Marching off to war.

I don’t support the resolution that congress just passed. I don’t support the Bush administration’s obsession with Oil^H^H^HIraq, and I think it gives way too much power to the president.
So I wrote my senators (my US Rep is a hardline Republican so I didn’t bother) and I asked them to please oppose the vote.
Boxer voted no, Feinstein voted yes.
I was very upset with Feinstein’s yes vote…but after reading this from her, I am absolutely apoplectic.

“I serve as the senior senator from California, representing 35 million people. That is a formidable task. People have weighed in by the tens of thousands. If I were just to cast a representative vote based on those who have voiced their opinions with my office — and with no other factors — I would have to vote against this resolution

Yeah.
If she’d, oh, respected the wishes of her constituents, and *gasp* represented> us, she’d have to vote no.
If she’d listened to those pesky voters who put her into office so that she’d carry out our wishes in this silly representative republic we have here.
But there are these mysterious “other factors” that she speaks of, right? Maybe she knows something that we don’t, because she refers to herself as

“…a member of the Intelligence Committee, as someone who has read and discussed and studied the history of Iraq…

Well, that’s pretty compelling stuff, isn’t it? I know that after a year of nebulous warnings I’ve certainly learned to be afraid of my own shadow and turn to my big government to protect me…maybe she’s onto something there, and we shouldn’t mobilze the entire state to throw her out for failing to cast a representative vote based on those who have voiced their opinions with her office.
But there’s this other guy, you see, who ]co-chairs the same committee, and who is privy to the same information. His name is Senator Bob Graham, and he’s a Florida Democrat who disagrees with Feinstein:

Iraq is ”the wrong target” in the war on terrorism, Graham said in an impassioned speech moments before the Senate early Friday gave President Bush sweeping powers to attack Iraq. The Senate overwhelmingly approved the resolution, 77-23, with Graham among the “nays.”
”I predict we will live to regret this day,” declared Graham, who is co-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and privy to a gamut of classified information on global terrorism. Graham said it would be ”irresponsible” to go to war with Iraq before confronting more imminent terrorist threats to the United States.

Surely he can’t be serious! Isn’t he privy to the same information that Feinstein has? Maybe he’s paying more attention to the report from the CIA:

Then there is the awkward matter of the CIA report on Iraq released last week, which concluded that U.N. inspections actually worked before they were halted in 1998, leaving Saddam’s military and his chemical-weapons program weaker than they were in the 1980s.
In other words, the head of American intelligence and a top military man don’t think Saddam is planning terrorist attacks against the U.S. now, but might if he was convinced we were coming in after his head. And the CIA says that Saddam’s military machine poses less of a threat to the U.S. than it did a decade ago.

Boy, it sure seems that anyone who doesn’t have something to gain politically is telling us all that the war against Iraq is at best unnecessary, and at worst A Very Bad Idea(tm).
Dianne Feinstein may not be “against us” by the Bush administration’s definition, but she’s certainly against the wishes of her constituents, and is therefore unfit to represent us in the future.
I’ll be thinking about this in November 2006.
—-
Sources:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2002/10/11/senate_iraq/print.html

http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/4266351.htm

http://www.salon.com/news/col/scheer/2002/10/09/cia/print.html

http://www.salon.com/politics/feature/2002/10/10/intelligence/print.html

197 thoughts on “Marching off to war.”

  1. Anyone who hasn’t seen it yet should check out presidentmoron.com.
    I check out this site regularly, and it is dead on with it’s humor.
    Personally, I agree with you Wil.
    In my opinion -and many others obviously- Bush Jr. is a brainless idiot who can barely speak let alone run a country. Everyone knows he is a puppet.
    There is actually a quote attributed to Bush Jr. (that I have seen on more than one site, and many credible sites) that he said to the president of Brazil (which also has humanitarian issues that sicken me), and I quote: “Do you have blacks here too?” Oh yeah. He is what we want for president.
    The people who defend Bush seem to always be the same type of person. A sheep. Someone who is so blindly caught up in the Super Patriot, ultra Christian mindset, that anyone who differs from them is automatically called Un-American.
    Islam is being persecuted. It amazes me that that is not obvious to everyone. Bush wants Iraq’s oil as well as revenge for Daddy. And, until Bush and the US “government” reevaluate their relationship with Israel, tension and terror will continue. I mean that should be obvious too. It is unfair to say on one hand that the terror that Palestinians perpetrate is worse the the ones Israel does. And then on the other hand, defend Israel when it bombs hospitals and private homes. It attacks Arafat’s residences with Arafat inside, which is a direct violation of UN Charters. They are not allowed to assasinate a world leader, but they can destroy the building he is in? Huh?
    Hey I am not saying that Arafat is a great guy; he is not someone I admire, but seriously, fair is fair. The same rules need to apply to everyone involved. And, the US were the ones who refused to discuss the problems occurring in Israel with the Palestinians in the last race summit, and then proceeded to walk out.
    My Senators also voted no. Thank God. But, they were in the minority.
    It is funny that the people who want war with Iraq can not offer tangible reasons why. Ask the average person on the street who happens to aggree with Bush why they agree, and they say: Because Iraq could attack us. Ok, why? Response: Because that is what I heard on tv. Whoa…….
    Bush doesn’t care about going to war because there can not be an election held during war time. That suits him just fine. I bet no one in his family will be over there fighting a stupid and pointless war.
    I am more than a little disgusted by the UN too. They need to stand up to the American propaganda machine and say “No, you will not wage a war that is completely unfounded.” But they won’t. Oh, well.
    If the US does go into a war with Iraq, I will move to New Zealand. I swear. I want to be as far away from the craziness as possible.
    One more point: There are far more threats to our security coming from other countries of the world at present, but -Oops, right, there is not that vendetta issue, or Oil.
    Wil, keep posting your point of view. It is like having a light in the darkness.
    And, you are cool, and so are most of your readers and posters, well except “me”:
    “Have you checked with each and every one of her constituents? I didn’t think so. Saying things like:
    “… but she’s certainly against the wishes of her constituents, and is therefore unfit to represent us in the future.”
    Just invalidates everything you said and makes everything you will say about the subject in the future worthless.”
    Right, and the people who want war obviously are so led like the sheep they are, they didn’t care enough to voice the approval of the war resolution, now did they?
    If the war proponents took it seriously they would have equalled or outnumbered the people who called in the first place. But they didn’t call in in the numbers that people who are opposed to the war did. That should tell you something. Using more than one percent of your brain might be a good idea….

