Political Thinking
About the Author
I would like to have my ideas heard in The Democratic Party and develop a network of like-minded individuals
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Friday a lack of democracy, a "freedom deficit" is the core problem in the Middle East. (Link
I’m almost speechless, but I’m going to try to tackle this anyways.
Americans aren’t fat, they suffer from “calorie indulgence”
In war we don’t kill children we “preemptively dispatch future enemies.”
The Bush administration isn’t stupid, it suffers from a horrible medical condition called “competence deficiency” which is sort of like Iron deficiency. Maybe they make a supplement for this.
I’ll be right back I have go “evacuate my excretory system”
I think this administration suffers from a “reality deficit.” Seriously, Secretary Rice is one of the few people in this administration who isn’t a complete retard, but why can’t she just admit what the real problem is? The problem is not a “freedom deficit” Why can’t they just say: “There are three different factions fighting for power while an occupying force tries to control a country of 50 million people while fighting at least two of the three factions as well as Al Queda fighters.”
That is very different from a “freedom deficit” isn’t it? If I had to say it in a few words I think “shit-storm of violence and religious friction” would be a bit more accurate. Of if I wanted to use a euphemism I could call it a “product of excretory evacuation of people not seeing eye to eye on Islamic principles” Yeah, that sounds nice. I think I’ll send in my resume so they can make me White House Press Secretary.
I’m almost speechless, but I’m going to try to tackle this anyways.
Americans aren’t fat, they suffer from “calorie indulgence”
In war we don’t kill children we “preemptively dispatch future enemies.”
The Bush administration isn’t stupid, it suffers from a horrible medical condition called “competence deficiency” which is sort of like Iron deficiency. Maybe they make a supplement for this.
I’ll be right back I have go “evacuate my excretory system”
I think this administration suffers from a “reality deficit.” Seriously, Secretary Rice is one of the few people in this administration who isn’t a complete retard, but why can’t she just admit what the real problem is? The problem is not a “freedom deficit” Why can’t they just say: “There are three different factions fighting for power while an occupying force tries to control a country of 50 million people while fighting at least two of the three factions as well as Al Queda fighters.”
That is very different from a “freedom deficit” isn’t it? If I had to say it in a few words I think “shit-storm of violence and religious friction” would be a bit more accurate. Of if I wanted to use a euphemism I could call it a “product of excretory evacuation of people not seeing eye to eye on Islamic principles” Yeah, that sounds nice. I think I’ll send in my resume so they can make me White House Press Secretary.
Get ready for the truth that is. I know there are still those out there who continue to support The President and refuse to believe he’s a criminal. You’re about to get a dose of reality. In a short time, Congress will do their job and investigate the events leading up to this war. Oversight is a duty of congress but they have chosen to neglect this duty. The 109th congress will go down in history as one of the most corrupt, incompetent, unpatriotic legislative bodies this country has ever seen. They have failed the people by openly neglecting their duty and letting a President wreak havoc on our system. The wrath of the people was obvious in the midterm elections.
They will will find undeniably, that President Bush criminally lied to Congress (which is an impeachable offense) and mislead The American people with such vigor and lack of integrity, that anyone who denies he did so will be considered delusional. This is a congress, Democrats and Republicans alike, who supported a war without even asking basic questions such as “where is this evidence?” “can we see it to make sure it’s credible?” and “what’s the plan?” All the while, the CIA was telling The Bush Administration certain pieces of their case were no better than rumors. Saddam Hussein trying to buy Uranium from Niger, for instance, was debunked as non-credible information. The President, knowing this, used this shaky evidence to convince The American people and Congress to grant him the power to wage war. Colin Powel, a man respected by both parties left in shame, knowing that he took part in a criminal misinformation campaign.
Just the other day, the 3000th US troop was killed in action. This pales in comparison to the of suffering we’ve unleashed on The Iraqi people. Estimates go anywhere from 30,000 to 654,965. Unless you’re not to good with numbers, any estimate is many times more than the number killed in 9/11. Most of the people killed were civilians. Women, children, grandmothers, fathers, mothers.
