Iraq & Roll, Sudan & Silence
Nicholas Kristof reminds President Bush, who seemed so concerned about human rights violations in Iraq, that there's genocide in them thar Sudanese hills. Oh, right!
Bush finally let the word Darfur pass his lips on Wednesday, after 142 days of silence, but only during a photo op. Such silence amounts to acquiescence, for this policy of rape flourishes only because it is ignored. I'm still chilled by the matter-of-fact explanation as to why it is women who collect firewood, even though they're the ones who are raped. It's an indication of how utterly we are failing the people of Darfur, two years into the first genocide of the 21st century. "It's simple," one woman here explained. "When the men go out, they're killed. The women are only raped."
Odd how our interest in human rights seems to coincide so neatly with our interest in oil wells.
You mean it or you don't: From now on, no more smirking about "Who appointed US to be policemen of the world?"
After more than two years, a population of soldiers smaller than my high school have given their lives to (as Frum says) "completely change the calculus of legitimacy in the middle east." Yet antiwar types describe this loss of life as an unprecidented, unbounded, and fully uncompensated tragedy. This mocks the sacrifice itself.
No, we CAN'T fight for every worthwhile cause on the planet. But meanwhile, IRAQ is our Darfur policy; If we do well enough in Mesopetomia, a lot of the Darfurs will take care of themselves.
Paraphrasing:
- "Nations will go to war for many reasons having nothing to do with their direct political and ecomomic interests." -Keegan
- "Compassion is about more than mouth." - Cridland
Crid at June 6, 2005 6:51 AM
I made a Mesothespelling, but I'm late for work.
Crid at June 6, 2005 6:54 AM
Who's mocking the sacrifice, Crid? The number of people lost on 9/11 was smaller than my high school, too. Does that mean the next time you bring up 9/11 as some obscure justification for the war on Iraq that I should just tell you to lighten the hell up?
2,000 soldiers is a big loss, period. And it's all the more troublesome because that number is trending upward, and we still have no exit plan.
How old are you, Crid? If this is such a worthwhile cause, why aren't you over there?
Frank at June 6, 2005 11:38 AM
It's also worth mentioning the uncounted, but surely in the tens of thousands, Iraqi civillian deaths that our little invasion has caused. Do they enter into your equations for acceptable casualties in the pursuit of nebulous goals, Crid?
Frank at June 6, 2005 12:22 PM
First, be clear.
> The number of people lost on 9/11...
...was not a factor in my comment.
Second, an atrocity of the magnitude of 9/11 falls beyond a stoner's entreaties to "lighten the hell up," and the suggestion is rightly dismissed out of hand. When decent people review such a morning, they can only ask, "Where did we go wrong?" In considering what Clinton had recently href="http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/libera.htm">called a "bitter reality of internal repression and external aggression," Americans were ready for a new approach to that part of the middle east. Many of us think our errant conduct began many decades ago and afflicted very broad many corners of Iraqi society.
Third, most of the people we need to kill in Iraq are "civilians" as opposed to uniformed military. Sad but true. Are you obsessed with cowboys?... It'd be a neater world if bad guys wore black hats.
Fourth, if you want to do arithmetic of that sort, you ought not be a coward about it. (Page 67 is particularly moving.)
Fifth, an obsession with "exit strategy" betokens a love of inactive and often abjectly corrupt technocracies. You aren't into justice, you just hate war. But there are worse things than war, for example the rape of brides in their veils as status quo.
DOB 2/59, mildly overweight, blood pressure & cholesterol, eyeglasses for reading, essentially deaf above 9 kilohertz, lethargic except for scuba dives. The local recruiting office did not phone me on the morning of September 12....
Crid at June 6, 2005 4:56 PM
Actually, you can blame the continuing violence on your beloved French. The headline of this article from the BBC sums it up:
France opposes UN Sudan sanctions
"France says it does not support US plans for international sanctions on Sudan if violence continues in Darfur."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3875277.stm
And there is plenty of oil in Sudan, only it is controlled by French oil companies. They enjoy a close relationship with the current government of Sudan and don't want to see it upset, just like their relationship to Saddam Hussein's former regime in Iraq.
