and Hamas.
The Vietnam War is rightly being compared to this war because we aren’t doing what it actually takes to win a war - you gotta look back to WWII victory to see what it takes. It is not fun, pretty or nice, but you don’t fight wars to make friends. You fight wars to win. Unfortunately Bush or Shrub or whatever you want to call him is more interested in not getting the left, the media, et al too upset with him resulting in more dead Americans.
We have the strength to win just not the will quite yet. Not sure what it will take, but Iran is going to try to stoke it.
Some good points in this thread.
It is ridiculous to claim the U.S. is controlling the government of Iraq. Independence and a deeply unpopular military occupation characterized, in part, by direct interference with political decisions and processes are not mutually exclusive. We are there primarily in a support role… supporting what, I don’t know. A wise man once noted that the Arabs are either at your feet or at your throat. That’s our problem there. The ones at our throat need to be at our feet, and the ones at our feet need to be under our heels.
One of the big problems with how we have fought this war of liberation is our unwillingness to completely exterminate the bastards. An American military man in Vietnam gave us a wonderful phrase for this, “destroy the village in order to save it.” That is exactly what needs to happen. And I don’t mean something small scale like 3 million dead Iraqis (the toll of our Indochina wars), I am thinking big. Like all males between the ages of 9-55, or something similar. That’s what it will take to win this thing. But the softies in the liberal media and Congress won’t go for it… gimps and pimps, all of them.
I am glad to see some evidence of groundswell support for an invasion of Iran too. Let’s do this lock, stock and barrel. Those crazy bastards want to wipe out the rest of the planet?, fine, let’s carpet bomb them first. Christ, why outspend the rest of the world combined on our military if we can’t even use it to wipe the oily smirk off a reptile like Ahmadenijihad’s simian face? I am talking total annihilation.
Good God, when did our country get filled with a bunch of bleeding heart pacifists? I am sick and tired of hearing ignorant peaceniks say we have to leave Iraq. Are they even paying attention? We are the best goddamned thing to happen to those wogs since the British stomped their faces with jodhpur boots back in the 1920s. If we quit killing them, who would man up to finish the job? Iran? Bitch, please. For all our talk about their meddling in Iraq, that country hasn’t had the stones to invade anyone in centuries. There is such a thing as triage, people! Better to stay indefinitely until we finally decide to take the next step and do this thing right.
Actually, it is more accurate for me to point out, that just because you say that I am “out of context”, “ill informed”, “one sided”, and “ignorant”, doesn’t make it so. You have as yet to have even acknowledged that I laid out a counter to your so-called contradictions, and yet, your retort was nothing more than, Nuh-uh! You have got to better than that. If you want to PROVE that I am being inconsistent with what I have said, you need to provide the proof as to where I was doing it; Andy couldn’t, and I doubt you can either, because as I said, I am not being inconsistent on this issue.
And the paranoia jab? That was just fucking bitchy and immature. If you, or anyone for that matter, has such a problem with what I say on my blog, why do you bother reading it? I mean, if what I am saying jumps around and is so “ill informed”, why bother? You don’t even try to discuss the issue with me, and show me why you think that I am ill informed; and instead, you just point your finger and try to prove I am wrong by yelling “you’re wrong”. That “argument” style isn’t going to hold water here, so I would appreciate it if you would consider that for the future.
M, the Vietnam war and this war are extremely different than WWII. And answer this question for me, how and what will we “win”?
Gunner, you are a psychopath that is suggesting genocide. I hope that you realize that you are suggesting the same thing that Hitler did, and if that is all you have to “add”, please, keep it to yourself.
Ok fine - let’s review The Revolutionary War - we are acting like the British and the terrorist are fighting like the Swamp Fox (remember the Mel Gibson movie) - very sneaky. If we need to destroy at town to rid it of Al Quaeda do it. It is not all towns and all provinces causing trouble - just a few and why in the hell is Al Sadyr still alive?