It was told to Americans the entire war and occupation would be a bargain at $2 Billion. We’re currently spending $6.4 billion A MONTH! As of now, $349 billion has been spent at the expense of the next generation, since it is not being paid for by the generation of Americans who supported this war. This would be like racking up millions of dollars of debt on credit cards and leaving it to your children or grandchildren to pay off. Estimates say that by the time this war is done, we’ll have spent anywhere from 1 to 2 Trillion Dollars. So you see, $2 billion for the entire thing is not just a bad estimate. Spending 4 billion instead of 2 would be a “bad estimate.” This was a flat out lie. We’ve spent 174.5 times the original estimate of $2 billion. Take this scenario. You pull up to a gas station and fill up your 20 gallon tank for $45 at $2.25 a gallon. When you receive your credit card statement the charge reads $7852.50, 174.5 times more than you thought you were paying. Of course, you call the gas station as they obviously made a mistake. But oh no, they tell you their posted prices are just estimates. You just failed to read the small print. $2.25 a gallon is just a slight “misestimate” of the true market price and you will have to pay the new amount. Tough shit buddy, now would you like to put your bill on layaway? Or you could have the bill, plus interest, billed to your children in 20 years. This war is nothing less than a criminal looting of the next generation of Americans. You would not accept this kind of price gouging at a retail outlet, so why do people accept it from their government?
The truth is on it's way. Even since The Iraq Studies Group Report came out, there are still people who were prideful enough continue to delude themselves that America is in the right. It’s now blatantly obvious this war was i’ll-fated from the start and in the next few months, all the evidence will point to this conclusion. When our congress finally fulfills their duty to our constitutional theory of checks and balances, it will be obvious to anyone who cares about their country that America is in trouble in more ways than just this war. We have an administration that has committed criminal acts of terrorism far worse than anything Osama Bin Laden has ever done. Congress let this happen without even batting an eye because a single organization was asleep at the wheel. That organization was not The Congress, The Republican or Democratic party, or The Bush Administration. That group of people is the American public and they are ultimately who is to blame. Unconciousonably, there are still those who support this war and this President. These people are more dangerous to the future of America than any terrorist in the world. The future of our country relies on how history will judge these last six years. If war criminals are allowed to fill the positions of our government with the support of the citizens, America as a beacon of light and hope to the world will be forever gone.
They will will find undeniably, that President Bush criminally lied to Congress (which is an impeachable offense) and mislead The American people with such vigor and lack of integrity, that anyone who denies he did so will be considered delusional. This is a congress, Democrats and Republicans alike, who supported a war without even asking basic questions such as “where is this evidence?” “can we see it to make sure it’s credible?” and “what’s the plan?” All the while, the CIA was telling The Bush Administration certain pieces of their case were no better than rumors. Saddam Hussein trying to buy Uranium from Niger, for instance, was debunked as non-credible information. The President, knowing this, used this shaky evidence to convince The American people and Congress to grant him the power to wage war. Colin Powel, a man respected by both parties left in shame, knowing that he took part in a criminal misinformation campaign.
Just the other day, the 3000th US troop was killed in action. This pales in comparison to the of suffering we’ve unleashed on The Iraqi people. Estimates go anywhere from 30,000 to 654,965. Unless you’re not to good with numbers, any estimate is many times more than the number killed in 9/11. Most of the people killed were civilians. Women, children, grandmothers, fathers, mothers.
It was told to Americans the entire war and occupation would be a bargain at $2 Billion. We’re currently spending $6.4 billion A MONTH! As of now, $349 billion has been spent at the expense of the next generation, since it is not being paid for by the generation of Americans who supported this war. This would be like racking up millions of dollars of debt on credit cards and leaving it to your children or grandchildren to pay off. Estimates say that by the time this war is done, we’ll have spent anywhere from 1 to 2 Trillion Dollars. So you see, $2 billion for the entire thing is not just a bad estimate. Spending 4 billion instead of 2 would be a “bad estimate.” This was a flat out lie. We’ve spent 174.5 times the original estimate of $2 billion. Take this scenario. You pull up to a gas station and fill up your 20 gallon tank for $45 at $2.25 a gallon. When you receive your credit card statement the charge reads $7852.50, 174.5 times more than you thought you were paying. Of course, you call the gas station as they obviously made a mistake. But oh no, they tell you their posted prices are just estimates. You just failed to read the small print. $2.25 a gallon is just a slight “misestimate” of the true market price and you will have to pay the new amount. Tough shit buddy, now would you like to put your bill on layaway? Or you could have the bill, plus interest, billed to your children in 20 years. This war is nothing less than a criminal looting of the next generation of Americans. You would not accept this kind of price gouging at a retail outlet, so why do people accept it from their government?
