ANTI-WAR/USA BASHERS: WHERE ARE YOU NOW, MFERS?!?!

THE FACT THAT YOU DIDNT BLOW UR STOP AND GOT OUT WOULD MAKE IT A SUCCESFUL TRADE....Im not straying.......take care...

 

Anti-war voices have been SUPPRESSED? When? Where?

 

Not in America. But that's only because MondoTrader is not running things. He probably thinks Ashcroft is a left wing radical pinko who should be in prison because he did not have all those who expressed their dissenting views either jailed for sedition, or better yet, executed for treason.

However, the good guys seem to have won, and that's all that matters. While Alphonso may prove to be right in the long run, (hopefully not), right now, as someone said, the Iraqi people can not possibly be in worse shape then they were before this campaign started.

America DOES stand for ideals that are exclusive of economic gain. Look at the Constitution. Better yet, look at our Declaration of Independence. It AIN'T ABOUT OIL!!! (although having an administration packed with oil guys does make for good conspiracy theories). Wild/Msfe, suggested reading for you especially!!!


Rs7

PS: ElCubano....don't waste time arguing with brick walls.

 

A very, very simple analogy, and incorrect. It is not just the US that desires stability in oil prices, but OPEC itself. $25 - $30 a barrel has been the stated desired range of members for how long now? To thus accuse the US of hijacking the oil industry and conspiring to keep prices down strikes me as not only odd, but comical.

LOL! That is NOT what I'm trying to say at all!

But, first of all, ABC hardly kowtows to Washington! That network has leaned to the left for some time now! MSNBC isn't all that objective anymore either, not to mention CNN. You won't hear me saying Fox is centrist either, fear not!

Going back to the main point: if Iraq had nukes, it would be a far different situation that would require different tactics of course. North Korea is going to be the blueprint of how to deal with such a problem....But no, IMHO we would have just as much right to invade. I don't know where you got that idea from my statement. My point was MAD would not have been a consideration for Saddam because he could not care less what happens in the end to his people, which is the foundation on which MAD relies.

Ciao,
Hapa

 

James Lileks
April 10, 2003

***

You hope Saddam’s alive to see this, to see the hailstorm of footwear, the burly men taking sledgehammers to his statue’s polished podium, to see the American flag draped over his cruel empty mug. That last point was one of the more remarkable moments today - the soldier put the flag over Saddam’s iron face, then removed it and replaced it with the old Iraqi flag. It’s a potent message. A show of power, then a show of respect. Our flag first; your flag for ever after. Don’t forget how the latter was made possible by the former.

***

The media should poke and carp and needle the military; it’s their job. It’s instructive on many levels. But just don’t forget this day: liberation. Freedom. All of a sudden, in a day, a guy can look at a car battery without crossing his legs. It’s just a car battery now. It’s just something you curse when it dies. Bring out the satellite dishes; uncork the hooch; smoke ‘em if you got ‘em, yawp at the moon. Revel & enjoy.

I’m not stupid enough to think that we’ve just created a nation of 22 million wannabe Americans. But tonight parents can look down at their children in bed and believe they will have better lives. Not just hope for it, but believe it. Some of us call that the American Dream - hold the scare quotes, please - and we pray for the day when it’s no longer an American concept but a universal birthright.

Whatever you think we should do to get to that point, you have to admit that the sound of a cast-iron skull striking the pavement is a good way to start. And if you don’t it’s because you see some other false god on the podium, pointing at an empty heaven.

Full "bleat" at:

http://www.lileks.com/bleats/archive/03/0403/041003.html

 

Oh, and here's one just for msfe:

Kommentar

Ein Sieg der Freiheit

Das Regime Saddam Husseins ist tot

Von Richard Herzinger für ZEIT.de

Es scheint wahr geworden zu sein: Heute, am Mittwoch, den 9.April, vormittags, sprechen alle Anzeichen dafür, dass das Regime Saddam Husseins aufgehört hat zu existieren. Noch wird in Bagdad gekämpft und gestorben, doch organisierten Widerstand scheint es nicht mehr zu geben. Die Chefs des Regimes scheinen sich abgesetzt zu haben. Hoffentlich kommen sie nicht davon.

