Post from rucquoi's ramblings:
cut, run, and apologize
Bad? Brilliant?
You can rate this post.
Register or login now and
tell us what you think.
this came from a friend today. i have to pass it on. mike at his best . . .
Sunday, November 26th, 2006

Friends,

Tomorrow marks the day that we will have been in Iraq longer than we were in all of World War II.

That's right. We were able to defeat all of Nazi Germany, Mussolini, and the entire Japanese empire in LESS time than it's taken the world's only superpower to secure the road from the airport to downtown Baghdad.

And we haven't even done THAT. After 1,347 days, in the same time it took us to took us to sweep across North Africa, storm the beaches of Italy, conquer the South Pacific, and liberate all of Western Europe, we cannot, after over 3 and 1/2 years, even take over a single highway and protect ourselves from a homemade device of two tin cans placed in a pothole. No wonder the cab fare from the airport into Baghdad is now running around $35,000 for the 25-minute ride. And that doesn't even include a friggin' helmet.

Is this utter failure the fault of our troops? Hardly. That's because no amount of troops or choppers or democracy shot out of the barrel of a gun is ever going to "win" the war in Iraq. It is a lost war, lost because it never had a right to be won, lost because it was started by men who have never been to war, men who hide behind others sent to fight and die.

Let's listen to what the Iraqi people are saying, according to a recent poll conducted by the University of Maryland:

** 71% of all Iraqis now want the U.S. out of Iraq.

** 61% of all Iraqis SUPPORT insurgent attacks on U.S. troops.

Yes, the vast majority of Iraqi citizens believe that our soldiers should be killed and maimed! So what the hell are we still doing there? Talk about not getting the hint.

There are many ways to liberate a country. Usually the residents of that country rise up and liberate themselves. That's how we did it. You can also do it through nonviolent, mass civil disobedience. That's how India did it. You can get the world to boycott a regime until they are so ostracized they capitulate. That's how South Africa did it. Or you can just wait them out and, sooner or later, the king's legions simply leave (sometimes just because they're too cold). That's how Canada did it.

The one way that DOESN'T work is to invade a country and tell the people, "We are here to liberate you!" -- when they have done NOTHING to liberate themselves. Where were all the suicide bombers when Saddam was oppressing them? Where were the insurgents planting bombs along the roadside as the evildoer Saddam's convoy passed them by? I guess ol' Saddam was a cruel despot -- but not cruel enough for thousands to risk their necks. "Oh no, Mike, they couldn't do that! Saddam would have had them killed!" Really? You don't think King George had any of the colonial insurgents killed? You don't think Patrick Henry or Tom Paine were afraid? That didn't stop them. When tens of thousands aren't willing to shed their own blood to remove a dictator, that should be the first clue that they aren't going to be willing participants when you decide you're going to do the liberating for them.

A country can HELP another people overthrow a tyrant (that's what the French did for us in our revolution), but after you help them, you leave. Immediately. The French didn't stay and tell us how to set up our government. They didn't say, "we're not leaving because we want your natural resources." They left us to our own devices and it took us six years before we had an election. And then we had a bloody civil war. That's what happens, and history is full of these examples. The French didn't say, "Oh, we better stay in America, otherwise they're going to kill each other over that slavery issue!"

The only way a war of liberation has a chance of succeeding is if the oppressed people being liberated have their own citizens behind them -- and a group of Washingtons, Jeffersons, Franklins, Ghandis and Mandellas leading them. Where are these beacons of liberty in Iraq? This is a joke and it's been a joke since the beginning. Yes, the joke's been on us, but with 655,000 Iraqis now dead as a result of our invasion (source: Johns Hopkins University), I guess the cruel joke is on them. At least they've been liberated, permanently.

So I don't want to hear another word about sending more troops (wake up, America, John McCain is bonkers), or "redeploying" them, or waiting four months to begin the "phase-out." There is only one solution and it is this: Leave. Now. Start tonight. Get out of there as fast as we can. As much as people of good heart and conscience don't want to believe this, as much as it kills us to accept defeat, there is nothing we can do to undo the damage we have done. What's happened has happened. If you were to drive drunk down the road and you killed a child, there would be nothing you could do to bring that child back to life. If you invade and destroy a country, plunging it into a civil war, there isn't much you can do 'til the smoke settles and blood is mopped up. Then maybe you can atone for the atrocity you have committed and help the living come back to a better life.

The Soviet Union got out of Afghanistan in 36 weeks. They did so and suffered hardly any losses as they left. They realized the mistake they had made and removed their troops. A civil war ensued. The bad guys won. Later, we overthrew the bad guys and everybody lived happily ever after. See! It all works out in the end!

The responsibility to end this war now falls upon the Democrats. Congress controls the purse strings and the Constitution says only Congress can declare war. Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi now hold the power to put an end to this madness. Failure to do so will bring the wrath of the voters. We aren't kidding around, Democrats, and if you don't believe us, just go ahead and continue this war another month. We will fight you harder than we did the Republicans. The opening page of my website has a photo of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, each made up by a collage of photos of the American soldiers who have died in Bush's War. But it is now about to become the Bush/Democratic Party War unless swift action is taken.

This is what we demand:

1. Bring the troops home now. Not six months from now. NOW. Quit looking for a way to win. We can't win. We've lost. Sometimes you lose. This is one of those times. Be brave and admit it.