The truth is on it's way. Even since The Iraq Studies Group Report came out, there are still people who were prideful enough continue to delude themselves that America is in the right. It’s now blatantly obvious this war was i’ll-fated from the start and in the next few months, all the evidence will point to this conclusion. When our congress finally fulfills their duty to our constitutional theory of checks and balances, it will be obvious to anyone who cares about their country that America is in trouble in more ways than just this war. We have an administration that has committed criminal acts of terrorism far worse than anything Osama Bin Laden has ever done. Congress let this happen without even batting an eye because a single organization was asleep at the wheel. That organization was not The Congress, The Republican or Democratic party, or The Bush Administration. That group of people is the American public and they are ultimately who is to blame. Unconciousonably, there are still those who support this war and this President. These people are more dangerous to the future of America than any terrorist in the world. The future of our country relies on how history will judge these last six years. If war criminals are allowed to fill the positions of our government with the support of the citizens, America as a beacon of light and hope to the world will be forever gone.
(based the report from 9/27/006 that can be found at Link
After all, it is their country. In recent public opinion polls of Iraqis, 71% would like their government to ask The United States to get out. The wishes of The Iraqi people should be the only factor in deciding what to do with their country. Even more telling, 78% of the Iraqi people say we’re provoking more conflict compared to 21% who think we’re a stabilizing force. Whether they’re right or wrong doesn’t matter. We should for once respect their wishes. After all, we held elections where they picked leaders. In a democracy, leaders should represent the people. The people are telling their government to ask us to leave. Why has the Iraqi government not done this yet? Are they afraid to speak out to The United States? I suppose their is little indication our Commander In Chief will listen considering he’s sending more troops in when 12% of Americans think that’s a good idea.
We do not own Iraq and are supposed to be there as liberators, not occupiers. Sending in more troops is against Iraqi and US public opinion. The Bush Administration is now thumbing their nose at their own people, and the people whose country they’ve invaded on false pretext. When the war started, they insulted our European allies for going against the war, and now they are insulting The American public. It is clear they will do whatever they want. This is why Democrats must take the reigns of this war. The President cannot just do whatever he feels like. Right now he is acting like a child playing with plastic army men. He must view our military as a giant game set up for his personal amusement.
6 in 10 Iraqis now favor attacking American troops. In January of last year, only 47% of Iraqis supported attacking American troops. We are seen as an occupying force that needs to be eradicated. This support for the insurgency is not related to support for Al Queda, which has always been very low. Even more interestingly, the polls says if we were to commit to withdraw our troops, half of those (3 out of 10 Iraqis) would no longer support attacking Americans. So if our troops stay, 6 out of 10 Iraqis would want them dead. What do think it will do to public opinion if we send in 20,000 more troops? Chances are this will inspire more people to fight us. More troops almost certainly means more enemies, and more death to Iraqis and U.S. troops.
The citizens of America and Iraq seem to have no control. Officials for both countries are dragging on a war that no majority supports. This is a war that Americans and Iraqi’s can see is doing more bad than good. It is now up to our Congress to be the voice of reason to counteract the arrogance and belligerence of our Commander in Chief. If this war continues on the path it has, The Iraqi people will believe even more firmly that America intends to build permanent military bases in Iraq, a perception that is already held by 77% of Iraqis. The report I’m reading suggests that this perception is highly correlated with support for attacks on U.S. forces. Whether or not this is our plan, the longer we stay and the more troops we put on the ground, the more Iraqis there will be who will want to kill us and drive us out of their country. If President Bush succeeds in his plan to send in more troops, it will anger everyone.