  2. Oddly enough, the only persuasive argument I have ever heard against going to war with Iraq came from a conservative friend of mine who is against the war for just this one reason:
    “I don’t want American boys to die on Iraqi soil.”
    All left-wing excuses and anti-war posturing pale in comparison to that. But then, the left-wing never did nor still doesn’t care about the conditions of the military men who go out every day to protect _their_ freedoms. That’s why they go out of their way to come up with false reason after false reason not to go to war with Iraq.
    May I also remind the dumb left-wingers here that Saddam LOST the Gulf War, and is thus expect to follow through every last condition of the treaty which ended that war, which includes complete disarmament of his WMDs, which he has NOT done, and is therefore in violation of said treaty, and is now rightfully subject to military action by the U.S. and its allies.

  3. Derek, Pro-American. Did you actuall read my post, or did you just skim over it and dismiss it as liberalism?
    Heres an argument for you. The evidence FOR war is unconvincing, and not enough to justify more death, and there is a great deal of evidence that a war would make the situation in the Middle East worse…not better. There is NOTHING that can be applied to Saddam and his regime that cannot be applied to at least 5 other countries, sometimes better, and some of those countries are apparently our bosom buddies. After all we are still selling them weapons. Just like we sold weapons to Saddam when it suited us.
    Has anyone else seen this evidece that ties Saddam to Al Quaeda? I haven’t. And I’ve been looking for it.
    Arguments against the war? Hows this…a cornered bear is the most dangerous, especially if its claws are sharp. If Saddam does have WMD then he will undoubtedly use them the moment he gets a sniff of an invasion, which tells me that an invasion would not be the best course of action.
    Its interesting that the hawks are demanding reasons NOT to kill people, while providing unclear and murky evidence to support bombing the crud out of anyone who pisses them off.
    Am I liberal? Damn right. 3000 people died on Sept 11, and at LEAST 3500 people died in afghanistan. Is human life really so cheap to you people? or do you think that only American lives are worth anything?

  4. To theothercourtney:
    A billion muslims against the US for invading Iraq? Give me a break. We thought we were going to run into huge opposition when running into afghanistan. The only problems we ran into were the local populace trying to get the GIs to bring in satellite dishes and radios from the US and Taiwan to sell.
    People LIKE being free to do what they want, living in a dictatorship/religious state just tends to piss off the middle class and oppresses the poor even more.
    Can someone show me a better government than the US? I would love to see an example…

  5. When do we get to make our own planet? This one is obviously hooped.
    It’s pretty sickening that the lines between countries are emphasized thus obscuring the fact that we’re all one race on this planet. Truth be told: Goverments are NOT bigger than the world.

