Infinite Menus, Copyright 2006, OpenCube Inc. All Rights Reserved.

“Becase We Acted…”

No doubt, we are all tired of listening to the sound bites carefully selected from today’s Presidential Propaganda Catapult launch from the Pentagon. I just want to unpack one paragraph. Have a gander and see what you think:

Because we acted, Saddam Hussein no longer fills fields with the remains of innocent men, women and children.

Saddam’s dead, sure. But we have been responsible for putting a lot of innocent Iraqi men, women, and children in the ground too.

Because we acted, Saddam’s torture chambers and rape rooms and children’s prisons have been closed for good.

Sure, Saddam is dead and cannot open the McFrancise version of his “torture” chambers, but this claim is hollow because Bush and his cronies still allow torture anyway, and by our own hands (Waterboards for Every One).

Because we acted, Saddam’s regime is no longer invading its neighbors or attacking them with chemical weapons and ballistic missiles.

But with all the saber rattling toward Iran, it’s looking a lot like we may invade that neighbor. Or is all the threatening rhetoric about Iran getting the nuke just a lot of hot air?

Because we acted, Saddam’s regime is no longer paying the families of suicide bombers in the Holy Land.

But the suicide bombers keep coming, and the IEDs, which are more threatening are still exploding. It could be argued that our presence in Iraq has led the recruiting drive for the Jihadists making it substantiall y easier for the terrorists to recruit more terrorists because we acted in Iraq.

Because we acted, Saddam’s regime is no longer shooting at American and British aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones and defying the will of the United Nations.

I may be quibbling about grammar here, but regimes don’t act. People do. And last I checked our troops are still in harms way getting shot at. Does it matter that it’s not a “regime” but a reconstitute d army of believers who used to follow Saddam?

Because we acted, the world is better and United States of America is safer.(Appla use.)

Well, that’s most certainly debatable, and in the face of the threatening language George Bush used yesterday when talking about Iran, it doesn’t pass muster. You can’t spur fear and simultaneous ly say we are safe. Bush continues to dance the fine line between foolishness and faith preferring to lead via faith over fact, and all I know is I most certainly don’t feel safer for it.

Share and Enjoy:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us
  • De.lirio.us
  • digg
  • Fark
  • Reddit

11 Responses to ““Becase We Acted…””

  1. As I was listening to these sound bites today I was thinking exactly the same thing. Thanks for putting this down for all to see including those who still think that Iraq is worth the blood and money we are spending there.

  2. Here is more - the TRUE $COST of WAR.
    President MORON ignores FACTS.

    Nobel Prize-winnin g economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and Harvard University public finance expert Linda Bilmes have estimated the eventual cost of the war could be as much as $3 trillion when all the expenses are calculated.

    Without naming anyone, Bush decried those who he said have exaggerated the expense.

  3. Because we acted, Saddam’s regime is no longer paying the families of suicide bombers in the Holy Land.

    Then too there is our policy of arming the different warlords. This should pay the same dividends as it did in Afghanistan.

  4. He also mentions that the Iraqis used women and children as shields.

    Isn’t that exactly what we say we are doing when we make the case for the war by saying - We have to fight them there so as not to fight them here.. I mean who cares how many Iraqi woman and children die. They are not Americans.

  5. A person over at my original location stipulated a good point: Remember, when Iraq and Saddam were busy invading neighboring countries, they were duking it out with Iran with our backing - serious backing - money and weapons…so….

  6. GWB made the WORLD LESS SAFE. Iran & Iraq fought each other and kept the area stabilized.
    Cheney said Cheney is the IRAQI LIBERATOR (Meet the Press). USA should put Cheney & GWB in JAIL for FRAUD to the USA. World leaders did not want WAR. American people should demand the TRUTH.
    Nobody cares - only Hundreds in War Protest this week. 4,000 dead 100,000 wounded $3 Trillion in USA TAXES. Nobody cares WAR was started because of an OLD MAN’s Dream as LIBERATOR (CHENEY) & a FOOL’s NOTION of being a HERO (GWB) “Mission Accomplished ”. America is suffering because of GWB CHENEY GREED. How Many times has the American people seen either of these CHENEY GWB BUFFONS give any Press Conferences. Talk about a Hidden Administrati on - Worst in History. GWB LOSER

  7. Does anyone know what happened to having the Iraqis step up so we can step down?

  8. Well Christopher, if you ask Craig, they are doing just wonderful! They have a worthwhile government and the whole frigign nine yards. ;)

    We will be there still…five years from now. Doesn’t matter which of the three we elect, I believe we will still have a substantial number of troops in Iraq.

