This is an interesting blog, and an interesting post. There are legitimate reasons that it could be profitable to stay in the Middle East but what about long-term problems resulting from such occupation, like resentment, or as Pape's book recently wrote about, spikes in suicide bombings? And the ideology thereof?
Posted by mediafanatic at January 13, 2006 01:37 PMI have a great deal of trouble accepting that the American "mushy middle" and even a significant part of the Republicans are not so evil as to blithely stand by while we slaughter tens of thousands in Iraq.
I have been baffled by this fact--it is empirically true that they do nothing as the killing goes on full force--for a long time, yet I do not think it is a deliberate choice.
I don't think the appallingly ignorant beings really know what they're doing. I don't think they're ever seen a kid on video with her arm blown off.
They've never seen or heard the tapes of child rape from Abu Ghraib prison. Or felt the concussion of a 2,000 lb. bomb from 1,000 meters away, the incredbile destructiveness of it. Or seen a loved one bleed to death in their arms from shrapnel wounds. Or heard the explosions day after day as the electricity always fails and the smell of the smoke tinges the incredible cold of January.
I don't think those huge masses of people have any inkling of what they approve of by silent aquiesence. I do not. If they did the war would stop. Surely so many among us would not make that kind of choice deliberately, to approve of the appalling slaughter, pain and destructiveness. No.
Posted by paradox at January 13, 2006 01:38 PMParadox, they know what they'd see if they looked. That's why they refuse to look. I tried to show people the pictures; they refused to look because if they did, they would have to acknowledge, and doing that demands something be done. They're too lazy, or busy, or uncaring to do anything, so they don't look.
Posted by iamcoyote at January 13, 2006 01:49 PMIf you look your helping the terrests win.
Posted by lil' boots at January 13, 2006 02:11 PMNon-US caused Deaths in IRAQ
Iraq, Saddam Hussein (1979-2003): 300 000
Human Rights Watch: "twenty-five years of Ba`th Party rule ... murdered or 'disappeared' some quarter of a million Iraqis" [http://www.hrw.org/wr2k4/3.htm]
8/9 Dec. 2003 AP: Total murders
New survey estimates 61,000 residents of Baghdad executed by Saddam.
US Government estimates a total of 300,000 murders
180,000 Kurds k. in Anfal
60,000 Shiites in 1991
50,000 misc. others executed
"Human rights officials" est.: 500,000
Iraqi politicians: over a million
[These don't include the million or so dead in the Iran-Iraq War.]
Since we invade, there have been approximately 30000 killed (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/)
Only 7299 is attributed to the major military operations.
The deaths between the 7299 and 30,000 appear to come about because of the Michael Moore/Cindy Sheehan Freedom Fighters. Or as Bush Calls them the terrorists/insurgents.
Again, do you guys have any shame?
I didn't vote for Bush, but I do hope that Iraq DOES become a peaceful oasis in the ME. It does not benefit independents and democrats to hope otherwise.
Posted by avaroo at January 13, 2006 02:50 PMWhile Bill Clinton was the LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD he sat on his hands, like a true liberal and did NOTHING, to help the BLACKS IN RWANDA.
800,000 PEOPLE DIED while Clinton played his fiddle.
Yeah, you guys have the moral high ground... how do you sleep at night?
http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/rwanda.htm
Posted by carpediem at January 13, 2006 02:53 PMWe should have done something about Rwanda. So should the UN.
Posted by avaroo at January 13, 2006 02:55 PMOh, God. Not another "Clinton did it, too" thread. Now, what exactly has Bush done about the ongoing genocide (as Colin Powell described it) in Darfur?
Posted by ann at January 13, 2006 03:13 PMThe stinking, filthy irony of Republicans and Bush apologists waxing indignant over Rwanda. Oh, those neo-con bleeding hearts -- what a convincing makeover.
Posted by KM at January 13, 2006 03:17 PMI didn't vote for Bush, but I do hope that Iraq DOES become a peaceful oasis in the ME. It does not benefit independents and democrats to hope otherwise.
