OT: A Rotten Week For Bush?

[Franknputer]

[i]What you are missing is a very simple point. We are currently having problems with a group of folks that want to kill us because we do not agree with their viewpoint. [/i] Umm...I think you mean a very simplistic point. This is not about wanting to kill someone over a simple disagreement. It's about much more: things like using one dictator against another to further our own ends; like imposing our beliefs of how things should be run upon people who just might have their own ideas; like treating other people like they are subhuman, because 'we know better'. Arrogance. Opportunism. Lack of integrity. Not just by the US, but by many of the more powerful nations against the less powerful. Europeans, the former USSR, and the US too - it's been going on for centuries, and the result is pretty much the same. People get shit on enough, they get mad enough, and they initiate a backlash in whatever form they can muster. So if we pit one side against another, provide support to whichever side is going to 'do something' for us, or occupy other countries without the rule of international law behind us - then should we honestly be surprised at a violent reaction?

[StoneinaPond]

Seems to me the following is a plausible chain of events. Bush Jr. was elected to office. Or should I say willed into office by many that were disenchanted with Bill Clinton. I'm sure he and they thought he would have a free ride, all the while helping those that got him elected to a piece of the pie. A nice piece I would add. And then came along 9/11. Now I do not subscribe to the theory that this administration planned the attack, or consciously let it happen. They were just caught with their pants down. Plain and simple. Now think about this. Here is a man who believes the rhetoric that America is the mightiest country on this planet and he, as the ipso facto leader, is the most powerful man in the world. Well, a bunch of snotty nobodies knocked out this man's front teeth and bloodied the nose of the person that many in the world perceive as a symbol of the schoolyard bully. (And this description of events is in no way meant to be disrespectful of those that lost loved ones in the WTC and Washington attacks.) Like anybody else, I do believe he grieved for those that were lost. But it also made him angry. Shame can do that to a person. This happened on his watch, despite people trying to blame this on every Tom Dick and Harry. And Bill. So what to do? The enemy is unclear. The world is watching. Some are rejoicing. He took the easy way out. Well proven in the short term for bragging rights, but a little less effective in the long run. He attacked Afghanistan. One could see a justification in that, although he further polarized the area by insisting that the President of Pakistan stand with the US despite the majority of people in that country being opposed to the idea. But in reality, Afghanistan would have been a cluster f**k if not for some Pakistani support. (Some say it still is.) But this is where I think things got devious. The administration began to believe its own hype. We are the liberators of the world, we have g*d on our side, we have been wronged by terrorists (a beautifully manipulative term that stops argument as quickly as brick wall stops a speeding vehicle.) In almost Shakespearean style, the courtiers started to whisper poisonous thoughts into the King's ear. We are the moral ones, we have the opportunity to overthrow enemies of our friends. We can do anything, we can get our hands on certain resources that someone we hate is sitting on. Nobody will know the difference, we will just invoke the magic symbol of the terrorist and the wrathful victim. It's perfect. But the audience had seen this play before. Many cried fowl. Undeterred, George Bush was swept along by these arguments and in a show of strength he started to mobilize forces against Iraq. At some point, the scales tipped over and the machinery of war was unstoppable. Hubris, shame, anger, logistics, greed, the desire for vengeance were propelling the mighty not so multi-national force towards the inevitable. The audience cried fowl even louder. The administration set out to try and quell the ever rising tide of dissent with addition reasons why their actions were justified. Scrambling for this justification, truths were twisted, half-truths and rumors were presented as facts, but the intent was already set. And here we are, two years and two months to the day of 9/11, Afghanistan is in ruins, Iraq is in ruins, soldiers and civilians are dying daily because of our activities. Bombs are going off in Saudi Arabia, Israel and the Palestinians are repeatedly blowing each other up and seem to be further apart than ever. Iran is threatening to develop a nuclear arsenal, North Korea has one, and people are interned in Cuba with no due process or end of imprisonment in sight. We have a Patriot Act that could at any moment be used against the citizens of the country that it is trying to protect and travelling abroad as an American citizen is distasteful and sometime downright dangerous. The European Community, in a recent poll perceives Israel as the greatest threat to global peace, with the US not too far behind. The UN/US relations are at their lowest in decades, Jessica Lynch is hyped as a heroine and people who criticize their leaders are called traitors. It really is a good time to be alive. :freak:

[Philter]

I thought this was interesting... I found a post I made from this past February, before we invaded Iraq... [quote] ...Anyway, I'm not arguing that Saddam shouldn't go- my original point was that it's imperative that we achieve it through the framework of the UN. The damage to our reputation and the weakening of the UN if we act without it would be enough to ensure that we "lose the peace."... Bush needs to present a viable endgame strategy- what happens when a war is over? Right now it feels like a rush job which could result in the same kind of mess that his father created and which we're still dealing with. Democracy in Iraq? Seems unlikely. The Iraqis have zero experience in governing themselves. The Kurds want their own country. The results of toppling Saddam won't be pretty. ...My point all along has been to line up our reluctant allies ahead of time, so that next time we have trouble, we won't be standing in the playground all alone. And taking the time to line up support also increases the opportunity for something to give way in Iraq under the pressure of the looming storm clouds. [/quote] http://www.musicplayer.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=004574;p=13 Interesting. Did anyone else read the reports last week that Saddam was looking to settle in the weeks before the war? We could have avoided this whole fiasco and determined that Iraq had no WOMD without ever going to war, and all of that information was available to the administration before they started the war.

[Peake]

Conspiracy theory? "For example, why does the administration seem unconcerned about an exit strategy from Iraq once Saddam is toppled? Because we won't be leaving. Having conquered Iraq, the United States will create permanent military bases in that country from which to dominate the Middle East, including neighboring Iran. In an interview Friday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld brushed aside that suggestion, noting that the United States does not covet other nations' territory. That may be true, but 57 years after World War II ended, we still have major bases in Germany and Japan. We will do the same in Iraq." http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2319.htm

[Dan South]

[quote]Originally posted by Talcott: [b]I look forward to my opportunity to vote against Bush. [url=http://www.counterpunch.org/sperry07302003.html]Bush the Liar[/url] [/b][/quote]If I recall correctly, President Clinton was impeached for lying. He told one lie, one time, about one thing (which was nobody else's business in the first place). What if there were an entire Administration of liars who lied at every opportunity in order to further their secret agendas? Why would impeachment be suitable for a President who tells one harmless lie and not applicable to a President who weaves complex networks of deadly lies? IMPEACH BUSH - FOR LYING

[KenElevenShadows]

[quote]Originally posted by StoneinaPond: [b]It really is a good time to be alive. :freak: [/b][/quote]Possibly, but this is despite our nation's "leaders"!