  6. I have always supported the Constition. It gives us our most basic rights such as free speach and self defense. I also support our right to have a voice. I also think that someone of your stature should be a little more responsible in what you post. You have influence over a multitude of people. You usually try to promote positive issues. You do your homework. You try to give an informed opinion. Did you stop to think that this time, you can’t. Yeah, Congress wasn’t unanimous in their vote. They couldn’t even get a unanimous vote to give themselves a raise! No matter what the threat, no matter what the reason, there will always be people who oppose war. It doesn’t change the fact that war is a necessary evil. My husband is in the Persian Gulf defending your right to have your opinion. He is defending your right not to do a damn thing to defend our country. He is willing to give his life for this country and its people. That includes you. SHOW A LITTLE RESPECT!! Just because you and most of the other people our age are too cowardly to stand up to the people threatening our way of life, don’t diss the people who aren’t. This is not about oil. This is about people who deliberately kill civilians. Would you be so quick to judge and to criticize if you lost a loved one on the USS COLE ,in the World Trade Center or in the Pentagon?! Have you forgotten about those people? Have you forgotten that this isn’t about you. This isn’t about money. This isn’t about convenience. This isn’t about looking good. This is about freedom. This is about our very way of life. This is about being able to live in a place where your wife can wear what she wants. This is about living in a place where daughters are not circumcised or stoned to death for looking at a boy. This is about a place where sons learn to carry a gun and to hate before they learn to read and write. This is about our children having a place to grow up where they won’t have to be afraid of their shadow. What about Nolan and Ryan? Did you think about them and their future or were you too busy thinking about your political beliefs and cozy moralities. Well, guess what. Not everything is as easy as obeying the Golden Rule. Not everyone cares that you are a really good guy. Not everyone cares that you are a talented actor who has made a difference in peoples’ lives. They would kill you for being a different. So please, the next time you want to rant about not going to war, think about Nolan and Ryan and how you want them to grow up. Think about what their kids’ lives are going to be like. What do you want for their future? Are you willing to do what needs to be done? What would you do to defend them? Would you stand idle knowing your next door neighbor was planning to hurt them? What would you do? It is easy to criticize, but what about solutions? I don’t see you coming up with a better plan to defend our country? Rant about that. If you can’t, the least you can do is respect those that are trying. Thanks.

  7. Fluffy,
    Thank you for posting the thoughts I didn’t have time to waste on the warmongers who I know wouldn’t listen anyway. Don’t worry though, Derek and pro-American will be on the frontlines, riding their shining white steeds with purple feathers in their caps, crying, “Tally Ho Boys! Once more into the breach!” Should all us cowards ever need to be saved from oppression. Let the flames begin!
    Uncle Willie’s Nephew Eric

  8. From Neil:
    “Goverments are NOT bigger than the world.”
    No, but living in anarchy would probably have hindered the development of the following.
    Jet Engines
    Rocket Engines
    The Internet
    Society as we see it today
    While government itself is no where near perfect, it DOES allow the general populace to have a reasonable voice and allow for the specialization of certain skills (because of the local government, I don’t need to know how to build a road, a stoplight, or have to cart anyone I care about to the hospital when they are severely hurt).
    No, government isn’t the answer to everything, but it does answer the few things we do need quite well.

  9. And as for us “warmongers,” we listen very closely to all of your liberal arguments against the war. It is by listening to them and reasoning them through that we know you’re all _dead wrong_ on Iraq.

  10. This little offf Wil’s subject.
    Here’s the bottom line of it all if Bush does invade unilaterally (using the media’s new favorite word), invading Iraq will be against international law. The resolution that has passed by Bush has forfieted a check and balance laid out by our forefather’s that will be very hard to overturn, and will be inherited by any new president.
    An invasion of Iraq without UN approval will cause many unsettling scenarios.
    1.) chances are there will be a lot of casualties on both sides.
    2. if We win the US may not be able to finacially or politically restructure Iraq and may inadvertantly give rise to someone even more of dictator than Saddam (its happened before when we put Saddam in power orginally).
    3.if things go as cheery as what Bush hopes for, there is still the big issue of oil that might ignite conflict with larger contries such as Russia, China, France, and other nations who are contracted to Iraqi oil.
    4.)invading Iraq may give rise to more anti-american culture in the middle east and spark terrorism against Americans far beyond what we have seen yet.
    5.) there the unpredicted scenario never thought to crossed our minds.
    Granted these are all scenarios that might not happen, but one or more may happen, that is something anyone can be sure. Nothing ever works as we hoped or predicted it to happen, and I don’t think our current leader realizes that fully.
    It puzzles me that every option has not been explored. If we are so desperate to change Iraq’s regime why not try something that may not cost as many lives. It’s a crazy idea that I’ve only heard a few experts express, but: Why not use our international court to indict Saddam? It may not be successful, but such action would strengthen diplomacy amongst our allies and other nations, and force the international community to forcively remove Saddam. Its an option that should be expresed by us American citizens to all our local leaders and the leader in Washington DC.
    So write to your leaders and express some new options to present. And if anything threaten not to vote for your leaders if they don’t listen to you.

  11. *Sighs* why do Right-winger people believe the left is totally against war???? I read in the editorial of the Sun newspaper which is a concervative canadian paper, that leftys are antiwar and they shouldn’t stand in the way of Bush’s war on terrorism when dealing with Iraq. *Aaaaagh!* I ….a lefty…am pro war on terrorism. What I AM against is war for oil which is trying to be sold to us as part of the war on terrorism. Hello!!!! isn’t indonisia or some other countries warrant war more than Iraq on that excuse?? Pluhease!

