|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Warren Stupidity (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Mar-17-06 08:52 AM Original message |
Three Years! A Look Back. 03-05/2003 Who Could Have Thunk? |
As part of my protest over the third anniversary of the war crime committed by the Bush Regime when it invaded Iraq, I went back to my old usenet postings around the time of the invasion. I am just an idiot on a computer, an amateur, a nobody, but it seems that I and many others like me had this war figured out from the start.
Here is what one old lefty was saying three years ago about this damn war. P.S. Get off your asses and out on the streets tomorrow! ================== http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.misc/browse_frm/thread/3c5ab6c1d4ca2077/0ca4d662aafa88ff?lnk=st&q=(iraq)+group%3Atalk.politics.misc+author%3Awarren+author%3Astupidity&rnum=10&hl=en#0ca4d662aafa88ff On 15 Mar 2003 10:18:51 -0800, wobblybutto...@yahoo.com (Michael) wrote: >The anti-war lobby say we shouldn't go to war because it will cause >civilian deaths. Instead they say we should help the Iraqis depose >Saddam themselves. However if we do this, Iraq will end up with a >protracted civil war in which far more civilians will die than in a >short hi-tech war. Iraqi internal affairs, as long as they do not cross the line into crimes against humanity, our not the business of the international community. Would I like to see a democratic Iraq? Sure. Is it the neocon cabal's intention to create such a regime (after killing some large number of Iraqis in the 'short hi-tech war?) I rather doubt it. A democratic regime in Iraq would very likely be a fundamentalist Islamic regime. The Algerian and Pakistani problem with democracy would assert itself. Our government's goal is control over the strategic oilfields of mesopotamia and arabia, not Making the World Safe For Democracy. Democracy, War On Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction are just lies 1,2,3 put forth by the neocon agitprop division. ================== http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.mideast/browse_frm/thread/c322b3c518e3a820/025b82ea4a5b6e3d?lnk=st&q=(iraq)+group%3Atalk.politics.misc+author%3Awarren+author%3Astupidity&rnum=40&hl=en#025b82ea4a5b6e3d Well that isn't quite the only difference is it? The other difference is of course that we have this nasty partisan problem and patton by and large didn't. That 'small difference' is the one that can spell actual disaster for our forward positions. If we cannot clean up this mess we may very well be forced into a truly ugly situation. And how exactly do we 'clean up this mess'? The only way I know of is that we start killing iraqis in large numbers from southern iraq to the edges of baghdad. Where does that end up? Well it ends up with us having to reinforce the reinforcements in order to keep a hostile and now seriously motivated population under control, and it leaves us with no exit strategy regardless of what happens in baghdad. Basically the necon cabal in washington has put our soldiers and our nation into a serious shithole from which there may be no viable political or military exit. ================== http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.bush/browse_frm/thread/795d837215c78658/50bab775dff900b2?lnk=st&q=(Iraq)+author%3Awarren+author%3Astupidity&rnum=7&hl=en#50bab775dff900b2 <bbernard...@comLOOKATTHATcast.net> wrote: >In article <3E7CE624.512CE...@earthlink.net>, > Steven Litvintchouk <sdlit...@earthlink.net> wrote: >> The American left-wing could play a constructive role--they could act as >> watchdogs to ensure that real democracy is given a chance in Iraq, and >> that the oil really is put in trust for the American people. >Sounds like a good idea, although I doubt *real* democracy will ever be >given a chance in Iraq. It hasn't worked here yet. >Why would the oil be put in trust for the American people? It doesn't >belong to us. Oh I think Steven had a bit of a freudian slip there. As the protests have never been about supporting Saddam, and have always been about opposing the imperialist adventure of the neocon cabal, the struggle will continue as the neocon plan continues to unfold. Perhaps, if we are patient and continue to explain what is going on, the good folks of america will start to listen. ================== http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/952b3f762c9ccc98/919b5c7fd4701911?lnk=st&q=(Iraq)+author%3Awarren+author%3Astupidity&rnum=10&hl=en#919b5c7fd4701911 >Are you just stupid or what? The problem with Iraq is the arsenal they >posessed that was unaccounted for, their history of willingness to use it, >their hatred for the US and Isreal, and the great potential of someone like >Bin Laden getting their hands on such weapons. I guess if we hadn't done it >and someone did set off some nerve gas or nuclear device, you wouldn't have >cried "Why didn't Bush do more to prevent this?"