Iraqi’s are anxious to rebuild their country and strengthen their government. This will not happen while we are still their. We are nothing more than a distraction and we are preventing the country from moving on after decades of war under a ruthless dictator. Saddam Hussein is now dead and that entire period in the history of Iraq is over. Iraqis are optimistic about the future of their government and country and will take control of their own destiny only when we remove the biggest roadblock to their peace; The American Military.
After all, it is their country. In recent public opinion polls of Iraqis, 71% would like their government to ask The United States to get out. The wishes of The Iraqi people should be the only factor in deciding what to do with their country. Even more telling, 78% of the Iraqi people say we’re provoking more conflict compared to 21% who think we’re a stabilizing force. Whether they’re right or wrong doesn’t matter. We should for once respect their wishes. After all, we held elections where they picked leaders. In a democracy, leaders should represent the people. The people are telling their government to ask us to leave. Why has the Iraqi government not done this yet? Are they afraid to speak out to The United States? I suppose their is little indication our Commander In Chief will listen considering he’s sending more troops in when 12% of Americans think that’s a good idea.
We do not own Iraq and are supposed to be there as liberators, not occupiers. Sending in more troops is against Iraqi and US public opinion. The Bush Administration is now thumbing their nose at their own people, and the people whose country they’ve invaded on false pretext. When the war started, they insulted our European allies for going against the war, and now they are insulting The American public. It is clear they will do whatever they want. This is why Democrats must take the reigns of this war. The President cannot just do whatever he feels like. Right now he is acting like a child playing with plastic army men. He must view our military as a giant game set up for his personal amusement.
6 in 10 Iraqis now favor attacking American troops. In January of last year, only 47% of Iraqis supported attacking American troops. We are seen as an occupying force that needs to be eradicated. This support for the insurgency is not related to support for Al Queda, which has always been very low. Even more interestingly, the polls says if we were to commit to withdraw our troops, half of those (3 out of 10 Iraqis) would no longer support attacking Americans. So if our troops stay, 6 out of 10 Iraqis would want them dead. What do think it will do to public opinion if we send in 20,000 more troops? Chances are this will inspire more people to fight us. More troops almost certainly means more enemies, and more death to Iraqis and U.S. troops.
The citizens of America and Iraq seem to have no control. Officials for both countries are dragging on a war that no majority supports. This is a war that Americans and Iraqi’s can see is doing more bad than good. It is now up to our Congress to be the voice of reason to counteract the arrogance and belligerence of our Commander in Chief. If this war continues on the path it has, The Iraqi people will believe even more firmly that America intends to build permanent military bases in Iraq, a perception that is already held by 77% of Iraqis. The report I’m reading suggests that this perception is highly correlated with support for attacks on U.S. forces. Whether or not this is our plan, the longer we stay and the more troops we put on the ground, the more Iraqis there will be who will want to kill us and drive us out of their country. If President Bush succeeds in his plan to send in more troops, it will anger everyone.
Iraqi’s are anxious to rebuild their country and strengthen their government. This will not happen while we are still their. We are nothing more than a distraction and we are preventing the country from moving on after decades of war under a ruthless dictator. Saddam Hussein is now dead and that entire period in the history of Iraq is over. Iraqis are optimistic about the future of their government and country and will take control of their own destiny only when we remove the biggest roadblock to their peace; The American Military.
Progressive: 1.) Happening or developing gradually in stages; proceeding step by step.
As opposed to a knee-jerk reaction that's based more on gut than a rational progression of ideas followed by actions. In other words, thinking before you do something. This is not just preferable, but absolutely essential for an effective leader. Here's an example: Starting a war with a muslim nation of 50 million with little more of a plan than "shock and awe" is not progressive thinking. This is action followed by thinking. Literally shooting first and asking questions later. I call this the "John Wayne" theory of foreign policy.
Progressive: 2.) -(of a group, person, or idea) favoring of implementing social reform, or new liberal ideas.