This reminds me of that recent post where you mentioned making a comment out loud to the owner of a Humvee along the lines of 'how many soldiers had to die in Iraq to fill that thing up with gas?' Now you can ask yourself, "how many Sudanese had to die for my last trip to Paris?"
nash at June 6, 2005 6:33 PM
You have kids, Crid? Would you send them to Iraq?
And if you don't support planning an exit strategy, that means, what? That we'll always be at war with Oceania? OK, we're only losing kids at a rate of about 3 per day....
Why do you hate our troops, Crid?
Frank at June 7, 2005 12:20 AM
> You have kids, Crid?
Nope.
> And if you don't support planning an exit
> strategy, that means, what?
Reynolds linked a fun piece about Europe yesterday: "After Six Decades, No End to the Quagmire."
Iraq is our responsibility. No other nation made as many big mistakes as we did in there, and no other nation was ever going to clean it up. We're in it for the long haul. Don't pretend we shouldn't be.
> That we'll always be at war with Oceania?
Oceania? What about Oceania? Nice place to scuba dive.
Crid at June 7, 2005 6:48 AM
Hi, guys. Sorry I haven't been here in a while, but it seems that my next door neighbor for 16 months, Ed, lost his son, Louis, to sniper fire in Iraq.
Sucks to be him, doesn't it? Ed's a great guy, stable, friendly and a good neighbor. Works hard, raised a really terrific son. His son Louis was polite, friendly and respectful to me. As a matter of fact, he wanted to join the Army right after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, but he was only 17 and his mother said no. So, he joined when he came of age.
And you know what? I'm pissed as hell. In fact, I can't remember a time feeling so pissed. I can barely type, my hands are shaking so much. There was a great kid who wanted to put his life on the line to protect us, and instead Louis died so Dick Cheney's buddies could make a mint off government contracts. Well, fuck you, Dick Cheney, and you, Bush, and you, Rove (the living definition of evil). Louis was worth 50 of you. Louis has the soul of a hero and you are heartless, greedy pieces filth.
The three of you may wish to request to be buried in asbestos when you finally kick off. You'll need it. And it would be a courtesy if you could be buried face down. See where you're going, and all that.
As for what we were saying about whether or not the government was lying about our reasons for going to war... while idiotically claiming that the democrats were saying the same thing. Sorry, but you're wrong.
First of all the definition of WMDs needs to be made clear. The phrase is inclusive of nuclear weapons, but also includes biological and chemical weapons. For instance, this quote by Sandy Berger: "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times
since 1983."
Obviously, Hussein has not used 10 nukes since 1983, or even one nuke. It's pretty plain that he was including chemical weapons in his use of the term. Hussein is, after all, notorious for his use of chemical weapons.
So, since we know that WMDs isn't limited to just nukes, who was it who was claiming that Hussein had nukes? I'll give you a hint: it wasn't the liberals.
Conservatives, on the other hand...
August 27th, 2002, from the New York Times: "Cheney Says Peril of Nuclear Iraq Justifies Attack." Oh???
And who can forget Bush's famous "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of of uranium from Africa." Not true, but at this point, who the hell is keeping track of the number of lies this man spouts? He is, by far, the biggest liar the White House has ever hosted. He makes Nixon look like Mother Theresa.
But let's not leave out my personal favorite... Colin Powell's (former U.S. Army General, no less) who claimed that aluminum tubes were to be used for centerfuges?
"Second, we actually have examined tubes from several different batches that were seized clandestinely before they reached Baghdad. What we notice in these different batches is a progression to higher and higher levels of specification, including, in the latest batch, an anodized coating on extremely smooth inner and outer surfaces. Why would they continue refining the specifications, go to all that trouble for something that, if it was a rocket, would soon be blown into shrapnel when it went off?"
Uh, actually, Colin, the tubes were too small to be used for centerfuges, and even if they were the right size, the anodized coating would have to be removed, and rockets would NEED the anodized coating. But being a retired army general, you knew that. But you still presented it as if it were some kind of proof that Hussein was working to acquire nuclear weapons, counting on the ignorance of the common people, and their laziness to look up the facts, in order to scare them.