  12. One thing this discussion points out is that it’s difficult to pinpoint the mood of the country. I said the growing majority of Americans oppose unilateral action in Iraq. Several more conservative voices have stated here that something like 70 percent of Americans support Bush. Well, in effect both are accurate, although the 70 percent cannot be construed to mean that all of those people support Bush on EVERY ISSUE. Of course they don’t. Just as the the other 30 percent don’t oppose him on EVERY ISSUE.
    There is also merit in the argument that the phone calls, e-mails, letters, and faxes that Feinstein and friends received only represent the very vocal and are not an accurate representation of the people. This is probable.
    So the question is, how should a politician figure out what the mood of his or her constituents is? He or she should not have rushed to this vote, should have gone back to the people, and talked to them. They could have held non-partisan public forums, town hall meeting. Of course no Republican or Democrat would do that in an election cylcle.
    Someone pointed out that politicians aren’t supposed to vote the way their constituents would have them vote. I think this is probably true on issues such as civil rights. But in order to sustain war, the nation has to be largely in favor of it. If not, the effort will fall apart as soon as the bodies show up on screen.

  13. Angela Thomas wrote:
    “This is about a place where sons learn to carry a gun and to hate before they learn to read and write. This is about our children having a place to grow up where they won’t have to be afraid of their shadow.”
    Sounds to me like you’re describing Oakland CA, or Compton CA, or New Haven CT, or Washington DC, or zillions of other places right here in the US.
    There are people suffering and dying right here in our own land. We are not a healthy nation.
    In a war with Iraq, Americans will die on Iraqi soil, funded by billions of dollars that could have gone towards preventing Americans from dying on *American* soil.

  14. Conservative,
    Oh yes, the conservative right holds the monopoly on all the answers…sorry, I forgot. Oh wait, that was sarcasm. The mere fact that you are so sure of yourself leads me to know that you are indeed not. How in the wide world of sports have I gotten myself pulled into this today? As a bleeding heart leftist liberal coward I will now run away screaming just as you would have me do. AHHH…AHHH…Ahhh…ahhh….
    Good night all,
    Uncle Willie’s Nephew Eric

  15. Often times on these forums involving political discussion I sometimes see the rants of people who express phrases against liberal thinking people.
    I’d like to point out that “liberal people” are what made the United States to begin with. It was considered a liberal and unconfromist view to seperate from Great Britain. It was considered liberal to believe in a democracy were people voted for their own leaders. It was considered a liberal idea to announce such foreign ideals of freedom of speech and religion. Because Liberal comes from the word liberty, and liberty means the quality and state of being free. Which if i remember correctly Liberty is at the heart of American idealism. So rant all you want about radical Liberals but without many Liberals the liberties you have now would not exist.

  16. I, too, wrote to the two California senators (I only moved here 3 weeks ago, but they’re mine now, and I intend to let them know it), and received similar responses. When I heard the result of the vote, I picked up the phone on Friday and called not only the california reps, but also my former representatives in Oregon (god bless Ron Wyden) to either thank them or blast them for their choice. I wanted to let them know I didn’t just care before they voted, I’m going to remember who they are and what they did.
    Which reminds me, go Paul Wellstone For President 2004. :)

  17. NY Senators both voted yes as well, and certainly democrats in NY are mostly against the war. I am so hopping mad about this. They just don’t freaking get it do they?

  18. Uncle Willie’s Nephew Eric,
    As to sureity of purpose, my assuredness comes from the fact that I’ve looked extensively at the arguments from all sides of the equation (that means every argument from noam chomsky down to ann coulter), and have come to my own definitive answer. If that’s being sure of myself, then so be it.
    Also, do not for a second forget the fact that you yourself are sure of your anti-war views. If it weren’t for the fact that we were sure of our own opinions, we wouldn’t bother defending them.
    And run away screaming? I usually don’t have to say anything at all for liberals to run off foaming-at-the-mouthing screaming like that, they do it on their own :)
    Patriotically yours,
    Conservative

  19. In response to JimmyT’s listing of Dem/Rep Presidential War’s:
    While many Democratic Presidents have had wars during their terms, we seem to quickly forget about the following:
    Reagan (R) – Libya, Grenada, Lebanon, and of course, the Cold War.
    Carter (D) – Failed attempt to rescue American hostages in Iran.
    Nixon (R) – Kept the Vietnam War going even though he promised to leave (and we didn’t until Gerald Ford’s Presidency)
    Eisenhower (R) – Planned the Bay of Pigs invasion (which Kennedy did not want to do, but did anyway.)
    Truman (D) – Korean War
    McKinley (R) – 100 Day war in 1898 (which he opposed.)
    And then there is the first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln who had no choice but to fight the Civil War to preserve the Union.
    My point is, it doesn’t matter which party is in power, wars and skirmishes happen. History is intent on repeating itself.
    I recommend going back and studying the circumstances of what caused all of the wars that have occured, and then re-evaluate your opinion (whether it is good or bad) and see if it still makes sense.