-Favoring or promoting change or innovation
This is the opposite of conservative, which tries to cling to the aspirations and ideas of the past and resist change and innovation. As for example, a change in our energy policy. Self policing and voluntary compliance to pollution standards by energy companies is not PROGRESSIVE in solving our pollution problem or addiction to fossil fuels, but rather is REGRESSIVE, and makes these problems worse. The Bush administration is undoing progress we've made in the past 30 years. The Kyoto Treaty is an example of the global community pursuing a PROGRESSIVE solution to global warming. Analyzing a problem and implementing solutions is a logical way to plan for the future. Clinging to the past and lining the pockets of billionaires in the energy industry works against the problem at hand.
Progressive: 3.) Relating or denoting a style of rock music popular esp. in the 1980's and characterized by classical influences, the use of keyboard instruments, and lengthy compositions.
As opposed to REGRESSIVE music which features people who have little talent but lots of sex appeal, the use of drum machines, or following trends instead of embracing creativity.
Although I am currently unaware of Dennis Kucinich's musical tastes, I do know that he fits the other definitions of a progressive quite well. The political climate of this nation tends to act like a pendulum. America "elected" an extreme right-wing President, so it is conceivable a less extreme far-left candidate like Kucinich could win. He's certainly an underdog, but so was Bush in 2000. Americans are starting to pursue progressive ways of life such as alternative energy, organic foods, and independent media. It's only a matter of time that so called centrist candidates begin to adopt the progressive principles people like Kucinich already advocate. His biggest obstacle may be that he's so far ahead of the curve, mainstream America may not have caught up with him yet. It's my belief that in five to ten years progressive liberals will be representing mainstream America. I hope America surprises me and catches up sooner rather than later.
As opposed to a knee-jerk reaction that's based more on gut than a rational progression of ideas followed by actions. In other words, thinking before you do something. This is not just preferable, but absolutely essential for an effective leader. Here's an example: Starting a war with a muslim nation of 50 million with little more of a plan than "shock and awe" is not progressive thinking. This is action followed by thinking. Literally shooting first and asking questions later. I call this the "John Wayne" theory of foreign policy.
Progressive: 2.) -(of a group, person, or idea) favoring of implementing social reform, or new liberal ideas.
-Favoring or promoting change or innovation
This is the opposite of conservative, which tries to cling to the aspirations and ideas of the past and resist change and innovation. As for example, a change in our energy policy. Self policing and voluntary compliance to pollution standards by energy companies is not PROGRESSIVE in solving our pollution problem or addiction to fossil fuels, but rather is REGRESSIVE, and makes these problems worse. The Bush administration is undoing progress we've made in the past 30 years. The Kyoto Treaty is an example of the global community pursuing a PROGRESSIVE solution to global warming. Analyzing a problem and implementing solutions is a logical way to plan for the future. Clinging to the past and lining the pockets of billionaires in the energy industry works against the problem at hand.
Progressive: 3.) Relating or denoting a style of rock music popular esp. in the 1980's and characterized by classical influences, the use of keyboard instruments, and lengthy compositions.
As opposed to REGRESSIVE music which features people who have little talent but lots of sex appeal, the use of drum machines, or following trends instead of embracing creativity.
Although I am currently unaware of Dennis Kucinich's musical tastes, I do know that he fits the other definitions of a progressive quite well. The political climate of this nation tends to act like a pendulum. America "elected" an extreme right-wing President, so it is conceivable a less extreme far-left candidate like Kucinich could win. He's certainly an underdog, but so was Bush in 2000. Americans are starting to pursue progressive ways of life such as alternative energy, organic foods, and independent media. It's only a matter of time that so called centrist candidates begin to adopt the progressive principles people like Kucinich already advocate. His biggest obstacle may be that he's so far ahead of the curve, mainstream America may not have caught up with him yet. It's my belief that in five to ten years progressive liberals will be representing mainstream America. I hope America surprises me and catches up sooner rather than later.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Friday a lack of democracy - a "freedom deficit" - is the core problem in the Middle East. (Link
I'm almost speechless, but I'm going to try to tackle this anyways.
Americans aren't fat, they suffer from "calorie indulgence"
In war we don't kill children we "preemptively dispatch future enemies."
The Bush administration isn't stupid, it suffers from a horrible medical condition called "competence deficiency" which is sort of like Iron deficiency. Maybe they make a supplement for this.