I don't know anyone who hopes that Iraq will not become a democracy. Everyone hopes it will, but some of us are critical of why we went to war in Iraq, how we are waging that war and are doubtful that lasting democracy will come from the sacrifices of our armed forces. None of those issues mean that anyone wants anything other than peace in the Middle East.
Posted by ann at January 13, 2006 03:19 PMOh, I see now, roo-bot took the phrase "peaceful oasis" out of context. The entire sentence is:
Their wet dream is that Iraq will become a peaceful oasis for permanent US military facilities and US oil company operations.
I must agree with that. I don't want Iraq to become a U.S. military base to guard their oil for the U. S. oil companies. That does not mean that I don't want to see peace in the Middle East.
Posted by ann at January 13, 2006 03:24 PMAnn,
You say everyone wants peace in Iraq, well need I remind you of the host, who may or may not want it, depending of course on whether he's had enough jolly of late.
He's the one, like so many true liberal left wing nut cases that are amused that terrorist are able to befuddle the President. Of course, no one ever mentions that by befuddling the President, terrorist do that which they know how to do, and that is to terrorize and kill innoncents, but just as long as these FREEDOM FIGTHERS win, then everything will be okay.
Remember Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan belong to you guys....
Posted by Carpediem at January 13, 2006 03:27 PM800,000 PEOPLE DIED while Clinton played his fiddle. …Posted by carpediemWhile Bush goes fundraising, there's a genocide in Darfur. How can Repubicontarians look another human in the face?
By the way, Bill Clinton plays the Saxophone, not the violin.
Of course, with Bush's war crimes and torture in addition to the fact that he is killing Iraqi's at a faster and greater rate than Saddam, makes Bush the biggest war criminal of the 21st Century. The civilian toll of Bush's war is far higher than even his daddy's. No wonder his stalinist supporters are so proud of Bush.
Yep, no one can beat a Compassionate Conservative Christian for dealing out death, terror, and destruction.
Remember Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan belong to you guys.... Posted by CarpediemRemember Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff, Dan Burton, Newt Gingrich, Duke Cunningham, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Karl Rove, Grover Norquist, Michael Savage, Ann Coulter, Robert Novak and hundreds more crooks and liars belong to you guys. I'm proud of Cindy Sheehan and I'm proud of the work Michael Moore does. They are both great Americans. Posted by Mike at January 13, 2006 03:36 PM
Remember Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan belong to you guys....
Yes, and they'd like to bring the troops home before we lose any more young lives in this ill-founded war.
As for your blather about the insurgents "befuddling" Bush, I have no idea what you are trying to say. Besides, Bush is always, well, befuddled.
Posted by ann at January 13, 2006 03:37 PM"I don't know anyone who hopes that Iraq will not become a democracy."
Michael Moore does. Cindy Sheehan too. Howard Dean.
"but some of us are critical of why we went to war in Iraq"
because you have trouble remembering back to 1991.
"how we are waging that war"
reasonable
"and are doubtful that lasting democracy will come from the sacrifices of our armed forces."
you probably are. but that doesn't mean we don't do it.
"None of those issues mean that anyone wants anything other than peace in the Middle East."
you're very naive
Posted by avaroo at January 13, 2006 03:47 PMSo saith the 'roo while gazing in the mirror.
Posted by at January 13, 2006 04:55 PMMichael Moore does. Cindy Sheehan too. Howard Dean.
Please provide proof of this. I am unaware that any of these people ever said any such thing.
As for the rest of your post....blah, blah, blah. None of it really means anything anyway. I voiced my belief based on what I have experienced and you dismiss it and denigrate me. Not really what the bandwidth is for.
Posted by ann at January 13, 2006 05:10 PMThnks Mr fr yr nfrmtn. f my, wld lk t dd cpl thngs. Th scnd nvsn f rq ndd n vctry fr ‘s,’ shld sy r crprt lrds. W hv scrd th rq l rsrvs nd w n’t lvng nlss smn bggr kcks s t. t’s nt bt s jnng thm, t qstn whn thy r gng t cmpltly jn s, nd ths wll b sn. ls, thr s n n bggr thn r Wrld Bnk, MF, nd, shld dd, th Fdrl Rsrv. Th nly srprs ws tht Sddm lstd s r pppt s lng s h dd, (h, w r s trchrs t ‘frnds’ drng mrgncy sttns hngd pn glbl tkvr f vlbl mrkts brght bt by th pk l fct).