? And yet there remains no connection between Iraq, a secular nationalist regime, and the radical fundamentalist organizations like al qaeda. In fact al qaeda has stated in the past and recently re-affirmed, that they would also like to get rid of the baath regime in Iraq. Prior to the bush adventure, there was absolutely no reason for Iraq to get involved with al qaeda, and certainly no reason to give them weapons (which as far as we know the Iraqis do not have,) that al qaeda would very likely use against the baghdad regime itself. Generally you do not arm your sworn enemies with weapons they can use against you. However, it remains astounding that one of the many, ever shifting, justifications for this war is *SPECULATION* that in the future some bad thing *MIGHT* happen if we do not act now. That remains a completely inadequate reason to wage a war of aggression. Our war remains a violation of the UN Charter and of international law. Our regime is guilty of a war crime. Iraq demonstrated willingness to use chemical and biological weapons against Iran because they had what they believed was the tacit approval of the US. In fact, it was our government that provided the critical technology for some of these weapons. True enough, the Iraqis appear to have committed an atrocity against the kurds, killing, by most reports, 5,000 in a chemical attack. You should be aware that our good friends the turks have committed a similar atrocity against the kurds, albeit with more standard military techniques, in their campaign to put down kurdish independence. In fact, since WWI it has been open season on kurds, with turkey, iraq, and iran taking turns supporting and or seeking to eliminate various kurdish attempts to create their own nation. Generally this has been done with the tacit or explicit approval of the assorted Great Powers. But why bother with history. It is so much easier to spew out non-sequitors and emotional irrationalities. In gulf-war-I Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons and delivery systems. They did not use them, even as their army was being crushed in its retreat from kuwait. Why? Because they were warned that we would respond in kind if they did. This sort of simple threat of reprisal is very effective. We have an enormous arsenal of WMD and we have demonstrated our ability to deliver these weapons to virtually any place on the planet with pinpoint accuracy. This threat is understood by the baghdad regime. That might be evil folks, but they are not stupid. Prior to this war, there was simply no credible threat of an Iraqi WMD attack against us. There was little chance that Iraq, if it does have chemical or biological weapons useful to terrorists, would give these weapons to groups that would attack us. As the CIA itself testified to congress the risk of this happening has drastically increased now that the regime is facing almost certain destruction. We are engaged in a classic example of self full filling prophecy. Our actions have enraged the muslim world. Where al qaeda was becoming isolated, now there is a very good chance that more and more mainstream muslim people will be drawn into their cause. Where there was disunity among muslim nations and our proclaimed 'axis of evil', we are driving them towards unity against us. Iran and North Korea have accelerated their nuclear programs. We have destabilized the friendly muslim nations of jordan, pakistan, egypt, saudi arabia, yemen, and others. We have created a sense of grim determination in syria and libya: these countries will be seeking to defend their nations against our onslaught as well. We have created serious concern in the two other nuclear super powers: china and russia. We have alienated the european union, and perhaps we have galvanized their determination to move from economic union to political union. For what? For some addled-brained theory that this makes us immune to another 9-11? For the election campaign of 2004? For some neocon nightmare of world hegemony? ================== http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/88e8a907b089db0b/79ee5b9a33d96efd?lnk=st&q=(Iraq)+author%3Awarren+author%3Astupidity&rnum=18&hl=en#79ee5b9a33d96efd >"Brain Death" <jgl...