The end result these Islamic Jihadist don’t really give a damn about Islam - they blow up each others mosques, they kill their internal enemies women and children - obviously they don’t care. The only way to rid the world of this vermin is to completely annihilate them and playing mister nice guy isn’t going to do it. Also allowing govts who support this vermin - Iran & Syria to exist isn’t helping either. The enemy see us as weak and they are sowing their oats right now and testing us. Until we strike back hard they are going to continue to push - just ask Israel about what their tepid response to Hezbollah last summer has brought them.
we win some peace through strength - it would be best if we started digging for own vast oil resources on our own soil and then we can say to hell with them all.
I think most American citizens would prefer that.
Justoff - those countries you named asked us to be involved one way or another. Yes, our administration can be a bully sometimes but we don’t just attack other countries for no reason.
Dpb is right in saying that we can’t just up and leave that country. We made a mistake getting involved but if we remove our troops all at once -which I wish we could do - it would be chaos. Unfortunatly we will have some type of troop involvement for many more years.
Duane, we didn’t start their civil war - Suddam was killing thousands upon thousands of people. He was a threat to us and his country. We shouldn’t have used September 11th as a spring board into this war, the Shrub administration (I like that Mitch) lied and should be held accountable but it was going to happen anyway. The insurgents and terrorists are a small portion of the countries people. They are taking civilian lives, our troops and their countries troops and killing them with out a real reason. If a civilian is killed or injured and its our fault, it wan’t because we decided to bomb this or that city today. We don’t send suicide bombers, plant road side bombs and blow stuff up for the hell of it.
Like Vietnam we are not going to “win” this war. Blowing everyone up isn’t going to help either Gunner. That makes us targets for other countries - like it or not, we have to “play nice”.
After all is said and done, the outcome is going to have to satisfy the families of the dead Americans and British soilders. I would hate to think my family went over there for nothing.
eater, it’s not just as simple as what I would do as President. I tried to put together a comment that had what I would want to do but it got really long so I decided to make it a post on my own site. You can see it here if you care.
duane, it may be harsh to hear, but what Gunner is saying is not far from what really needs to be done. We are doing our best to not kill the innocent Iraqis and other middle-easterners. The problem is nearly all of them subscribe to a faith that says we should join them or die. They aren’t live-and-let-live people. They will come after us. The only way to ensure our continued existence and way of life is to ensure they never strike us … the only surefire way to do that is pure eradication. I’m not suggesting we set up gas chambers as Hitler did or drop chemical weapons as Saddam did but something must be done… we have to figure out the best way to do it.
Cheney’s a part of the Executive Branch when it suits his needs, like in 2000/1 when folks wanted to know what was going on in those energy task force closed-door meetings.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/26/cheney-exec-branch/
Why all the Duane hate…Lori why the bitchiness?
“Justoff - those countries you named asked us to be involved one way or another.”
Vanessa, you are 100% incorrect. I don’t want to spew out a bunch of facts or history, the history is readily accessible if you want to look at it. Instead, I’ll list several books that examine the particulars of those instances and leave it to you to decide whether or not it is worth your time to study it,
James Bovard, Attention Deficit Democracy
Stephen Kinzer, Overthrow
William Blum, Killing Hope
Chalmers Johnson, Blowback
I think this is one heck of a topic and not one we will solve here, but it is wonderful to see so much response and to know that this really is on the mind of voters (as the polls show–still not sure I trust polls). I just have to say that had the current administration been honest at any point during this war, maybe the sentiment of the American people would be more positive. I feel the current administration has manipulated information and their veil of secrecy is wrecking any good that could have come out of this war. I feel Shrub and Dickhead should both be impeached due to the atrocities that have been commited by their administration. Need I list them? It would take more time than I have…
Only one point really needs to be challenged here, and it’s this:
It becomes clearer and clearer to me each day, that Iran, Iraq, and the other “dangerous” nations in the world aren’t the threat; we are.