I"ll be right back I have go "evacuate my excretory system"
I think this administration suffers from a "reality deficit." Seriously, Secretary Rice is one of the few people in this administration who isn't a complete retard, but why can't she just admit what the real problem is? The problem is not a "freedom deficit." Why can't they just say: "There are three different factions fighting for power while an occupying force tries to control a country of 50 million people while fighting at least two of the three factions as well as Al Queda fighters."
That is very different from a "freedom deficit" isn't it? If I had to say it in a few words I think "shit-storm of violence and religious friction" would be a bit more accurate. Of if I wanted to use a euphemism I could call it a "product of excretory evacuation of people not seeing eye to eye on Islamic principles" Yeah, that sounds nice. I think I'll send in my resume so they can make me White House Press Secretary.
I'm almost speechless, but I'm going to try to tackle this anyways.
Americans aren't fat, they suffer from "calorie indulgence"
In war we don't kill children we "preemptively dispatch future enemies."
The Bush administration isn't stupid, it suffers from a horrible medical condition called "competence deficiency" which is sort of like Iron deficiency. Maybe they make a supplement for this.
I"ll be right back I have go "evacuate my excretory system"
I think this administration suffers from a "reality deficit." Seriously, Secretary Rice is one of the few people in this administration who isn't a complete retard, but why can't she just admit what the real problem is? The problem is not a "freedom deficit." Why can't they just say: "There are three different factions fighting for power while an occupying force tries to control a country of 50 million people while fighting at least two of the three factions as well as Al Queda fighters."
That is very different from a "freedom deficit" isn't it? If I had to say it in a few words I think "shit-storm of violence and religious friction" would be a bit more accurate. Of if I wanted to use a euphemism I could call it a "product of excretory evacuation of people not seeing eye to eye on Islamic principles" Yeah, that sounds nice. I think I'll send in my resume so they can make me White House Press Secretary.
"The situation in Iraq is grave and deteriorating. There is no path that can guarantee success, but the prospects can be improved."
...reads the first two sentences of the Iraq Studies Group report released on 12/6/06. This rare honest and frank feedback from our government is the first from a bipartisan commission and proves that the Bush administration has been flat out, criminally lying to The American people about the situation in Iraq. This isn't a surprise to most people, but it is to the many Americans who still trust our failing President. No mistake can now be made that this president is unfit for office. Anything who now thinks George W. Bush is doing a good job as president is unquestionably an idiot. Anyone who thinks he has not broke the law is expressing a falsehood, not an opinion.
"We do not recommend a stay-the course-solution" says James Baker, former Secretary of State and member of the group. Even ever obstinate Rumsy indicated a change a direction is needed right before he was let go. Ah yes, it all comes crumbling down.
I ask those who supported this war and this president. How does it feel to know you supported a senseless killing spree and a failed Presidency? Because it certainly feels like shit to be right. To tell you the truth I would love nothing better if I were now admitting I was wrong from the start about this war. If Iraq was now a beacon of democracy in the middle east, I would eat my pride between two buns with a side of freedom fries and enjoy every bite. But for me, that possibility was never even in the cards. Why? Because I know a little bit about history, particularly the history of trying to force democracy on nations. Anyone who knows even a little about the history of democracy in the world would know that democratizing states are the biggest cause of violence in the world today. And guess which country has tried to force democracy on the most nations who weren't ready for it. I'll give you a hint, it's not France!
The same thing happened in Iraq that happened in Afghanistan, South America, Korea and Vietnam. We went in with our big guns and said "democratize or we'll kill you!" Why do we continue to think this works when it almost never has? How many people can we kill trying to "protect" them from their own government? What's the last country we successfully helped to become a democracy? The only one I can think of is The USSR, and that's the only one where there was no military action. We waited them out instead of killing them and now they're an ally.
"We do not recommend a stay-the-course solution." former Secretary of State James Baker said. Critics of the war were right on the mark before the war even started. But unfortunately the American public trusted the President and supported a sloppily planned, incompetently executed military campaign into one of the few stabilizing forces in the middle east. Why do you think Bush One didn't get Saddam after the first Iraq war? Because his advisers told him that having Saddam Hussein in power was more good for America and it's interests than bad. Critics of the new Iraq war said that a preemptive war would lead to thousands of deaths, and could destabilize the entire middle east.