  20. I’m scared by the recent vote. And I’m glad someone with a voice larger than my own has said how wrong they see it is.
    Maybe if more (sudo-celebrities) stopped their boxing matches against each other and started boxing the goverment, we might actually make some…dare i say….PROGRESS.

  21. One should really remember one thing:
    religion and politics are opinions.
    Everyone had them, and hopefully people with more information on the topic at hand are making the best choice out of a plethora of bad options… My take, solidarity is more important than anything else.

  22. Concerned Historian:
    ‘Zactly. My post was more to Rust to point out that labeling one party or another as “warmongers” makes no sense. Dem and Reps, neither has a hammerlock on who is the party of peace and who is the party of war. Personally, despite being a card carrying GOPer this whole thing with Iraq smells of politics and nothing else. Not even a thin veneer of justification seems to remain. I dislike this rather headlong rush to the edge.
    -JimmyT

  23. Dear Fluffy,
    Not standing up to a Bully because he might hit you does NOT get rid of the bully. Not going to war with Iraq “because he might use his WMD” is jsut as misguided. Being nice to a bully does not mkae the bully leave you alone. Instead, it make you a target.
    Alacrity

  24. Dear Concerned Historian,
    Reagan was the only president during the “cold War”?
    In what revised history are you reading? The cold war was decades long and only ended when the USSR was bankrupt and couldn’t support their own war machine.
    Alacrity

  25. Wil, I know how you feel.
    Oregon’s wonderful Senator Smith valiantly promoted his own agenda by opposing our suicide law in congress many years ago. While I understand he has his own issues with suicide, we don’t pay him to vote his conscious, we pay him to vote ours.
    I’m anti-war, too, by he way. I think those Emperor Bush protest signs gave him ideas.
    Thanks
    Ben

  26. Dear Alicrity,
    My point exactly…who forced the bankruptcy of the USSR? While Reagan wasn’t the only ColdWar President, who of all of the Cold War Presidents actively (and very publicly) fought to end communism?

  27. I too am disappointed. I wrote Boxer, Feinstein, and Tauscher. Boxer is the only one that took her constituents views to heart and action. She made several good points in her floor statement on the Iraq resolution.
    One that sticks with me is the administration

  28. wil,
    you are just plain wrong — but thank god we live in a country that can tolerate our opposing opinions.

  29. Title of post
    “Marching off to war.”
    Question: You are, when did you PERSONALLY join the military?
    In the grand scheme of things what is it YOU are really doing … hint, you are adding fuel to the fire of other countries & people in other countries hating American’s by talking trash about your own country.
    You abuse your freedom of speech, something you should remember you have because of the men & women who WILL go fight any war when the time comes.
    Now that’s not something YOU will be doing is it?!! You’ll be nice and cozy here in America, continuing your trash talk.
    For the record, I AM a military spouse whose husband has now been deployed twice for an extended period since 9-11 — you’ve no clue how hurtful your words can be & are, when anyone says I should come read what you’ve written in the future, I will give them a resounding “HELL NO!”

  30. Derek and pre-American raise a point: There hasn’t been a solid argument against from the liberals.
    Well, I have one. Actually, several.
    Bush’s big argument is that he doesn’t want Saddam Hussein to get Nukuler weapons capability (What is it about Texan Presidents? LBJ pronounced it that way too). Well, let’s suppose he does.
    What can he possibly nuke? The range of his missle program is well-known to only cover the few nations surrounding him – the farthest his reach goes is Israel. What can he nuke in Israel? NOTHING. Keep in mind that Israel is the home of most of the Muslum Holy Sites as well. He nukes Israel, the entie Muslum world will pound his ass into the ground. The same can be said pretty much elsewhere, as most his other neighbors are Muslum.
    Okay, what about biological weaponry? Well, here we have a better argument. But let’s not be hypocritical about it. In the Reagan-Bush error an envoy was sent to Iraq to discuss the sale of oil and other issues. This happened while the gassing of the Kurds was going on. Who was that envoy? Donald Rumsfeld (feel free to look that one up – I did). Sure, policies change from one administration to the next, but let’s get real here – this is about the second largest reserve of oil on the planet.
    One more “liberal” argument. We’re by-passing the United Nations. Bush Jr (let’s call him shrub – little Bush) argues that if the U.N. can’t be effective, then perhaps it is irrelevant. Someday American Arrogance will catch up to us. I fear that it won’t be the U.N. that becomes irrelevant, but the U.S. instead. After all, over 180 countries belong to the U.N., and so far 2 support action outside the auspices of the U.N. Sure, it’s 2 of the most powerful (U.S. and Britain), but doesn’t that just make us into bullies? It’s like the movie “A Bugs Life” – as soon as the other 178 relaize that they don’t need us, they WON’T need us.
    Being a bully is not the image we should project to the rest of the world – the Muslum world already believes this to be true – attacking Iraq will enhance that view. The world will become MORE dangerous than it is now for Americans.
    But hey, that’s just one liberal’s view.
    One last thing. “Liberal” isn’t a swear word, much as people starting from Reagan to Rush would like it to be so. It means open-minded, willing to accept change. It’s not about having a Scarlet “L” pressed to one’s lapel.