@valhalla.com> wrote in message >news:2on8avs8kt8i587h85bs8qirr7viount5a@4ax.com... >> On Mon, 21 Apr 2003 08:32:44 -0700, The Axis of Weasel >> <zeppnos...@finestplanet.com> wrote: >> >This occupation is a disaster. The US must leave - and fast >> >Any gratitude for the removal of Saddam is now virtually exhausted >> Wait a minute, you guys have to make up your mind. Before the war you >> were telling us Bush would not stay long enough to do the job >> properly. Now you're saying we've got to get out now? Uh, actually most of us were saying that the US would establish a permanent military presence in Iraq in order to control the middle east oil fields. But it is so much fun to make up positions for your opponents isn't it? However, there is a related issue of how the US will establish a compliant Iraqi regime of nominal independence. This is somewhat separate from the military base issue, which will simply happen regardless of how 'nation building' is implemented. I happen to disagree with the article. Now that we have conquered Iraq we have a responsibility to stay in Iraq as the colonial authority for as long as it takes to rebuild a stable iraqi society. The correct time frame is years not months, during which time the colonial administration is going to be a magnet for nationalist agitation. Or, we could just be irresponsible and turn the country back over to a reconstituted baath organization, trained and ready to run the country under a new quasi-military regime. Or we could establish 'democracy' and have the embarrassment of having to overturn the resulting fundamentalist regime. Given the arrogance and pig-headed stupidity of the Bush regime, I suspect we are in for a few rather unpleasant misfires in nation building over the next few years. ================== http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.dan-quayle/browse_frm/thread/a9b331e5a5622c81/06744aa6475190ed?lnk=st&q=(Iraq)+author%3Awarren+author%3Astupidity&rnum=21&hl=en#06744aa6475190ed Why on earth would you think that 'installing democracy' was part of any plan seriously considered by the neocon cabal in washington? Making Iraq Safe For Democracy was simply lie number three tossed out by the professional liars in the faux-regime, when lies one and two weren't having the desired effect. They are so lame at lying that they haven't even managed to come up with lies 4,5,6 and 7. At least then we could have a daily rotation rather than the confusing current situation. A really good set of professional liars would have had the moron supplying a lie of the day for why we are going to kill a whole lot of poorly armed Iraqis: a barrage of lies so overwhelming that buckets of talking heads would be occupied for months just sorting them all out. ================== http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/browse_frm/thread/6449c105e06ba5b1/6e8c256373db8547?lnk=st&q=(Iraq)+author%3Awarren+author%3Astupidity&rnum=27&hl=en#6e8c256373db8547 Too bad then that we are going after Iraq, as there appears to be little or no connection between the Iraqi regime and al qaeda, either past or present. Now on the other hand, the northern 'no-fly' zone of Iraq, under US/British protection, does support an al qaeda linked organization. Perhaps we ought to attack ourselves? Terrorist suppliers of anthrax? Not even Resident Bush's team is making that claim about the Iraqis. As far as funding goes, look no further than our good friends the Saudis. Rather a bloody ruthless undemocratic regime there too, doncha think? The only thing that stinks worse about the Bush (mal)administration than 9/11 was the Florida selection. In fact it appears to be all one continuum of rottenness. >If nothing else, the Iraqi people will be rid of the man who gassed his own >people. Ah, yes, Plan-9 (from outer space,) for why we are going to kill a whole lot of Iraqis. The terrorist connection was hogwash. There weren't any weapons of mass destruction, and the Iraqis are actually cooperating with the UN regarding inspections and the destruction of weapons that are not even remotely WMD, such as the stupid rockets destroyed today. To no avail of course. No matter what concessions the Iraqi's make, the message from Washington is "WAR!". So now the Daily Rational for War is: we are going to make Iraq Safe for Democracy. Where have I heard this before? It sure sounds like a Very Familiar Phrase. Has a certain '60's ring to it, doesn't it? Perhaps we can Win the Hearts And Minds of the Iraqi People too? Those B-52's are just great at installing democracy. Carpet Bombing/Carpet Bagging, hey its all the same! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC