Jump to content

Is Is Wrong To Criticize The War In Iraq?


snookums
 Share

Recommended Posts

Iraq; Staying the course at our peril

According to the Bush administration and their official public relations machine, the army of pundits employed by Fox News, it is wrong to criticize the war in Iraq. Criticizing the war is unpatriotic, they claim, and comforts our enemy. We are supposed to forget that each of the reasons offered for invading Iraq has been shown to be false and that Bush has consistently misled the American people. We are expected to excuse the administration for "intelligence failures" and simply trust them to represent our interests abroad. Most of all, we are not supposed to question the flawed ideology which led the neocons to seek this war in the first place.

 

Recent moves by the neocons are showing that they are about as American as McCarthy. This is not the America most citizens envision. The denial of habeas corpus, preemptive war in the name of American imperialism, consistent denial of the scientific consensus that global warming is real, and efforts to infuse Christianity into the public square are blatantly un-American. It is because we love America that we cannot stand for this.

 

Describing a recent radio address by the president, the Associated Press reports that Bush "...argued that critics are wrongheaded to argue for a different policy in Iraq..." Does he see this as an effective political strategy, or does he actually believe this?

 

Clearly, critics would be wrong to criticize a highly effective set of policies, so the question that follows naturally is whether Bush's Iraq policies are effective. This is not a question that can be conclusively answered by the average American citizen. We must rely on those who have access to information which has been withheld from the public. A logical source would be our own intelligence agencies. However, we know that they are prone to disagreement and cannot be expected to reach consensus on something this complicated, right? Wrong. There is now consensus among American intelligence agencies, in the form of the National Intelligence Estimate, that the war in Iraq is making terrorism worse and increasing the likelihood of future attacks. To dismiss this sort of consensus report is a mistake. The situation in Iraq is getting worse.

 

The administration is doing their best to make politicians who speak out against the war pay a price. According to Tammy Duckworth, a veteran of Iraq who is now running for Congress in Illinois, "Anyone who challenges our failed policies, or suggests the need for a new strategy, is accused of 'cutting and running'...I believe the brave men and women who are serving in Iraq today, their families and the American people deserve more than the same empty slogans and political name-calling."

 

Yep. What is more American that openly speaking one's mind without fear of retribution? We who speak out are exercising our freedom; those in the administration who are desperate to silence us have turned their backs on America.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

...i wish more folks would! whats happened to all that 'freedom of speech'...that folks in the US claim to enjoy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to be wrong!

 

I don't like that the IRS is investigating an Episcopal church for crossing the line into politics because someone there preached a sermon against the war, yet how many churches, several documented in the forums here, have "military" Sundays? In my own life, it seemed that every two years during the election season, I began to question my beliefs because all I got from the pulpit was right-wing rhetoric and my politics are moderate to liberal.

 

Despite what the neo-cons think and say, the first amendment has not been repealed and dissent is patriotic!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is wrong not to Criticize the war in Iraq!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest copacetic

I'm from South Africa and I think Americans in general would be horrified at how American politics are portrayed in the media overseas. Unless you happen to take an active interest in world politics, one could easily get the impression that there are about 3 and a half dissenting voices in the whole of America.

I don't wish to insult your country since I think America itself is great in a lot of ways. It's just George Bush and friends that scare the shit out of me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm from South Africa and I think Americans in general would be horrified at how American politics are portrayed in the media overseas. Unless you happen to take an active interest in world politics, one could easily get the impression that there are about 3 and a half dissenting voices in the whole of America.

I don't wish to insult your country since I think America itself is great in a lot of ways. It's just George Bush and friends that scare the shit out of me.

No, insult away. Primus knows I do it all the time. It's far from undeserved.

 

America is a nation populated vastly by complete and total brainwashed idiots - how else do you think we intelligent people wound up with this government? I know I sure as hell didn't vote for a single one of the self-serving fuckers.

 

And it's true, about dissent... for every three people speaking for rationality and common sense, it seems that there's another 997 railing and screaming about how those three are unAmerican and unpatriotic and terrorist-loving liberal scum... So international perception isn't, apparently, that far off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not know how the president and his like-minded appointees and followers have come to be called neo-conservatives. I am a conservative.

 

The neocons are anything but conservative. They follow the political thinking of Leo Strauss, a refugee of nazi Germany. Here is a snapshot, albeit perhaps a not very objective one:

 

"According to Drury, Strauss like Plato (http://plato.biography.ms/) taught that within societies, "some are fit to lead, and others to be led". But, unlike Plato, who believed that leaders had to be people with such high moral standards that they could resist the temptations of power, Strauss thought that "those who are fit to rule are those who realise there is no morality and that there is only one natural right, the right of the superior to rule over the inferior". (www.sourcewatch.org)

 

The neocons are anti-democratic, and promoters of American world empire. Some prominent names are Irving Kristoll and son William, Richard Perl, Paul Wolfowitz. Personally, I consider them dangerous people, unless you like fascism and hate the Bill of Rights.

