"That's as much to try and bolster the spirits of the people in the field as well -- you can't have the commander-in-chief say to a bunch of kids who are sacrificing that either it's not worth it or you're losing. What does that do for morale?" - George Bush.This reminds me of Jennifer's "if you criticize the war, you don't support the troops" hallucination from months ago. It fails pretty much every test of reasonable logic.
Now, the preznit is saying that you can't be honest with the military.
Here's the deal - for those in Loon Land, where the obvious is a difficult thing to grasp. Unless you want to nuke Iraq into a pile of glass, as Douglass V. Gibbs has advocated, nothing is going to change. The situation in Iraq has nothing to do with the military. Even the military has said it's not a military situation. It's a political one.
Each year rolls by, and the same things get said over and over. The Loons say "we must win", without defining "winning" nor explaining how the military is supposed to do that. After all.. if the military was capable of "winning", by the Loons definition.. why hasn't it happened so far? Does the military just suck?
Meanwhile.. year after year ticks by, and people keep saying.. "we must win".. and it just gets old after a while.. you know? Doesn't the Loon Brigade start thinking.. hey.. I said this last year.. and the year before.. and the year before.. and I'm still not the one in the military getting shot at..
What is the deal with people wanting 130,00 Americans in the Iraq meat grinder? I ask this question often, and get no response. If the situation is the same next year, will you finally decide that it's not a military situation? How about 2 years? 5 years? How about 10 years from now, if the situation is the same, will you admit that your definition of "winning" is just a huge pile of bullshit - dripping from your vapid head because you really have no real comprehension of what it means to occupy another nation?
Soooo.. let's say.. 20 years? Is that long enough? 30 years? 50 years? 100 years?
It goes without saying that if you agree that there is a limit, then all the deaths that happened between now and that limit are morally your fault.
I'm making this more complex then it really needs to be. There is no limit.. because the Loons want to "kick ass".. and that means killing as many Muslims as possible for as long as possible. They'll never desire a troop withdrawal because in their fucking insane minds.. this is the Holy War - or the "end days".. or whatever the fuck that final war that brings Jesus back is.. and they will always advocate for a much more aggressive killing of human beings.
You can spin your head into the ground trying to get a logical answer out them.. when really.. the only answer is "Islam is bad - can we just nuke them all now please?"
Advocating wars of aggression is the same as killing a human being with your own hands. It's morally the same. That's what the trials in Nuremberg were all about. It's strange to me that people don't understand that.. perhaps because once they realized they've morally killed somebody - they just go insane... or more insane anyway.
2 comments:
Damn, did you have to bring that up again? LOL
Yeah, I admit, at first, I saw things as black and white, no if's and's or but's. I've come a long way since then though. I'm not just spouting the "required rhetoric" that I used to. I realize that our freedom isn't just there for people who are supportive. That same freedom gives us the right to protest, although I do think there is a time and place for it. (a lesson Jane Fonda should have listened to)
Being against George Bush doesn't mean that you hate your country, you just happen to think he is an idiot. And every day that goes by, I tend to agree!
I don't think winning is an issue anymore. We will never win. I think at this point, we have to figure out how to get out of there without causing Iraq to be a slaughter zone. I supported the war at first. Hussein was a dictator and murderer. He needed to be disposed of just as Hitler did. We've accomplished that. We want to build up the economy. We are doing that but in the process we are getting our men and women killed. We needed a plan and our government didn't have one, or if they did, it was a shitty one! I don't have a solution because I don't think there is a perfect one. Yes, we need to bring our troops home, but doing so without endangering any more lives. I wish I had an answer but I'm not a war strategist and never claimed to be. I have heard people say just drop a bomb and blow them all up. I can only shake my head and wonder what rock they are living under.
As far as kicking ass....I have no desire to see anyone dead and I don't think of this as the "Holy war" either. Hmmm, maybe I'm not a loon after all.
Seriously though, I think that when you open your mind up, you begin to see the big picture, not just the one painted for you!
Thing is.. it's not really our responsibility to "take out the bad guys". Hitler invaded Poland and was rampaging Europe. The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and were rampaging the pacific.
Saddam Hussein hadn't attacked us.. and was quite contained by the existing sanctions. They had no WMD's. They did not pose a threat to us.
So.. do we attack Korea? Kim John Il is a "bad guy". How about Iran? Egypt? Saudi Arabia? Is it our responsibilty to spend our blood and treasure to "free" other people?
The problem with this "get out of Iraq as well as possible" idea is that it's the same thinking that got us into the war in the first place. The same people thought it would turn out great.
Every single argument about withdrawing our troops does one thing.. keeps our military there. We can't leave those that helped us, right? It would be chaos.. The "terrorists would win". Meanwhile.. how many more years go by with the same exact consequences we've seen over the last 5 years?
There's nothing you can do but take all the troops out and do it as quickly and orderly as possible. If there are Iraqis there in fear for their lives.. put them all on transport planes and fly them here.
There.. done.
I do agree that protesting by holding press conferences with the other side is probably not a good idea.. but what individuals do doesn't make a bit of difference. It's what the groups are doing that creates a movement.
There would never have been an American Revolution if the current crop of conservatives were running the show. They refuse to criticize the government and call those that do "anti-American" or worse.
It was those that had the courage to stand up to the government that freed America from the British Crown.
And it was up to the Iraqi people to free themselves from Saddam Hussein.. if that's what they really wanted.
Post a Comment