Iran’s not only a threat to its sworn enemies in the U.S. and Israel, but also to many of its neighbors in the Middle East. And, btw, the Mullahs aren’t too keen on gay people.
This kind of knee-jerk, Rosie-inspired “self-hatred” of the U.S. needs to be combated, and villified. There’s plenty to criticize about this administration and American foreign policy, but calling us more dangerous than countries which want to annihilate entire races or religions (they’re not shy about it) is simplistic Chomsky-esque nonsense.
I know, I know, I took you out of context. Tough to do with direct quotes, but somehow we manage.
atlmalcontent, I am glad that you focused on that statement, because I stand by it wholeheartedly. And you didn’t take it out of context, as you have done in the past. I am not so unreasonable here; I don’t know why you go to extremes when you discuss things with me. Either way.
How many times has Iran attacked us? How many times? None? Also, if we go by your standards of determining who is an enemy, the Christian Coalition should also be obliterated, because they hate gay people too, and want us all to die of AIDS.
My point that I was trying to make by saying such a strong statement, was that we are not above moral authority. We go in, kill who we want, take what we want, and say that we are doing it to “protect” ourselves; even if they haven’t done anything to us, yet. Sure, there are extremists, but they do not make up a large portion of the population in the countries that we are so eager to wipe out, and justifying the slaughter of the whole to wipe out the few is genocidal, and frankly, our very own holocaust-type situation. Might they attack us? Sure, they might. But why would they? Because we have done everything we could to take advantage of them. And, the radicals plant that thought in the heads of the general population, and then you have a bad situation on your hands. This has been hundreds of years worth of manipulation, and by continuing on that trail, we are doing more and more harm each day.
I don’t hate America, as you accused me of. In fact, I love this country, and I believe that we can do so much better, and that is why I am so upset with the way we are doing things. If we really want the world to be a safer place, both for us, and for anyone else, we have got to stop doing what we are doing; killing, taking advantage of, stealing from, profiting from, and destroying those that have what we want. Until that day comes, I will hope and pray that we can change, but until then, we remain a threat to anyone we come in contact with. Saying that we aren’t isn’t a substantial argument, especially when you can see the actual numbers of people killed on both sides. We are definitely doing a lot of murdering over there, and turning a blind eye to our involvement is what scares the hell out of me.
There’s a huge difference between hating gay people and hanging them in the public square. Lots of people hate lots of other people; most don’t act on out it violently. And then you say: “justifying the slaughter of the whole to wipe out the few is genocidal, and frankly, our very own holocaust-type situation.” You’re comparing our actions in Iraq to the Holocaust? Are you serious?
“Might they attack us? Sure, they might. But why would they? Because we have done everything we could to take advantage of them.”
Iran is ruled by extremists. We, and the Jews, are infidels. They vow to destroy the infidels. Why are we infields? Because they follow a perverse, fundamentalist logic that deems all non-Muslims (and moderate Muslims, for that matter) worthy of death. Take their word for it!
You and people who think like you are VERY DANGEROUS. And btw, Iran has said they want to attack us and Israel. U get your talking points from Rosie? I’m going to keep calling you out, because people like you should be VILLIFIED. You’re ignorant — of current events AND history.
A quick search of Duane’s archives reveals no mention of Rosie.
If you really think Duane should be VILIFIED (in ALL CAPS) please step up your efforts on your blog. Satirical posts are one thing, but you’re no Swift.
Hang him in virtual effigy.
Post a defaced picture of him as a criminal, wanted poster style.
Put his home phone number and address on the internet.
If you’re willing to come here and SAY he should be vilified, follow that through to it’s logical conclusion.
Make the leap from malcontent to activist, just as you describe.
So let’s see… kill them before they kill us!? What a moral high ground you suggest for us.