  31. this is why i dislike politics and people who get overzealous in it. No side is ever 100% wrong. No side is ever 100% right.But not a damn person on either side will concede even the tinest bit.You want america to be safe. You dont want any inconviences that might occur though. You want people to please YOU because “you have rights” well, so do those that have different opinions. You have every complaint and fault detailed out, but nothing positive to add. Nor solutions either.People love to shout we the people, but noone notices that the people tend to be fickle, are incapable of being pleased and a great many of we the people are just plain stupid. I dont jump to unnecessary actions, but I dont wait for a rabid dog to bite me before I shoot it either.

  32. Wil,
    You know what they say never discuss politics or religion, but since you brought up a political issue I have to open my big mouth. I have to say personally I disagree with you in your stand against a war with Iraq. I think it is a necessary evil that will soon come to pass. Sorry to disagree with you Wil I still got nothing but love for ya man.
    Matt……

  33. Let’s just side-step any arguments that involve the U.N., shall we? Lest we forget, a democracy of nations is no democracy at all. The U.N. is an impotent invalid, content to negotiate itself into oblivion with the great evil-doers of the world. It can yap and yammer all it wants, but no one honestly listens to it, as it is irrelevant to the politics of the world as a whole.
    Saddam’s violated U.N resolution after U.N. resolution, and all the U.N. has been able to collectively say is “You’re not being nice Saddam.” Its opinions are largely irrelevant (any international body that would have Colonel Qaddafi as its head of the Human Rights Committee is a complete and total joke). The Security Council is quite worthless, as it reflects a power structure that is decades out of date (since when was France a relevant player on the world scene in any way, shape, or form? Why aren’t other more important countries on the world stage occupying permanent seats, like India, or Brazil? And do the opinions of countries like Mauritius, Singapore, Cameroon, Bulgaria, and Guinea mean anything when it comes to global security?) Let’s not also forget that when it comes to the measure of freedom, the majority of nations on the planet are not free at all (consult the Map of Freedom for an exact picture of the status of the world in regards to which nations are free, and which are not). To expect that their opinions are relevant and valid is to suggest that the Chinese opinion on the value of free speech is one worth considering.
    Anyone here that thinks the U.N. is the appropriate body to go to in order to resolve this issue of war on Iraq has completely lost their mind.

  34. So, here’s what I have learned today:
    Being Patriotic means never criticizing the government.
    If you speak out against your government’s actions, you’re abusing your freedom of speech.
    Democrats are evil. Oh, wait. Republicans are evil. No, hold on, everyone is evil, except the Libertarians, who can do no wrong.
    Greens and Republicans are exactly the same.
    “Liberals” are the worst sort of scum the world can have, what with their crazy ideas about peace and equality, and diplomacy over bombings.
    And finally, the most important thing I’ve learned today: You’re either with us, or against us.
    Thanks for the education, everybody.

  35. I appreciate the opportunity to read this ongoing discussion. However, one repetition in these posts perturbs me a bit: the quoting of polls. As many know, polls are highly inaccurate. The words, phrases, timing, and order of questions in polls can directly affect a person’s response 99% of the time.
    It is unfortunate that politicians -and- their voting populace have come to rely so heavily on polls. Being that the information is unreliable, why is it that a politician feels he or she must change his stance to keep the populace happy? Why does the populace feel that polls are the end-all, win-all? Why can we not, in fact, have a politician in office who refuses to be governed by minute-to-minute polls, but instead takes a stand for what he or she -truly- believes in?
    Arianna Huffington, in her book “How to Overthrow the Government”, makes these sound arguments, as well as others. For those of you out there – whether or not you agree with what Bush is doing – who are wanting to make a difference but don’t know how, read the book. It offers a wealth of information, including a wonderful appendix with current stats and local, state, and governmental addresses.
    Now that I’m done twiggin’, I’ll step down. Thanks. =)

  36. Wil,
    I know I’m posting late, and probably no-one will read this, but I’ve got to post this anyway.
    Please remember that your representatives are elected by a vote. Once voted in, they must, if they do their job correctly, vote their concience in all matters left for them to decide.
    They are put into office based on a general election, which everyone has access to and knows about. Politicians should NOT base their opinions on the latest polls, or by counting the number of emails the recieve for or against a certain issue. They must weigh the facts, and vote for what they believe is right.
    One of those factors may be what the people who voted for them are expressing, but that cannot be the only factor. To do this is unfair, because there may (note I said may) be a “silent majority”, who are simply not expressing their opinion. This is important to remember, as it is the basis for our representative system of government. The general population votes for someone who (they believe) will represent them. They should not have to monitor every vote, and express their opinion on it to the representative.
    If the representative’s votes on the issues is out of line with the people they are elected by, they should not be re-elected. Your comment about remembering this in 2006 is important. Each citizen should research how the incumbant politican in every election has voted while in office. (These votes are public record, and can be accessed via the congressional website for national politians.)
    I truly believe in the way our government is set up. It does mean, however, that we can be let down by our elected officials. We as citizens just have to remember it, and try to improve as we go along.