2. Apologize to our soldiers and make amends. Tell them we are sorry they were used to fight a war that had NOTHING to do with our national security. We must commit to taking care of them so that they suffer as little as possible. The mentally and physically maimed must get the best care and significant financial compensation. The families of the deceased deserve the biggest apology and they must be taken care of for the rest of their lives.

3. We must atone for the atrocity we have perpetuated on the people of Iraq. There are few evils worse than waging a war based on a lie, invading another country because you want what they have buried under the ground. Now many more will die. Their blood is on our hands, regardless for whom we voted. If you pay taxes, you have contributed to the three billion dollars a week now being spent to drive Iraq into the hellhole it's become. When the civil war is over, we will have to help rebuild Iraq. We can receive no redemption until we have atoned.

In closing, there is one final thing I know. We Americans are better than what has been done in our name. A majority of us were upset and angry after 9/11 and we lost our minds. We didn't think straight and we never looked at a map. Because we are kept stupid through our pathetic education system and our lazy media, we knew nothing of history. We didn't know that WE were the ones funding and arming Saddam for many years, including those when he massacred the Kurds. He was our guy. We didn't know what a Sunni or a Shiite was, never even heard the words. Eighty percent of our young adults (according to National Geographic) were not able to find Iraq on the map. Our leaders played off our stupidity, manipulated us with lies, and scared us to death.

But at our core we are a good people. We may be slow learners, but that "Mission Accomplished" banner struck us as odd, and soon we began to ask some questions. Then we began to get smart. By this past November 7th, we got mad and tried to right our wrongs. The majority now know the truth. The majority now feel a deep sadness and guilt and a hope that somehow we can make make it all right again.

Unfortunately, we can't. So we will accept the consequences of our actions and do our best to be there should the Iraqi people ever dare to seek our help in the future. We ask for their forgiveness.

We demand the Democrats listen to us and get out of Iraq now.

Yours,

Michael Moore
Link

Reader Comments
  
Of course, it took two nukes to end WWII
By Arius Nov 27th 2006 at 1:55 pm EST
We're simply not willing (nor should we be) to use the tactics it took to win WWII. Indiscriminate carpet bombing of major cities, firebombing, and (ultimately) two atomic weapons. Our mining campaign against Japan was called, "Operation Starvation."

So, yeah, of COURSE we can't secure a road from the airport to downtown.
  
new title 1
By b vnbn hghg Nov 28th 2006 at 8:31 am EST
text it is from new titile 11111111
Re: new title 1
By b vnbn hghg Nov 28th 2006 at 8:32 am EST
this is reply of the title 11111
Re: new title 1
By b vnbn hghg Nov 28th 2006 at 8:33 am EST
2nd reply of the new title one
Re: new title 1
By b vnbn hghg Nov 28th 2006 at 8:34 am EST
reply of the second reply one
  
Comment Title:
By b vnbn hghg Nov 28th 2006 at 8:48 am EST
Comment Text:
Re: Comment Title:
By b vnbn hghg Nov 28th 2006 at 9:02 am EST
r11111
Re: Comment Title:1111111
By b vnbn hghg Nov 28th 2006 at 9:15 am EST
111111111111111111111111
  
What are the consequences? World War III?
By Steph Nov 28th 2006 at 10:00 am EST
"So we will accept the consequences of our actions..." Do you have a clue of the potential consequences of withdrawing from Iraq? What are the current hot spots either having obtained a nuclear devise or close. How many of these countries would love to drop one on an American city or an ally of ours? The threat that we would clean their clocks is what keeps most of the strongmen from doing something stupid. Ok, let’s look at the present international attitude of America's will to fight. Many believe that America fights only when there is no risk. We are demanding the withdrawal of American forces in Iraq because we are unwilling to pay the price of their freedom. That seems right too me. But that is not what the nuts out here in the region believe. They believe America is full of hot air. With the America is full of Hot Air mentality. What is going to keep the nuts from attacking America or her interest? What happens if they threaten to place a nuclear device in New York, San Francisco (Take your Pick). They tell us do what we say or we explode the device? Perception and or the lack of confidence places America at risk. If You demand and you are making the same mistake Bush made going into Iraq. You have to know the risk before you take action.
*
You will accept the consequences. What are the consequences?
Re: What are the consequences? World War III?
By D. Tree Nov 28th 2006 at 3:08 pm EST
"We are demanding the withdrawal of American forces in Iraq because we are unwilling to pay the price of their freedom."

No. We are demanding withdrawal because this war was wrong from the START, and our troops have done the best they can do despite the circumstances.

Don't give our troops a piece of junk and expect them to make a limo out of it. And don't go around thinking that "If we just keep trying, we'll eventually make a limo out of this pile of junk."

Another thing I am sick and tired of hearing is people worrying so much about "how we are perceived if we withdraw."

C'mon, this is not a time to let your PRIDE cloud your decisions! I'll tell you exactly how the world will view a withdrawal: as a heckuva better decision than the invasion!!
  
655,000 Iraqis Die From War
By Grassroots Democrat Bruce Nov 30th 2006 at 11:32 pm EST
Michael Moore mentioned some important statistics. Respected sources agree with the 655,000 figure. Question it? Here's some evidence. The Lancet reported the 655,000 casualty figure in 10/06: Link.
CNN asked the president about it at a news conference. Watch the video: Link. Time to start withdrawing from Iraq, and lets not be slow about it.