Yes I am serious, we have ourselves a similar (notice how I didn’t say the exact same, which is most likely, how you interpreted it) situation to the holocaust, in that WE are causing the death of many innocent people. There’s 700k dead so far, so let’s see if we can get to 2 million!? If you can’t understand how that is even vaguely similar, perhaps you should read it slowly back to yourself until you understand; killing people, is killing people, however you want to spin it, innocent people are dieing because of us. Hitler hated the Jews, and tried to exterminate them. We went after him, because he was an evil MF, and stopped him. But, in this case, we hate the people in the middle east, all because a handful of them are evil mother fuckers, and because they have threatened us. Why are you, and the other sadistic people like you, capable of justifying the killing off of an entire region of people because of, again, a threat from a minority of people? You are a victim of religious profiling, and it has warped your world view into sanctioning the death of those even sharing the same religion, geographic region, or dare I say it, skin color of those extremists. Yes, they are capable of killing, I never said they weren’t; but killing everyone in sight just to say “we got ‘em first” is not the way to do things. Why not just kill everyone that isn’t American? Both suggestions make about as much sense as the other; and both are psychopathically deranged at best.
Dude, the problem with your critiques on what I have said, is that again, you are mistakenly focusing on the FEW, and making decisions that will affect the many. People like you are utilizing homicidal thoughts to justify murder, at the least. People like you believe that you should cut off a hand to spite an infected finger; even when the other fingers are perfectly fine. I just don’t share you sense of radical extermination because of a “want” to possibly attack us (never mind the reason they want to attack us, is in response to everything we have done to them for thousands of years).
I am just elated that there aren’t very many extremists like you that have power to make decisions. And the ones that are like you are in the minority; and hopefully, on their way out the door. What I think isn’t as radical as you portray it, and it is honestly interesting to me that even though I thought we shared similar value systems for human life, you are willing to justify mass murder, and I am not.
If you continually fail to see the extremist mindset that you portray, I just hope that you can eventually realize it for what it is. That’s your opinion, and you are entitled to have it, but it doesn’t make my more conservative approach at stopping the violence in the middle east any less viable; what it does make it, is vastly more humane.
War and killing will cause more war and killing. History has shown this over, and over, and over, and over again (perhaps it is you who should examine history?). In the case of WWII, we went after a bad man, and a bad group of people who were killing people; there was a reason for it, a justification, and a plan of action that had an end and a means. This time, we are going after an entire slew of countries who have only even threatened to attack us, and this time, they haven’t even done the whole extermination of an entire race of people. They didn’t even attack us at all! All of this “jumping the gun” extremism makes me think that you are probably little too quick on the trigger in far too many ways; and that makes me glad that I am only interacting with you through the internet.
I’ll be honest, I pissed the bed almost every night for several months after 9/11 happened - that is how scared I was. We all were. The difference is, some people forgot that fear. Not me. I have held onto with a kungfu death grip. I know it is considered weak or unmanly to admit fear, but F that shite. I don’t mind it all. I think it is completely justifiable to wipe out an entire region so we dont have to live in fear anymore, and as a commenter upthread mentioned we don’t necessarily have to do it like Hitler or Saddam because that would be evil. We should find a more humane way to do it, I am all for that.
Face reality, Duane. Iran and other Arab countries may officially endorse the Arab League proposal of 2002 and make other overtures toward reconciliation, but unofficially they are all irrational, homicidal regimes bent on wiping us off the planet. Don’t take your eye off the ball. Even though Iran has never actually explicitly said they want to attack us, do you doubt that they do? I mean, come on! What if the Iranians had subverted our democracy in the 1950s and propped up a vicious dictator for over 20 years, then financed a Mexican invasion of the U.S. that killed some 500,000 people, and shot down a civilian airliner taking off in Miami, etc, etc, etc? You think we wouldn’t want their heads on a stick? Watch Red Dawn, babe. Of course they want us dead, and I for one have no compunction about wiping them out first and neither should you. Get your head out of your bottom and let the good times roll. What happened to this country?
Gunner, the most important two words in your post are “what if”.