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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (44884)	5/17/2004 4:05:35 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793682

How to lose the war? How shall I count the ways . . . . Well, let's see -- did the United States invade Iraq? Check. Did we maintain military surveillance and interdiction of supplies going to Iraq for approximately a decade before the war? Check. Did we surround Iraq with aircraft carriers, supporting vessels, and brand new air force bases and other military bases built for just that purpose for several months leading up to the invasion? Check. Did we make it clear that if the United Nations did not approve force being used against Iraq, we'd invade anyway? Check. Is it not true that the United States, in point of fact, actually initiated a war with no prior menace or attack from Iraq, contrary to centuries of international law and accepted precedence, based on the solemn assurance of our President and his closest advisors that it was essential for the safety and well-being of the United States and its allies due to massive stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction? Check. Did the UN inspectors tell us that they were unable to find any WMD prior to invasion? Check. Is it not true that to date we have not found any significant proof that Iraq had a present capacity to use WMD against the US or its allies? Check. Is it not true that to date we have not found any connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, other than a notation in someone's diary that a member of Iraqi intelligence had coffee with a "Hamburg student," name unspecified, sex unspecified? Check. Is it not true that we are telling the Iraqi people that we are their friends at the same time that some of our prison guards are mistreating Iraqis, apparently with impunity until international outrage brought about reforms? Check. Is it not true that the events in Abu Ghraib were carried out by members of our armed forces acting under color of law, while wearing US uniforms, while drawing US paychecks? Check. Is it not true that, in contrast, the events in Fallujah and the beheading of Nick Berg were NOT carried out by members of the Iraqi armed forces, that the perpetrators were NOT acting under color of law, and that the perpetrators were NOT drawing paychecks from the Iraqi government? Check. In fact, is it not true that the events in Fallujah and the beheading of Nick Berg were carried out by persons who are criminals according to Iraq law, and are presently fugitives from Iraqi justice? Check. Is it not the case that the largest military in the world has invaded their country, occupied their cities, taken over their government buildings, their infrastructure, their oil wells, their air ports, their sea ports, everything of military or economic value? Check. Is it not the case that Rush Limbaugh and others who have the ears of, if not the President, the persons who have the ears of the President, dismiss Abu Ghraib as "frat pranks"? Check. Is it not the case that many Americans outspokenly equate Islam, per se, with Islamism, and dehumanize eeevil moooslims? Check. Is it not the case that even conservative Americans are openly critical of the administration's detention of American citizens without charge or the ability to meet with counsel? Check. Is it not the case that the administration failed to make its case about Guantanamo early and cogently, so that in the world's eye, it is a torture chamber? Check. Is it not the case that dozens of prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo have died in capitivity or suffered injury sufficiently grievous to motivate criminal inquiry? Check. Is it not the case that Michael Moore's latest opus apparently got the longest standing ovation in the history of Cannes? Check. I conclude by observing that between the idiocies of Michael Moore and the idiocies of Rush Limbaugh are vast expanses of American sanity, and that the Republic shall prevail and endure, and that this, too, shall pass, but it is indeed regrettable that the rest of us are relegated, as usual, to the Silent Majority. I regret that Hanson doesn't get it, and prescribe less Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity to start with.