I think the war was a necessity and I do not look at it as a failure. I think things could have been completed more efficiently though. I am not sure what this troop withdrawal will mean for
Randy Williams
2-27-09
Friday, February 27, 2009
Obama: US combat in Iraq to end
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Randy, I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say that you think it was a "necessity." If you're referring to terrorist attacks, that your argument is invalid. If you're referring to the fact that Saddam Hussain was a dictator, that fact would be correct, but what is your point? Both of the Bush's were, by far, the most manipulative and misleading "leaders" of my lifetime.
Here are some things I know; it's not a whole lot, but it deals with what is true. It's doesn't deal in the circular, religious, or otherwise based assumptions about the globe and our role in it.
Did you know that Bush the first, in the 80's, orchestrated a story about Saddam Hussein ordering Iraqi solders to kill some babies in a hospital. The "witness" turned out to be the daughter of a very wealthy family, with ties to the Bush family. They got caught of course, but for some reason no one cared; the reason probably being; we are taught since middle-school that the middle east and Iraq are just "evil." I remember that thought being put in my head since elementary school.
Inevitably, we went to war for the first time (gulf war) with Iraq. A story of dead babies triggered a big American circle-jerk around the flag. He distracted us with a war, stole our money, and, behind our backs, raised our taxes to pay for the mass-slaughter and destruction that was intended from the beginning. Why would George Bush (1st) have given a fuck about the Iraqi people, when he didn't give a flying fuck about his own people. He raised our taxes, that's what pissed us off, a slight raise in our taxes. Mass quantities of innocent people die... and taxes is what kills the national erection.
The war was corporate, the war was over oil, labor, and greed; and on top of that, based on lies involving dead babies, and we revolt because our taxes go up.
Everything I've said about Bush 1's failure, applies identically to Bush 2. George W bush is even worse though, because this current Iraq war has affirmed the truth. And, there is a such thing as truth, no matter what is said in the news or contradicting polls on the 2-3 "news stations" that we actually hate, but still watch and absorb.
Bush 2 did the same thing, I mean, he didn't lie, he just manipulated Colin Powell to tell a lie he thought was true. Maybe someone manipulated Bush and he actually is that much of a retard. The black guy always goes first in horror movies, which is a pretty valid analogy to the Bush administration. He stepped down. Rumsfield; same deal, except that he was genuinely a prick. He steps down, because, oh, he "failed." Trust me, he did his job flawlessly, and without an ounce of remorse, making it just that much easier for us to blame "a couple of assholes" and accept that as the "failure" in Iraq.
Huge portions of the population believes the attack on the towers, and other terrorists attacks occur by Iraq based terrorists, supported by Saddam Hussein. Maybe you thought that? I mean, you didn't say much to back up your absolutely ridiculous argument of the "necessity" of the war. I would have thought most people, looking back, feel a combination of any emotion like regret, guilt or empathy for the country of Iraq and the people, now in chaos. Hopefully, maybe extreme anger - due to the obvious betrayal of our wishes here and around the world.
At least a third of our country still believes those were Iraqi terrorists, and that we found "WMDs." In reality, the terrorists are simply just a small group of radical religious fundamentalists from no particular country, but reside in Afghanistan. Bin Laden and his family have ties to the Bush family, and Reagans. I would never dare to imply that our own government would ever purposely orchestrate an attack... but I am implying that they knew, wanted, and allowed it to happen. Who is they? Who am I to know? "They" are not acting out of power, morals, ideals, or anything else besides simple bottom line wealth.
We gave money to terrorists in the 80s, under the leadership of Ronald Regan, to Osama Bin Laden to be exact, to fight the Russians for us, and fight each other.
As long as the middle east can remain molded to the image that has seemingly always been presented to us, we can continue to attribute it to the "inherent superiority" of our culture in white America. We'd lose our national erection if we were allowed to see truth. It is corporate, politically promoted attempts to promote (through religion, and the instillation, in our minds, as a nation of privilege) the third world stagnancy that has been... well... "Mission Accomplished."
Hatred and ignorance towards the middle east is one problem, just as in their hatred of us. The death of thousands of "sand ni____s" as was such a common slur 4-6 years ago, and the indifference that at least half of Americans felt toward the death of human beings, is frankly inconceivable to me.
It's the people that wind up suffering. "The insurgence" are what Randy? Soldiers? No, they are family men, with an old ass rifle, a rock and a stick, trying to protect the family from what he sees as a violent invasion (wonder why he'd think that).
Damn I wish we could see footage on TV. Maybe then, you would ask yourself how "necessary" random destruction is. Because people like you say, oh the plan went off maybe. No, the plan was to destroy and displace a country that was beginning to advance, and getting a little too testy. Saddam hadn't been sucking Americas dick for quite some time, and was stingy with oil prices. He started to, as we heard in class, set up education and develop a nation defense system. We just see what we see on TV and, combined with our own ability to think, see and hear WMDs, terrorism, al queada, Sadam Hussein, Iraq.
Guess it doesn't really matter, Arabs are terrorists are Arabs to us, towel heads, right? They hate us, we hate them. Good, evil. Right and wrong. We're free, they aren't, right? Must be a burden to have to make attempts at those grey areas in-between, or those aspects of mankind that cannot be polarized. There is no constant, besides the constant that exists among popular opinion. So that is freedom then? Staying in a war that a third of the population, mostly people who have never seen an Arab in their life, support because they cannot grasp the human element of war. They see it as a sport with the underdog, where we will prevail over the force that is trying to destroy us.
