Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Support the French! Viva Democracy! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (565)	3/31/2003 6:16:03 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7832

Is this just reminding Bush of what he already said, "lest he forget"? The invasion of Iraq has deeply divided Americans. It has alienated our allies. It is already providing volatile new ammunition for Islamist terrorist groups searching for impressionable young men willing to blow themselves up just so they can take a few of us along with them. It's a grim situation, but it isn't too late for the Bush Administration to minimize the damage created by its reckless and illegal war, now that we're committed to it. A year and a half after invading Afghanistan, the United States is about to seize control of another volatile, strategically vital patch of Muslim real estate riven by ethnic and tribal fault lines. As before, in its war against the Taliban, administration officials are issuing grandiose assurances about noble intentions. "We will deliver the food and medicine you need," Bush promised Iraqis. "We will tear down the apparatus of terror and we will help you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free...The day of your liberation is near." Only a few hard-right Republicans really believe in Bush's newfound interest in liberating the oppressed peoples of the world. Antiwar Americans, most international leaders and the overwhelming majority of the world's population still hold that the war is motivated solely by lust for Iraq's vast oil reserves. One U.N. Security Council diplomat explains his colleagues' reasons for voting no: "No one wants to alienate the United States but you can't ignore polls showing 80 percent opposition to the war," he said. Opinions of America are even worse among Arabs, who note that the only countries that Bush has invaded – Afghanistan and Iraq – and is thinking of attacking – Iran and Syria – are Muslim. Arabs conclude that Bush – a self-described "born again" Christian fundamentalist – is waging a 21st century crusade against Islam. Only six percent of the Egyptian public holds a favorable view of the U.S. This in a country where scholars at the Islamic Research Academy declared that "If the enemy steps on Muslims' land, jihad becomes a duty of every male and female." Bush's clash-of-civilizations rhetoric, sprinkled liberally with Old Testament imagery, hardly reduces tensions. Nonetheless, both America's image abroad and Bush's popularity here could improve dramatically if the former governor of Texas were to take the following steps to make the war look more like liberation and less like exploitation: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And Bush is already scheming to raid $40 billion in the now-defunct UN oil-for-food program to finance postwar reconstruction. That appears to me to be a pretty emotionally laden version of "Honey, please remember to pick up some Coke at the grocery store." While wer're here, how do you reconcile these two statements? We have a second chance to get things right – but it's going to take billions of dollars and several hundred thousand troops at least a decade to get Iraq back on its feet. and 5. Get Out. If we're really going to be taken seriously as liberators and proponents of democracy, we'll allow the popularly elected leaders of Iraq to lead their country into the post-Saddam era, whether or not we care for their politics. And we won't tell them what to do or how to do it. ? And I've asked repeatedly for someone to cite a section of US Code or a treaty the US is party to that justifies this charge: illegal war Can you do it?