Bestätigt sich dieser Eindruck, ist festzuhalten: dies ist ein großer Tag und ein großer Sieg für die Freiheit. Mit der Zerschlagung des Baath-Systems im Irak ist eine der grausamsten und gefährlichsten totalitären Diktaturen, die die Welt seit dem Ende Hitlers und Stalins gesehen hat, vom Erdboden verschwunden.

Über die amerikanische und britische Kriegsführung, über die Opfer, die sie gekostet hat, wird zu reden sein. Die Probleme und Gefahren der Nachkriegsordnung sind immens. Für den Augenblick aber ist festzuhalten: die USA und Großbrittannien haben im Großen und Ganzen recht behalten mit ihrer Einschätzung, das irakische Regime sei innerlich ausgehöhlt, habe keinen Rückhalt in der Bevölkerung und werde daher in relativ kurzer Zeit besiegt werden können. Genau drei Wochen hat der Krieg gedauert. Die Unheilsprophetien der Deutschen und Franzosen („Destabilisierung der ganzen Region, unabsehbare Folgen, hunderttausende ziviler Opfer, Welle fundamentalistischer Anschläge...“) haben sich bislang nicht erfüllt.

Es beginnt für den Irak eine ungewisse Zukunft, aber alles deutet darauf hin, dass es eine bessere Zukunft sein wird. Für die gesamte Region öffnen sich jetzt ungeahnte Chancen, auch wenn die Gefahren nicht unterschätzt werden dürfen. Haben George W. Bush und Tony Blair in allem recht behalten? Es ist noch viel zu früh, das zu sagen. Aber fest steht bereits, dass Jacques Chirac, Gerhard Schröder und Joschka Fischer Unrecht hatten, als sie unterstellten, es handele sich bei dem Irak-Krieg um ein unverantwortliches „Abenteuer“.

(c) DIE ZEIT 15/2003

 

10 Apr 2003]
Stephen Pollard

The dogs of intellectual war

We've seen the power - and success - of shock and awe. To use the military terminology, it scared Saddam shitless. And the papers and blogosphere are full of pieces such as this on Instapundit:

(N)ot many people will listen to a crowd that has squandered its remaining moral and intellectual capital -- again.

Those of us who saw the case for war, and pushed it, have every right to say 'I told you so'. But it doesn't get us very far. Nor does the view that because we were right, we have in somw way 'won' the intellectual and political war. That's certainly how it should be. But I defy anyone to provide me with a convincing example of how being demonstrably wrong has ever muted the message from our idiotarian friends - or, to a lesser but nontheless still real extent, their ability to persuade people that they do indeed have something to offer.

***

Just because they've had their worldview destroyed, don't think they'll give up. They're clever, and slippery. They'll come back for more - and they may still win. Take the Marxism Today crowd who found after the collapse of communism that everything in which they once believed had been shattered, and that no one was interested in the witterings of Marxists. They simply got up, dusted themselves down, and changed tack. And now they're some of the most influential voices in the media and politics.
This lot are the same, in every sense - the same people, the same beliefs, the same tactics. And if we don't adapt our tactics, they'll wriggle free. Unleash the attack dogs of intellectual war.

Full text at:

http://www.stephenpollard.net/viewstory.php?ID=0792

 

Stop treating your own people like shit or we will step in???

So I guess we're gonna step into all corrupt regimes in the world that oppress their people. We're gonna cut our ties with Pakistan and step into China, North Korea, Nigeria, Rwanda, and end the civil wars in Africa.

And I forgot our stellar record in preventing the numerous corrupt South American governments from murdering their own people during the past century. I wonder if you forgot our financing of the evil Pinochet dictatorship in Chile. Or the brutal Sandanistas in Central America.

There have been a myriad of valid arguments made here expressing our reasons for entering this war. But please, don't make an absurd statement implying that a major reason that we are at war is because we did not like the way Hussein treated his people. As a person who claims to realize how the real world works, you should know better.

 

Who's Alphonso? From what I hear of him, he sounds like a really bright guy. I'd like to meet him.

Of course, it certainly is possible for the Iraqi people to be in worse shape than they were before this campaign started. Is it likely? Perhaps not, but I'll opt to reserve judgement for another six months or so. I'll refer you to the people of certain Eastern European nations, who it was universally declared were going to be better off after the fall of communism, to reflect on the accuracy of popular proclamations.

 

alfonso, are you implying that the people of the former Communist countries are worse off now?