It take very little pride in being right because for me it was a no-brainer. I don't mean to belittle the intellect of the majority of American who supported this ill conceived campaign, but I do require they at least admit they were wrong. I hope that The American public learns from this what they obviously didn't learn from Vietnam. Democracy can be a great force of good in a country, but they must find it themselves and only when they're ready. We had to fight for our own right to govern ourselves and other countries should have to do the same. Civil war is always ugly, but sometimes it's better that wars be fought by people trying to help themselves. Trying to save people from themselves only breeds resentment and encourages hate for The United States. There will now be a big civil war in Iraq and many people will choose to die for their country. We should offer amnesty to any Iraqi who wishes to get the hell out, and wish luck to those who wish to fight the good fight for the future of their country. It's what we had to do and it's only through our internal struggles that we became a strong democracy.
...reads the first two sentences of the Iraq Studies Group report released on 12/6/06. This rare honest and frank feedback from our government is the first from a bipartisan commission and proves that the Bush administration has been flat out, criminally lying to The American people about the situation in Iraq. This isn't a surprise to most people, but it is to the many Americans who still trust our failing President. No mistake can now be made that this president is unfit for office. Anything who now thinks George W. Bush is doing a good job as president is unquestionably an idiot. Anyone who thinks he has not broke the law is expressing a falsehood, not an opinion.
"We do not recommend a stay-the course-solution" says James Baker, former Secretary of State and member of the group. Even ever obstinate Rumsy indicated a change a direction is needed right before he was let go. Ah yes, it all comes crumbling down.
I ask those who supported this war and this president. How does it feel to know you supported a senseless killing spree and a failed Presidency? Because it certainly feels like shit to be right. To tell you the truth I would love nothing better if I were now admitting I was wrong from the start about this war. If Iraq was now a beacon of democracy in the middle east, I would eat my pride between two buns with a side of freedom fries and enjoy every bite. But for me, that possibility was never even in the cards. Why? Because I know a little bit about history, particularly the history of trying to force democracy on nations. Anyone who knows even a little about the history of democracy in the world would know that democratizing states are the biggest cause of violence in the world today. And guess which country has tried to force democracy on the most nations who weren't ready for it. I'll give you a hint, it's not France!
The same thing happened in Iraq that happened in Afghanistan, South America, Korea and Vietnam. We went in with our big guns and said "democratize or we'll kill you!" Why do we continue to think this works when it almost never has? How many people can we kill trying to "protect" them from their own government? What's the last country we successfully helped to become a democracy? The only one I can think of is The USSR, and that's the only one where there was no military action. We waited them out instead of killing them and now they're an ally.
"We do not recommend a stay-the-course solution." former Secretary of State James Baker said. Critics of the war were right on the mark before the war even started. But unfortunately the American public trusted the President and supported a sloppily planned, incompetently executed military campaign into one of the few stabilizing forces in the middle east. Why do you think Bush One didn't get Saddam after the first Iraq war? Because his advisers told him that having Saddam Hussein in power was more good for America and it's interests than bad. Critics of the new Iraq war said that a preemptive war would lead to thousands of deaths, and could destabilize the entire middle east.
It take very little pride in being right because for me it was a no-brainer. I don't mean to belittle the intellect of the majority of American who supported this ill conceived campaign, but I do require they at least admit they were wrong. I hope that The American public learns from this what they obviously didn't learn from Vietnam. Democracy can be a great force of good in a country, but they must find it themselves and only when they're ready. We had to fight for our own right to govern ourselves and other countries should have to do the same. Civil war is always ugly, but sometimes it's better that wars be fought by people trying to help themselves. Trying to save people from themselves only breeds resentment and encourages hate for The United States. There will now be a big civil war in Iraq and many people will choose to die for their country. We should offer amnesty to any Iraqi who wishes to get the hell out, and wish luck to those who wish to fight the good fight for the future of their country. It's what we had to do and it's only through our internal struggles that we became a strong democracy.
Posts By Month
Posts
