Friday :: Jun 30, 2006

What Would Elvis Do?

by pessimist

King George is today taking Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi on a tour of Olympus -er, Graceland, where the Great God Elvis once resided before he flew off to Valhalla Nashville, his duty to humanity completed.

Think this is all about showing a visiting Asian head of state a good time? Think again!

George's 'War on Terror' is falling apart. Just a few days ago, it was announced quietly that Japanese troops would leave Irarq, and that withdrawal is currently underway.

Maybe George could survive without 550 Japanese troops who aren't carrying Weapons of Man Destruction, but now Rumania is talking about pulling out. Also, Australian troops have been invited by George's puppet government to go home after they opened fire on the Iraqi Trade Minister's bodyguards and killed one of them.

It's bad enough that your friends get bored with your game and want to go home.
It's much worse when they get SENT home for bad behavior!

Some think that it is time to rethink our own participation in this evil game, intended to impose American corporate dominance on the world.

Andrew Skerritt of the St./ Petersburg Times wrote:

Persistence in a failed policy doesn't make us brave or patriotic, especially when others must bear the brunt of our error. We need the courage to change course.

I'm tired of the endless carnage and body count. I'm tired of yelling at the radio as well-meaning folks try to explain, justify or defend our Iraq policy. And I'm tired of a generation of leaders who mostly sat out the Vietnam War but are now questioning the patriotism and backbone of anyone who challenges the insane policy we have followed for the last three years.

We are well into year three of this occupation. Before we know it, American forces are going to be in Iraq longer than GIs served in World War II. Iraq isn't postwar Germany; it will need more than a Marshall Plan to put it back together again. Still all the money - $300-billion and counting - and America's can-do attitude and optimism has not created a livable Iraq.

There is some doubt whether even the Iraqis themselves can create the kind of country we Americans would be satisfied with. But let them try. After all, they're the ones who are going to have to live and die there.

The Times Herald-Record, "serving New York's Hudson Valley and the Catskills", takes on a parental demeanor, scolding the two major political parties for acting like children:

Let's be honest on Iraq ... and let's stop the partisan politicking.

After three years of fighting, the blood still flows more freely than the oil or the electricity in Iraq. Meanwhile, in the United States, this being an election year for Congress, there is apparently no stopping the flow of political posturing on the war. With no apparent plan for securing Iraq and making it safe enough for American troops to "stand down" while Iraqi troops "stand up," Republicans have taken to describing Democratic calls for a timetable for U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq within a year as a "cut and run" strategy. Calls for a phased redeployment of U.S. troops, with or without a timetable, are dismissed as "cut and jog."

Stand up? Stand down? Stay the course? Cut and run?
What the hell are these people thinking?

American troops are stuck in an increasingly hazardous war zone with no clear idea of their mission, and their representatives in Congress are tossing around slogans aimed at gaining re-election. Jingoism is not patriotism. Nor are accusations of a lack of caring or compassion in the Bush administration.

So focused are the two main political parties on victory in November (and in the 2008 presidential election) that, despite their president having made a mess of the war and public opinion solidly affirming that view, Republicans have decided that "stay the course" is the best policy on Iraq. Not because they know what it means, but because they think it will attract more voters in its apparent decisiveness than the Democrats' mixed message. In times of war, the thinking goes, Americans like decisive leaders.

This situation calls for serious, thoughtful, nonpartisan debate. Let it be spirited, by all means, but let it be honest. Let it not, for example, include continued claims that invading Iraq was a necessary and proper response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It wasn't, and the 9/11 commission made that clear.

Stop the rhetoric, the posturing and the name-calling. Thousands of people have died in Iraq. Billions of dollars have been spent. Yet we can't even defend the lawyers hired to defend the man we said was so horrible to his people that we had to get rid of him.

Is this how we promote our system of justice?

Stop the politics, have a legitimate debate for once, and let the votes fall where they may.

We know that Bu$hCo isn't going to heed this advice, for they would lose ignominiously. All of their 'hard work' attempting to establish the First 'Mer'kin Reich would have been for naught, establishing them in history as the Gang That Couldn't Rule Right instead of as the Centurians of the New Rome.

So this message of the Times Herald-Record really shouldn't have been aimed at the two parties. It should have been aimed at the supporters of the two parties. They are the enablers of these two out-of-control juvenile gangs.

While Americans don't seem to like the idea of a third party, they leave themselves no alternative but to take control of the parties they have before their 'representatives' completely destroy everything they have. It's a no-brainer - a condition for which too many Americans qualify.

While they won't heed journalists, or other political authorities, maybe they would heed The King:

"Do what's right for you, as long as it don't hurt no one." — Elvis Presley

Thank ya! Thank ya verr' much!

And with that, Elvis has left the building. And America should leave Iraq.

As Andrew Skerritt pointed out, at least $300 billion dollars has gone into Iraq. That is money that would have funded Inflammatory Breast Cancer research, or to assist troubled communities like San Bernardino, CA with their vital anti-gang effort. It could have provided jobs for the jobless and homes for the homeless. It could have aided in the development of alternative energies to the point that going into Iraq wouldn't have been considered an option.

But we are being left behind - by the rich, not the evangelicals (to their dismay). Warren Buffett announced a while back that most of his money was invested outside of the US. I suspect the same may be said for Bill Gates now that he's been given control of the bulk of Buffett's wealth.

On a more personal level my son Bookseller's employers have moved their money to Swizerland and are seeking to reside there.

What is it that people with lots of money (courtesy of the tax breaks foisted upon the American people by the criminal Bush Gang) are in such a rush to leave?

It's another no-brainer. They don't want to be here when the crash comes. The $300 billion spent in Iraq would have gone a long way toward eliminating that fate.

It's your country. Do you want your grandkids living like Haitians? Do you want America to look like Darfur?

Do nothing about Bush, and you condemn your descendents to that kind of a life.

Don't Be Cruel!

Copyrighted [©] source material contained in this article is presented under the provisions of Fair Use.


This article contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of democracy, economic, environmental, human rights, political, scientific, and social justice issues, among others. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this article is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes.

pessimist :: 8:08 AM :: Comments (6) :: TrackBack (0) :: Digg It!