PDA

View Full Version : Why didn't he listen to daddy? (more bull-bushit))



patfromlogan
8th November 03, 01:08 AM
If only shrub would have listened to daddy. But no, he surrounds himself with jerks like Paul Wolfowitz and Assholecrotch. But not to worry, Jr thinks he was appointed by GOD, yes GOD him or her or itself, to lead our dear floundering nation in it's time of need. BARF


In his memoirs, "A World Transformed," written more than five years ago,George Bush, Sr. wrote the following to explain why he didn't go after Saddam Hussein at the end of the Gulf War. "Trying to eliminate Saddam...would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible.... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq.... there was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set
a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land."



Howard Zinn:
It has become clear, very quickly, that Iraq is not a liberated country, but an occupied country. We became familiar with the term "occupied country" during World War II. We talked of German-occupied France, German-occupied Europe. And after the war we spoke of Soviet-occupied Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Eastern Europe. It was the Nazis, the Soviets, who occupied other countries.

Now we are the occupiers. True, we liberated Iraq from Saddam Hussein, but not from us. Just as in 1898 we liberated Cuba from Spain, but not from us. Spanish tyranny was overthrown, but the United States established a military base in Cuba, as we are doing in Iraq. U.S. corporations moved in to Cuba, just as Bechtel and Halliburton and the oil corporations are moving into Iraq. The United States was deciding what kind of constitution Cuba would have, just as our government is now forming a constitution for Iraq. Not a liberation, an occupation.

Soldiers who are set down in a country where they were told they would be welcomed as liberators only to find they are surrounded by a hostile population become fearful, trigger-happy, and unhappy. We've been reading the reports of GIs angry at their being kept in Iraq. In mid-July, an ABC News reporter in Iraq told of being pulled aside by a sergeant who said to him: "I've got my own 'Most Wanted List.' " He was referring to the deck of cards the U.S. government published, featuring Saddam Hussein, his sons, and other wanted members of the former Iraqi regime. "The aces in my deck are Paul Bremer, Donald Rumsfeld, George Bush, and Paul Wolfowitz," the sergeant said.

I wake up thinking this country is in the grip of a President who was not elected, who has surrounded himself with thugs in suits who care nothing about human life abroad or here, who care nothing about freedom abroad or here, who care nothing about what happens to the earth, the water, the air. And I wonder what kind of world our children and grandchildren will inherit. More Americans are beginning to feel, like the soldiers in Iraq, that something is terribly wrong, that this is not what we want our country to be.

The so-called war on terrorism is not only a war on innocent people in other countries, but it is also a war on the people of the United States: a war on our liberties, a war on our standard of living. The wealth of the country is being stolen from the people and handed over to the super-rich. The lives of our young are being stolen. And the thieves are in the White House.

grimel
8th November 03, 07:42 PM
Originally posted by patfromlogan

Soldiers who are set down in a country where they were told they would be welcomed as liberators only to find they are surrounded by a hostile population

Gallop poll Sept 2003 2/3 of Bagdad residents approve of US action.

The Wastrel
8th November 03, 07:55 PM
Grimel,
I study public opinion and polling techniques...I'm leaving this one alone though.


I just want to clarify that my position on this is NOT that the war was "wrong", or that we shoudl pull out.

My point is that the State Dept was marginalized through cabinet infighting that resulted in a piss-poor post-op occupation plan that rested on the INC.

And now, soldiers are wandering the streets without a tactical objective. We kinda need those you know.

Southpaw
8th November 03, 09:02 PM
patfromlogan:

I really like Zinn's writing...where did that passage come from?

patfromlogan
9th November 03, 09:50 AM
http://www.progressive.org/oct03/zinn1003.html is where I lifted the paragraphs

http://www.accuracy.org/zinn/ is the link to 10 reasons to impeach Clinton (and none having to do with sex) - an article I liked. Zinn is an interesting man, from a working-class home. He worked in a shipyard after high school and then joined the Air Force. He fought in World War II as a bombardier. So he's not like so many academics (and Bush and almost everyone around him), people who've never seen combat.

Southpaw
9th November 03, 12:54 PM
thanks!

I agree, Zinn is quite guy. His ' People's History...' should be required reading for every American.

patfromlogan
11th November 03, 12:02 AM
Amp, you sound like one fucked up liberal commie twisted pevert. Welcome...

PizDoff
11th November 03, 12:39 AM
That is some FUCTDUP info in those links....

In other news, an Afghani woman participated in a beauty pagent.