  37. Dear animereader,
    Thanks for your long post. The argument about nuclear weaponry is flawed though (Tel Aviv can be nuked no problem, and it’s not near any holiest of holies — and he’s not going to get any wrath from the Arabs, come on. Arabs would willingly sacrifice the Arabs in Tel Aviv for its complete destruction.) But that’s not even a major point, I don’t believe he’s dumb enough even to nuke Israel. The problem is when you have a person known and proven to support and aid terrorism against us and our allies which also has nuke capability, you get into a sticky situation where Saddam can give a nuke to a terrorist, have him detonate it (even domestically) and plausibly deny it. That was point one.
    Second point about biowarfare — it was more of a statement, yes? You said we gave biochemical technology to Iraq in the 1980s which is true. Does that mean we can’t fight them for it back? I don’t see any reason there. So we gave it to them, so? Do you mean since we gave it to them, we have to sit back and wait for them to use it on us? Believe me, in the past year or so, we’ve learned a whole hell of a lot from our previous mistakes. I don’t see that as a REASON not to act now though. Tell me if I mistook your point.
    Thirdly, about the UN. The UN is a democracy and we know that democracies don’t work for a variety of reasons. That’s why the framers founded this country as a REPUBLIC with representative government. (Ref: Aristotle.) Because a democracy of Zimbabwe votes to take land rights away from white farmers, or because a democracy of Sudan votes for leaders who enslave other citizens, does not make the action RIGHT, simply because it came from a “democracy.”
    I’ve asked for links mainly because I really need to know the arguments against the war to soundly set in stone my arguments for the war. Since I asked for links, it’s only appropriate I give some of my own.
    You’ll find these articles rely solely on facts and NOT A ONE contains the term “revenge for Daddy” which is getting very tired, or oil-consipracy theories.
    Pro-War Articles/Op-eds
    http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/hanson/hanson092002.asp
    http://www.opinionjournal.com/forms/printThis.html?id=110002303
    http://www.danielpipes.org/article/444
    To anyone wishing to post ANTI-WAR links, it will be appreciated. I should be able to discern the author’s credibility upon reading them.
    Thanks!
    (For those who care, I am a non-conservative, non-leftist, atheist, Southern Californian, pro-Iraq war type of guy.)

  38. What was the catch phrase?…It’s the Economy, stupid!!! And the domestic problems and health care and the egregious tax breaks and on, and on, ad infinitum……..nobody wants to deal with any of that so why not smoke screen with ‘Wag the Dog’. Or doesn’t anyone remember that little jewel?
    Don’t want to rain on anyone’s parade but I’ve lived long enough to have seen what happens in SEVERAL wars and it is not a pleasant prospect.
    Too much power in any branch of the government is a threat to everyones freedom. Consolidation of power is just the beginning. So if you have opinions no matter what they are, let your elected representative know your views and let those representatives that share your views no matter their constituency, hear from you as well.

  39. Derek- You plan to discern the credibility of a person by the links they provide, links that were neccessarily provided by SOMEONE ELSE. Um, how scientific.
    Alactrity:- your points about bullies are well made, but they only go so far. Taking the bully metaphor further, lets say that you kick the crap out of the bully. You make him shit his teeth. If he has shown no sign of attacking you or bullying you, then doesnt that make YOU the bully? My point? America is and has been the bully, but refuses to see it that way. In America’s eyes, only America is right. Millions of people all over the world see you as a bully. Can we say “hypocrisy”, children?
    You also miss my point. Badly. If the bully has a big, spiky stick, and MIGHT use the stick against you, do you attack him, knowing that if you do he WILL use it against you? Or do you find a way to take the stick from him?
    “Being nice to a bully does not mkae the bully leave you alone. Instead, it make you a target.” – so does that justify becoming the bully yourself?
    See, im not pro-war. Im pro sending in the SAS to cap his bitch ass and then replacing the regime without bombing the whole country even farther into the stone age than we did afghanistan. Im anti-slaughter. Yes Saddam is evil and I await his soul in Hell so I can PISS on it, but that does not and should not extend to the ordinary Iraqi’s. Who are people like you and me.
    Muggedbyreality:- if Saddam has violated UN resolution after resolution (and lets not forget that Israel has as well, and Zimbabwe, but we dont want to go to war with them), then if we attack without UN backing, then don’t we become like Saddam?
    Id also like to challenge you, if I may.
    “Anyone here that thinks the U.N. is the appropriate body to go to in order to resolve this issue of war on Iraq has completely lost their mind.” – Oh really? Then who do you suggest is better?. The US? Led by a simpleton who got paid by OIL companies, who thinks books are good because they sometimes have pictures? The only country to have used a nuclear weapon against another nation, who funded Saddam, Bin Laden and a host of other psycho’s when it suited them?
    Certainly not the UK. Tony Blair lets his foreign policy be determined by Bush, and doenst have the balls to see what the country really wants vis a vis the EU. The UN was created for a reason. If countries like the US and UK and Russia stopped trying to us it to their own ends, then it might have the power and responsibility that its meant to.
    Lets not ponder that just now. Lets just get behind Shrub and chant “Death, death, death, kill, kill, kill!” Lets wade in blood, shall we? That’ll work. (this is called sarcasm, by the way. NO ONE has explained how by begetting death we will prevent terror. But hey, lets just kill people…right?)
    Some quotes from some very insighteful people.
    -please sir, tell me why, we stick a man on the moon but life down here’s so cheap? “Son, we gotta do our bit for the World Trade Deficit” – Pitchshifter
    - One was written on the sword, For you must enter a room to destroy it,International security,Call of the righteous man,Needs a reason to kill man,History teaches us so,
    The reason he must attain, Must be approved by his God,His child, partisan brother of war, – System of A Down
    - Beyond the staples center you can see america
    with it’s tired poor avenging disgrace, peaceful loving youth against the brutality of plastic existence, pushing little children, with their fully automatics, they like to push the weak around, pushing little children, with their fully automatics, they like to push the weak around
    A deer dance, invitation to peace, war staring you in the face, dressed in black, with a helmet, fierce – System of a Down