Thr s bsltly zr dstnctn btwn th pltcl prts: ch ndvdl s bght nd sld by thr crprt lrds. Th mst Bblclly rblls dmcrt n th Hll, fr nstnc, n dltr f ny frm scl ntrctn rngng frm mthrs dstryng thr nbrn fr slf gn t frcng hr stll lvng chldrn pn strngrs t rs, s n dffrnt thn th Dmcrt r ‘Chrstn’ Rpblcn tht crts scl cndtns rnd th wrld tht cs mllns t lv n pvrty nd ts ttndng dth f chldrn thrgh plcs f bnk lns t ths cntrs dsgnd t prft frm tkng vry vlbl dm jst t py th ntrst. ndd, t dsn’t mttr f th pltcl sttn s sclst r cptlst, r crprt lrds mk prft.
Fr xmpl, r wn ppr crrncy s prvt ntrprs. Ys, th ‘Fdrl Rsrv Nt’ hs nthng t d wth r Fdrl Gvrnmnt. D y s hw nsds r crprt systm hs bcm? Ths gys nt nly mnpltd r nc frly gd scl nstttns nt dng thr bddng, bt mk ll f s psychlgclly dpndnt pn thm vn n vrydy lf n vrywy. s ths bgnnng t snd lk tht ‘Mtrx’ flm? Ths gys mnpltd th Fds t tk s ff th gld stndrd, str th gld t Frt Knx, nd tk th gld fr thmslvs s clltrl bcs 'r' gvt. wnts t ls gv thm ll r tx dllrs t py fr crprt pllg ctns, b thy tctcl r strtgc! (Rgn ctlly dd n thng rght, h chckd t Frt Knx nd fnd tht t ws wtht gld. Hs xcs, t th tm, ws t fgr t f w cld g bck n th gld stndrd. Ths pnts t tht vn th frntln pltcl bys f th crprtns r ftn kpt n th drk. Ths sn’t hrd, snc ll pltcns r lwyrs nd thrfr nt th brghtst; nvrthlss, sw tht lt s fr brghtr thn r ‘lctd‘ ffcls whn h pntd t, n th md-ghts, tht th Fd. Gvt. wll sn b bl t spy wtht wrrnt).
Th crprt lt hv bcm r nvsbl gvrnmnt. Th nly dffrnc t th crrnt pnt n hstry s tht th pk l sttn hs crtd prft mrgn bm n th nr ftr. Th crprt gys wnt t mv nw, nd thy, f crs, cldn’t cr lss wh gts hrt, mmd, mrdrd, r frcd t lv n pvrty whl thy lv qt cnspcsly.
Th crp bys hv bn vry bsy drng th lst 100 yrs; bsds mnpltng th bnkng systm n thr fvr, thy’v bn mnpltng th rlgs, fmly nd pltcl nstttns. Thy r nt vry brght s thy s th sm tchnq n th bv: dcptn. Jst s thy cll thr prvt mny, tht w ll s, n ffcl sndng nm lk ‘Fdrl Rsrv Nt,’ th sm frms f dcptn hs bn sd t thr twk, frgmnt, r dstry ll th frmrly sld scl nstttns n thr fvr.
Thr hv gnd sch cmplt vctry, tht hv bn nbl t fnd nyn f th lk f Nm Chmsky f th 60’s, tdy, tht vn knw ngh hstry t rg. Th ‘rgmnts’ f nw shw th cmplt cnqst f th psychlgy f dcptn cltvtd by r nvsbl gvrnmnt. Th scl dlsn nd rprssn s bslt; w r pprntly wtht hp. My Gd hv mrcy.
Good post. Mostly crappy comments.
America’s intent in invading Iraq was to establish a friendly base to project power through the Middle East and turn the oil fields over to American firms. The Abu Ghraib pictures assure that America’s Iraq Colony will remain a neo-con wet dream. As long as Iraqi’s have pride and breath, they will overtly and covertly fight the foreign occupation.
