Saturday, September 13, 2008

Reflections on the War


We invaded Iraq because Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was about to lob them nine thousand miles at us ...

Oh, wait, no, he didn't. But since we said he did, even though we didn't have any real evidence, that makes it all right. Given the Bush Doctrine and all. Got Colin Powell to carry the water for them, and what a shame that was -- great for his reputation, flashing pictures of a truck at the U.N.

Bring us evidence of WMD's, the administration told the CIA. Otherwise, we don't want to hear from you.

We invaded Iraq because Osama bin Laden, the mastermind who sent suicidal attackers who destroyed the twin towers, flew a plane into the Pentagon and into a field in Pennsylvania, was hiding out there.

Um, well, no, he was actually in Afghanistan, then moved to a nice cave in Pakistan. In case anybody hasn't noticed, we haven't gotten him yet, and the loons in Afghanistan are coming back out of of the sand. In places where people will argue to the death over minor religious events that happened more than a thousand years past, they don't shrug off military invasions and let bygones by bygones. The British learned the hard way, so did the Russians, and now it's our turn in the barrel. Winning battles is not winning a war, and against enemies who won't ever give up and will curse you with their dying breath until the ends of eternity, winning the peace doesn't work. Hasn't happened in the Middle East so far I can tell.

Okay, okay, we invaded Iraq because the planes that killed thousand of Americans were hijacked by Iraqi fanatics --

Ah, gee, I forgot, those planes were hijacked by Saudis. Throw in an odd Egyptian, a Lebanese, one from the UAR, but Saudis, nary an Iraqi among 'em. But what does it matter, they are all ragheads, hey?

All right, then, we invaded Iraq because the country was crawling with al-Qaeda cells --

Nope. Hussein didn't like those guys. Ones that are there showed up after we did, because we gave them convenient targets. More Americans have been killed since the "victory" than were killed during the stand-up battles. Thousands killed, tens of thousands wounded, and that doesn't even count the hundreds of thousands of locals, who are still being offed at five hundred a month or so. Well, yeah, but they're just ragheads ...

As for the surge working? If you fill the streets with armed soldiers who shoot anything that moves, you can temporarily keep the lid on occupation force casualties. If you leave them there forever, you turn into Saddam Hussein's secret police, save that the locals set more IEDs because they hate you even more than they did him.

Okay, okay, okay! We did it because the Iraqis were yearning to be free and democratic ...

Really? As evidenced by what? They haven't been able to get their puppet government to decide what shape the table that the Sunni, Shiites, and Kurds won't sit at together should be. Go look up the word "tribal." Iraq needs to be three countries. At least.

Because Saddam was the worst dictator in the world ... ?

Not even close: Kim Jong-il. But he's got a big honkin' army -- and no petroleum.

We invaded Iraq because of the Wolfowitz Doctrine, which, in a nutshell, says we need to have a Middle Eastern country that produces a shitload of oil in our pocket. And because George W. Bush needed something to do, since he wasn't doing anything else. And we got to see our country start a war, engage in torture, then try to justify it, and watch a boatload of our civil rights go down the tubes at home. Spying, no-fly lists, electronic eavesdropping, what book you checked out of the library last week in their files.

McCain wants to stay the course to victory. Palin thinks Iraq is a holy war and God is on our side. They think they can destroy global terrorism with a gun. They don't know that we have sown dragon's teeth, and that every fanatic we cut down produces five more.

Me, I think Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam.

6 comments:

Dave said...

Amen.

Remember the Chinese curse?

"May you live in interesting times"

These will be interesting times in the coming years of our nation.

Steve Perry said...

Not that I'm an age-ist, being on the downslope of life myself, but I believe McCain wants to build a bridge, back to his heyday, not to the future.

He can still remember what he was doing when the big war started, long before I was born. You know, when the Johnny Rebs fired on Fort Sumter ... ?

Anonymous said...

If we'd only listened to poor, despised Jimmy Carter thirty years ago we could have been close to energy independence. No Bush Doctrine. No Wolfowitz Doctrine. No wars to grab the gas in Afghanistan or the oil in Iraq.

But all Americans did was make fun of him wearing a sweater.

Don Weiss said...

Just wanted to ask - where were/are Congress and Senate while all this is going on? And the third branch as well (Executive, Legislative and Judicial)? Where are the checks and balances? It is not one man that got us into this - seems it is our whole system - both sides of the political debate (which here in America seems the only voices heard - you are either a Dem or Rep). To be honest, I loathe both "choices" - finding their respective "agendas" quite frightening. At least from what has been presented in our media.

Steve Perry said...

Oh, congress and the courts are not blameless here. Plenty enough stupid and cowardly decisions to go around.

The Supreme Court gave Bush Florida after the last election, and a lot of the D's have been spineless when it came time to stand up and be counted.

But most of it lies with the R's this cycle, because they were the party in power. It wasn't until the '06 elections that the D's made a run, and they still don't have the numbers to get past a veto. Might, after the next election.

Bill was a hound, but he left the country with money in the bank and without a shooting war.

In eight years, the only Mission Accomplished Bush and company can claim is that banner on the ship, which turned out to be wrong, wrong, and wrong.

Ed said...

Let's pay for "people" not to do bad things in Iraq and Afganistan. I know we have done that before. I'm suprised we haven't done that here. If so we might cut the people and funds going to current and new prisons and other areas - talk about an industry. I could probably make a bundle with that policy - oops. Whatever happened to not paying terrorists?

When/if we leave Iraq and Afganistan - does Afganistan have oil - unless there is a strong and people first populous and government it is just back to warlordsareus and more killings - and smart people leaving or trying to leave (the same minds that could probably help a society in many ways) - dead or leaving. Many years ago I had a course by a teacher from Afganistan and he left for many reasons - education a big one and being able to do some good with it and not be killed because someone took offense one day of something he did, taught, said or beleived. I don't know but I wonder if he went back to Afganistan to help change things - He seemed the sort - if he thought there was a chance - it seems a good number of people did. I wonder if they are still alive or will be after we/us leave. Education ideas, concepts, technology - can it really hurt that much. To some that are just iron fist rulers and they think it undermines there rule and they are set in arcaic thoughts/practices - yep. It works for the populous that are doing the killing and not being killed/maimed/beaten but when you think you are going to heaven for crap like that it doesnt matter. Unless they change a fundemental extremist enviroment when dealing with one another or others of not like mind it will be back to more of that. And who wants to be told to change - not many. I guess you have to want to or be able to. Maybe it is the heat????

When we leave those places, I am sure we/UN Nations will go to Africa and help the millions there more - late for the millions dead. Boy if they would just find oil - and condoms. Talk about leaders that don't need to be leading. A bunch of great caring people and some resources have gone there to try and help but it just doesn't seem enough -specially since the warlords there take a ton of it. Hey - lots of heat there too, hmm.

I would rather have seen the war funds go to social, infrastructure, energy research - implimentation, small business (mostly here and some abroad)and savings here (I hope to do that someday myself) and to other non killing people - that don't need killing or need to be dead - things. Gee you think.

I like Jimmy. He sure did have some things right the technology just wasn't up to speed yet and he saw that and wanted to do something about it. Since his time in office he sure has tried to help his fellow man more than many politicians or others have or probably will. Those helicopters going down wasn't his fault. Yes he gave the order. I wish it would have worked.