  40. Sorry about my off-topic rant. I was feeling frightened and frustrated and took it out on my keyboard and the monkeys. Won’t happen again. May there be peace in our lifetime. If only for our [not yet born in my case anyway] children.

  41. it’s hard for me to jump on the war bandwagon…alot of real people are gonna die…many of them innocent children…maybe it’ll turn out the only way…but with all of our capabilities…is it really impossible to eliminate the real devil here, saddam hussein…he’s a madman for sure…and he is our enemy…but do we really have to destroy the whole country of iraq just to get him?

  42. Leadership is doing what is right, even if public opinion disagrees. Public opinion is fleeting. The effects of the right or wrong decision last forever. IMO, DiFi is an idiot but in this case she had to weigh the “feelings” of an uneducated group of appeasers, following in the failed path of Neville Chamberlain, et. al., or make an informed decision of what she feels was right for the nation as a whole.
    As for oil… Thanks to those who have effectively shut down attempts for America to become energy independent we rely heavily upon imported oil. Maintaining the free flow of this oil at market prices *IS* our National Interest. Get over it.
    We cannot conserve our way to energy independence and alternative energy sources are neither economical, practical, or widely accepted at this present time. Perhaps some day, but not yet.

  43. Wil,
    I very much enjoy reading your stories. Your one about your aunt was quite touching, and well written. I must say though, your ultra-mega-super-party line liberalism is sickening.
    Independent. Not just an independent party, but pure independent. Screw parties, I see things and think things my own way.
    You seem to disagree with the conservative viewpoint just to disagree. Do you see ANYTHING in a conservative light? If so, I’ve never seen it. Please inform me, I’d really like to think that you can think for yourself sometmes.

  44. Bomb Iraq into the stone age? What? How would you like it if another country said that about the U.S. over something that really wasn’t in your power? Think about the citizens of Iraq for a second. Do they deserve to die? If you think so then you are a bigot and don’t belong anywhere, especially not America. I am against war because it kills innocent people and in the end only results in more war. I don’t want to speak for anyone else, but that is why I don’t support it.

  45. Dear animereader,
    Please scan back UP to around 20-30 posts at the top of the column.
    Bush was and is not a TEXAN, he and his kin were born and raised in Maine!!!
    He picked up a horrid accent when he skated through college in West Texas (along with no actual education IMHO)…. but he is only a Texan by CONVENIENCE!!!
    Many people are not aware that Texas has NO STATE INCOME TAX, which is why Daddy B. came down here with his oil monies and was able to prevent Maine from taxing him for his money.
    Bush and co. established a residency status in Texas but they live in Maine even more often. (in fact GWB’s DUI ticket was in Kennesbunksport, Maine!)
    Just letting ya know — go Tony Sanchez for Govenor!
    NATIVE BORN TEXAN
    ***THE BEEJ***

  46. Ireland here again…
    One last point, a few people have mentioned that ‘it’s not about oil’
    However here in Ireland a number of newspapers have reported on the fact that an Irish businessman was involved in a proposal put forward by a number of higher ups in the international oil companies (the irishman was a bigshot in ChevronTexaco) to the Bush Administration in APRIL 2001 with regards to oil interests in the middle east. The gist of the proposal was for Bush to attack Iraq and assure US oil interests. I know I’ll probably get a few flames about this, but I thought that it might get a few people thinking to know that Bush has been considering war in Iraq since last year. (and almost 6 months before 9-11)

  47. That’s our DiFi…
    The same progressive Democrat who pimps for the DMCA and CBDTPA… Yeah, sure she’s on our side…

Comments are closed.