Posted by Jim S at January 13, 2006 05:49 PMRemember Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan belong to you guys....
Fine upstanding americans...both of them.
Willing to stand up for what they believe in, knowing they will be spit on by the likes of you.
Posted by SnarkyShark at January 13, 2006 06:12 PMAnd how's about that Eye-ran? We'll just scare them with some troops. We got em surrounded, don't cha know!
That's why you don't use the military as a political tool to secure oil. They have a deadly serious role to play in our democracy...to protect OUR democracy...and this role is inimical to bringing democracy to others at the point of a gun. Herr-Chimporer and his supporters have left us horribly exposed. Idiots! Fucking idiots, everyone of them.
Posted by phidipides at January 13, 2006 06:20 PMHummmmm. Still waiting for proof the Sheehan, Moore and Dean don't want democracy for the people in Iraq. Silly me, of course there's no proof! It was just another of those talking points. 'Night.
Posted by ann at January 13, 2006 07:56 PMThe corporate elite have become our invisible government. The only difference at the current point in history is that the peak oil situation has created a profit margin boom in the near future. The corporate guys want to move now, and they, of course, couldn’t care less who gets hurt, maimed, murdered, or forced to live in poverty while they live quite conspicuously.
scout, you've got it down. I've been reading "The End of Oil." great book, I might add. That's what it's all about, though: power and control. And the corporate elite see heaven in oil and money.
Sometimes I doubt myself, I think I'm naive or stupid to live my life happily rather than serving my corproate masters and chasing the almighty buck. But then I think, I am happy, rather than always hoping to reach that brass ring, one day, if only the elite would let me reach it.
Posted by ann at January 13, 2006 08:12 PMOT
Snark, thanks for answering my question. I don't believe that Carp ever did, but your post probably explains it better than Carp could. I truly did not understand how the conservative could question our patriotic stance or say we hate America, but I think you are probably right in your explanation. At least your response rings true to me.
Posted by Judith at January 14, 2006 12:10 AMWhile I agree almost entirely with your take on things, I did get a laugh out of your statements about South America. South America does not lag as far behind the western world as you imagine. It moves at its own pace and does things its own way, but "progress" can not be measured using a US-built yardstick.
Furthermore, your statement about Allende is entirely naive! Calling him "wise" is absolutely absurd. As president of Chile, Allende was a fool who understood neither the social, political nor economic dynamics of his country, nor the ramifications of his dream-based decision making. Don't confuse his "agrarian reform" with cases in Central America, where much of that was centered around taking land from US-owned corporations. In Chile, it was an entirely different story - he dismantled a semi-feudal social and economic system but did nothing to replace the services that were lost, including health care, education and production-allotments (all of which were very important components of the patronage-based system). I am not arguing that a patronage-based land system is a good thing (far from it) but, with the exception of those who identify with the communist party, you would be hard-pressed to find anyone in Chile today who remembers Allende as being "talented" or "wise".
Posted by KD at January 14, 2006 06:41 AMJim S - Good post. Mostly crappy comments.
Probably because the trolls have invaded again -- just when I was noticing a signficant improvement in the overall quality of the comments and dialogue in the comment section.
KD - on Allende. First, he must be evaluated in the context of 1970. Second, he wasn't in office very long. Maybe he was too much of an intellecutal and S. America needs the "street smarts" of those like Chavez, Lula and the new President of Bolivia. I don't doubt that S. America can quickly catch up. They have the resources to do so.
Posted by Marie at January 14, 2006 10:59 AMThanks, Marie, for daring to write what I've been thinking to myself the past few months. Sadly, there isn't enough "goodness" left in America to save it. Everyone in the world -- not just South Americans -- will be a lot better off when the Chinese cut off our credit line and we'll no longer be able to afford to throw our weight around in the world.
Posted by Matt Hogan at January 14, 2006 04:16 PMMarie - But I was referring to Allende in the context of 1970! Chile today is a much different place than it was 36 years ago :)
Posted by KD at January 15, 2006 07:26 AM