Randy, they didn't even own their own plane. A lot of things are necessary. Living, eating, shelter, water... necessities that aren't being addressed.
Gavin Munoff
Sat Feb18 2:39AM
Randy, I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say that you think it was a "necessity." If you're referring to terrorist attacks, that your argument is invalid. If you're referring to the fact that Saddam Hussain was a dictator, that fact would be correct, but what is your point? Both of the Bush's were, by far, the most manipulative and misleading "leaders" of my lifetime.
Here are some things I know; it's not a whole lot, but it deals with what is true. It's doesn't deal in the circular, religious, or otherwise based assumptions about the globe and our role in it.
Did you know that Bush the first, in the 80's, orchestrated a story about Saddam Hussein ordering Iraqi solders to kill some babies in a hospital. The "witness" turned out to be the daughter of a very wealthy family, with ties to the Bush family. They got caught of course, but for some reason no one cared; the reason probably being; we are taught since middle-school that the middle east and Iraq are just "evil." I remember that thought being put in my head since elementary school.
Inevitably, we went to war for the first time (gulf war) with Iraq. A story of dead babies triggered a big American circle-jerk around the flag. He distracted us with a war, stole our money, and, behind our backs, raised our taxes to pay for the mass-slaughter and destruction that was intended from the beginning. Why would George Bush (1st) have given a fuck about the Iraqi people, when he didn't give a flying fuck about his own people. He raised our taxes, that's what pissed us off, a slight raise in our taxes. Mass quantities of innocent people die... and taxes is what kills the national erection.
The war was corporate, the war was over oil, labor, and greed; and on top of that, based on lies involving dead babies, and we revolt because our taxes go up.
Everything I've said about Bush 1's failure, applies identically to Bush 2. George W bush is even worse though, because this current Iraq war has affirmed the truth. And, there is a such thing as truth, no matter what is said in the news or contradicting polls on the 2-3 "news stations" that we actually hate, but still watch and absorb.
Bush 2 did the same thing, I mean, he didn't lie, he just manipulated Colin Powell to tell a lie he thought was true. Maybe someone manipulated Bush and he actually is that much of a retard. The black guy always goes first in horror movies, which is a pretty valid analogy to the Bush administration. He stepped down. Rumsfield; same deal, except that he was genuinely a prick. He steps down, because, oh, he "failed." Trust me, he did his job flawlessly, and without an ounce of remorse, making it just that much easier for us to blame "a couple of assholes" and accept that as the "failure" in Iraq.
Huge portions of the population believes the attack on the towers, and other terrorists attacks occur by Iraq based terrorists, supported by Saddam Hussein. Maybe you thought that? I mean, you didn't say much to back up your absolutely ridiculous argument of the "necessity" of the war. I would have thought most people, looking back, feel a combination of any emotion like regret, guilt or empathy for the country of Iraq and the people, now in chaos. Hopefully, maybe extreme anger - due to the obvious betrayal of our wishes here and around the world.
At least a third of our country still believes those were Iraqi terrorists, and that we found "WMDs." In reality, the terrorists are simply just a small group of radical religious fundamentalists from no particular country, but reside in Afghanistan. Bin Laden and his family have ties to the Bush family, and Reagans. I would never dare to imply that our own government would ever purposely orchestrate an attack... but I am implying that they knew, wanted, and allowed it to happen. Who is they? Who am I to know? "They" are not acting out of power, morals, ideals, or anything else besides simple bottom line wealth.
We gave money to terrorists in the 80s, under the leadership of Ronald Regan, to Osama Bin Laden to be exact, to fight the Russians for us, and fight each other.
As long as the middle east can remain molded to the image that has seemingly always been presented to us, we can continue to attribute it to the "inherent superiority" of our culture in white America. We'd lose our national erection if we were allowed to see truth. It is corporate, politically promoted attempts to promote (through religion, and the instillation, in our minds, as a nation of privilege) the third world stagnancy that has been... well... "Mission Accomplished."
Hatred and ignorance towards the middle east is one problem, just as in their hatred of us. The death of thousands of "sand ni____s" as was such a common slur 4-6 years ago, and the indifference that at least half of Americans felt toward the death of human beings, is frankly inconceivable to me.
It's the people that wind up suffering. "The insurgence" are what Randy? Soldiers? No, they are family men, with an old ass rifle, a rock and a stick, trying to protect the family from what he sees as a violent invasion (wonder why he'd think that).
Damn I wish we could see footage on TV. Maybe then, you would ask yourself how "necessary" random destruction is. Because people like you say, oh the plan went off maybe. No, the plan was to destroy and displace a country that was beginning to advance, and getting a little too testy. Saddam hadn't been sucking Americas dick for quite some time, and was stingy with oil prices. He started to, as we heard in class, set up education and develop a nation defense system. We just see what we see on TV and, combined with our own ability to think, see and hear WMDs, terrorism, al queada, Sadam Hussein, Iraq.
Guess it doesn't really matter, Arabs are terrorists are Arabs to us, towel heads, right? They hate us, we hate them. Good, evil. Right and wrong. We're free, they aren't, right? Must be a burden to have to make attempts at those grey areas in-between, or those aspects of mankind that cannot be polarized. There is no constant, besides the constant that exists among popular opinion. So that is freedom then? Staying in a war that a third of the population, mostly people who have never seen an Arab in their life, support because they cannot grasp the human element of war. They see it as a sport with the underdog, where we will prevail over the force that is trying to destroy us.
Randy, they didn't even own their own plane. A lot of things are necessary. Living, eating, shelter, water... necessities that aren't being addressed.
Post a Comment