 

As to the disastrous war wrought by the Bush administration, I was one who never supported it. There was no good reason to initiate war with Iraq, at any time. Americans have suffered for this odious blunder with loss of American lives, crushing national debt, erosion of our civil rights, and a loss of respect by the free world. I don't know if the damage can ever be undone. But unless Americans demand an end to this kind of abuse of executive power, our country that has inspired those who love freedom and self determination world wide during its history, will cease to be a free republic. I say, protest from any and every possible forum. Not only is it not wrong, it is our obligation as citizens.

 

 

“The rulers of the earth have realized long ago what potent poison inheres in the Christian religion. That is the reason they foster it; that is why they leave nothing undone to instill it into the blood of the people.” (Emma Goldman)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

America is a nation populated vastly by complete and total brainwashed idiots - how else do you think we intelligent people wound up with this government? I know I sure as hell didn't vote for a single one of the self-serving fuckers.

 

Always remember, it's risky to speak of "America" or better "The USA". To be specific, basically we'd have to differentiate all the time between, like the goo' ol' Betty Bowers button says, "The United States of liberty and education"... and "Jesusland".

:Hmm:

 

And it's true, about dissent... for every three people speaking for rationality and common sense, it seems that there's another 997 railing and screaming about how those three are unAmerican and unpatriotic and terrorist-loving liberal scum... So international perception isn't, apparently, that far off.

 

One can only hope that this impression is due to the most braindead always feeling the greatest compulsion to be heard... :banghead:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get it, honestly. What is a 'neo-con? A 'New-Conservative?' That's what I assume. So many terms and conditions and views pop up everyday that I can't keep track of them, so how is this not the same as an old conservative?

 

Iraq? What's wrong with 'cutting and running'? Maybe Somebody should just stand up and say, ' "We might have fucked-up, or we might not have", so what? We can't MAKE IRAQ LIKE ITSELF! But we can still nuke Iran, so fuck 'em if we screwed up next door! Even the Great Allah, in this situation, would admit that that is true.

 

In the mean time, I do have freedom of speech. It may not be according to the Founding Fathers' ideas, what I have today. Yet the hope was given to me nontheless by the United States Constitution. So many swear to protect and defend that, but so few do.

 

So is it wrong to criticize the war in Iraq? Nope. And those who say you can't support the troops without supporting the war are (naive...SP?) children that have no sense of Country, Patriotism, God, or anything.

 

Just my humble opinion, as an American.

 

Duder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get it, honestly. What is a 'neo-con? A 'New-Conservative?' That's what I assume. So many terms and conditions and views pop up everyday that I can't keep track of them, so how is this not the same as an old conservative?

A neo-conservative is a CINO (conservative in name only). They wear the "Conservative" label, while adhering to stereotypically "liberal" beliefs - spending more money, more government control of traditionally personal issues, more government regulation (except in the case of Big Corporations, who are, apparently, free to do as they please, as long as they pay out), more power, more taxes, more more more - or, rather, less, if you're poor. They they don't want you to have anything other than a staggering amount of debt. They also tend to be openly hawkish and aggressive, even towards their own countrymen, and freely associate with, and uphold the ideals of, evangelical Christian fundamentalists, usually end-timers who believe that the world will die out soon.

 

Iraq? What's wrong with 'cutting and running'?

Well, obviously, it would make us cowards, and then the rest of the world would be beating down our doors, looking to invade. Besides, cut-and-runners favor terrorism and give aid and comfort to those evil, murdering brown people, instead of demanding that they be just like us and forcibly converting them to christianity so that their tattered little souls don't burn in hell...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So then, L-Feline,

 

Oh. Thanks. Is Bush then a neo-conservative? Because I have noted a power grab by the 'Executive Branch', much like the one in the nineties by the Supreme Court, that legislated from the bench, as it were.

 

IMHO, the legislature is sleeping on the job, and has been for a long time, despite their rhetoric and many vacations. They are good at making laws upon laws, but lax when it comes to being one-third of the American government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Neo-Agnostic - Vulgaris

So then, L-Feline,

 

Oh. Thanks. Is Bush then a neo-conservative?

 

Bush is the model of neo-conservatism. He hates separation of chruch and state, hates government being anything other than a lapdog of corporate power, hates anyone who doesn't let him do what he wants, hates the UN, hates brown people (except his buddies, the Saudis, who funded and aided the 9/11 hijackers), hates anyone who's not a far-right hyper-evangelical Bible-humper, hates, hates HATES anyone who questions his supremacy...

 

Neo-conservatism is hate, defined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm from South Africa and I think Americans in general would be horrified at how American politics are portrayed in the media overseas. Unless you happen to take an active interest in world politics, one could easily get the impression that there are about 3 and a half dissenting voices in the whole of America.

I don't wish to insult your country since I think America itself is great in a lot of ways. It's just George Bush and friends that scare the shit out of me.

 

 

Until recently, you could get that impression from our media too. But it is not the case. Nevertheless, you do well to be afraid of George and Company -- especially if someone finds a great deal of oil in your country.

 

We have an Imperialist government here and there is little we can do about it. We have been demoted from citizens to consumers. Nevertheless, a large minority are not content with that. Encourage your government to resist ours whenever it can but especially in matters of globalization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to those of you that explained what 'neo-conservative' means.

 

Chef, did you really mean to tell Copacetic to 'resist our government', or did you mean to resist this current administration?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our government was imperialistic and pushy long before the Bush Administration, he's simply done away with the velvet gloves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.