    But I hope I am wrong.

  9. Well Christopher, if you ask Craig, they are doing just wonderful!

    Here is, quoting myself exactly, what I wrote about the Iraqi government in response to Dusty saying that, except for removing Saddam, we’ve accomplished squat in five years:

    I disagree that we have not accomplished anything other than removing Saddam. Iraqis have established a Constitution which establishes their own form of parliamentar y republic by their own hands, they’ve elected their own leaders, they’ve gained the right to disagree with their governors without fear of being tortured and killed for that disagreement . They’ve established a means of changing their government by their action rather than by the death of a tyrant only to be replaced by another. I don’t think these things are squat unless, by ’squat’ one means ‘considera ble progress at replacing a tyranny with a representati ve republic’. None of that would have been possible without removing Saddam. The other side of that is, all of that has been made possible by our removing Saddam.

    Nothing there about Iraqis doing wonderful. They’re in the midst of a deadly insurgency and invasion by foreign fighters (again, referring to Al Quaeda aligned terrorists). They’ve got next to no experience with self-governm ent. What they have plenty of experience with is with tyranny and fear, torture and death. None of this is particularly conducive to good government, let alone living up to the demands of a foreign government to pass this or that measure on that foreign government’s timetable but then, I’ve said nothing about how well the elected government has been doing.

    As to what the above means, I shouldn’t have to explicate but having my position described as “[Iraqis] are doing just wonderful!” shows that my position will not be fairly understood if I don’t.

    Iraqis have established a Constitution which establishes their own form of parliamentar y republic by their own hands.

    Does anyone wish to contest that this is the case? I’ve not said that it is a Constitution that I, myself, would be comfortable living under but then, I’m not an Iraqi Muslim so I don’t have to live under it. But it exists. It was written by Iraqis (with some suggestions from us). It establishes a parliamentar y form of republic which met with their own approval. It was ratified by Iraqi vote. Would Jeff Davis approve? Probably not but he’s not an Iraqi Muslim either.

    they’ve elected their own leaders

    I recall seeing photos of purple-stain ed fingers. It wasn’t an election like ours but it was an election. Given the threats by AQ and insurgents to obstruct the elections, I’d say they did alright.

    they’ve gained the right to disagree with their governors without fear of being tortured and killed for that disagreement .

    I wrote this against the foil, of course, of their lives under Saddam, Uday and Qusay. Unfortunatel y, in actual practice, there’s been less than what we in America would call a free press or speech but from what I’ve read about Saddam’s regime, whatever they’ve got now (at least when they weren’t living in regions under the control of Al Qaeda in Iraq) is way superior to what they had under Saddam. Again, nothing like wonderful, I admit. But constitution ally, they have the right.

    Fact is, though, our own leaders have not always been scrupulous about protecting free speech and press either so I’m not sure we’re in a position to throw stones at a new experiment in representati ve government, particularly in a country that’s being torn by violence by people trying to thwart that experiment.

    They’ve established a means of changing their government by their action rather than by the death of a tyrant only to be replaced by another.

    Again, this is a consequence of their Constitution . It’s simple fact. I don’t see how anyone can contest it.

    Finally, I close with quoting myself again, “I don’t think these things are squat unless, by ’squat’ one means ‘considera ble progress at replacing a tyranny with a representati ve republic’. ” Again, I say nothing about the quality of any particular set of elected officials. I’m speaking of forms of government. That’s all!

  10. None of which means anything if they are unwilling to defend it. After five years we should not be patrolling streets. They have not stepped up and there is no reason to assume they will anytime in the near future, What you have now is a government supported by our troops, not Iraqis.

  11. Christopher,

    I didn’t jump in to contest any of that; merely to assure that my position vis-a-vis the Iraqi people and government and any progress that has been made there would be accurately portrayed.

    I’m outa here now. Early start tomorrow.

    Good night, all!

    Craig R. Harmon

Leave a Reply

Fish.Travel