So, ergo, Bush and his cronies lied to get us into Iraq. Do you know any liberals who claimed that Hussein was acquiring nukes, and generated elaborate fabrications as if Hussein was out to get nukes? That's right. You don't.
Patrick at June 7, 2005 8:22 AM
Sorry to hear about the loss of your friend's son, Patrick.
Frank at June 7, 2005 3:23 PM
As noted earlier, my heart goes out to all who lose loved ones in this pivotal effort. But Patrick, your timing, response, and wording are just too poignant to be believed... You stack the deck too high, and can't answer calls to your reasoning. Email the kid's and and address, I'll send flowers to the funeral.
Crid at June 7, 2005 4:07 PM
Ask me if I care whether you believe me or not, Crid. You so conveniently skipped over the rest of the arguments I presented about how Bush and his flunkies lied, lied, lied, about nuclear weapons in Iraq. No misconception ever presented by the liberals ever stated that Saddam Hussein was acquiring nuclear weapons.
But of course, there's nothing novel in that. As is typical, you simply ignore the arguments you have no answer for, and present the same tired, refuted line of reasoning you always do, whether we're discussing gay marriage or weapons in Iraq.
If anyone's at all interested, the details surrounding my former next door neighbor's dead son are here: http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2005/6/3/84993.html
The parents are divorced, and I never met Louis's mother. As for the funeral, I'm not going to that. It's at Arlington Cemetary. I will, however, go to the memorial service on Tuesday, where I will likely meet Louis' mother for the first time, although I would wish for it to be under better circumstances.
Patrick at June 8, 2005 7:15 AM
The numbers are getting high enough that most of us at least know someone who has a family member that is a casualty (wounded/dead) of this war. I see men around town with 1 less arm or a nice titanium leg.
The national polling numbers supporting this war are lower than ever. This is clearly a war being run by politicians with no military experience.
PS- Can you send the reciept for the flowers to Amy for posting Crid? That was pretty callous...
eric at June 8, 2005 7:44 AM
> Ask me if I care whether you believe me or
> not, Crid.
Well...
> Well, fuck you, Dick Cheney, and you, Bush, and
> you, Rove (the living definition of evil). ...you
> are heartless, greedy pieces filth.
At some point it's clear persuasion is not the goal here.
Cridl at June 8, 2005 9:12 AM
Doesn't sound like Louis is getting flowers...
eric at June 8, 2005 9:32 AM
> That was pretty callous...
Care to say why, Eric? I doubted Patrick's sincerity and still do. But neither of us was bluffing, so the flowers are on the way. I'm sincerely saddened that this fellow died. I'm comforted that his enthusiasm for soldiering was such that he pursued the task more than once, and formed a sense of responsibility that his girlfriend shared. His sacrifice was made in a volunteer army, not a conscripted force. These are exactly the sort of people we want active in society for a long generation... It's indisputably tragic.
Yet I strongly believe in the cause. Did any soldier's story ending in violent death ever go better? I sometimes think you don't hate this particular war, you just hate ALL war, and want to believe Kofi & Pooty-Poot could sort everything out over milk and cookies if we just gave them a chance, as if the previous decades never happened.
But no. You hate this war because it's George W. Bush's. The idea that you can skip all the history, nuance, and responsibility of a messy planet by concentrating your distress on one personality is just irresistably convenient for you. Irony's a pain in the ass, isn't it? And yet, religious authoritarianism's worse. (See Alkon, A.)
> This is clearly a war being run by politicians
> with no military experience.
And military authoritarianism sucks too.
Newsweek was sitting around the office today (deafness cover story), but I only had a glance at the charming headline from the Middle East: "Regime change may be contagious."
Crid at June 8, 2005 10:20 PM
Oh, by the way, one more point I forgot to make. No one from the liberal contingent claimed that Saddam Hussein had ties to al Qaeda. That was strictly a conservative fabrication. And yes, it was a deliberate fabrication. Richard Clarke, counterterrorism czar (appointed first by Reagan, and retained by Bush the elder, Clinton and Bush the moron), pointed out to the Bush administration repeatedly that there was no evidence of ties to al Qaeda and Iraq. In fact, during their one attempt to enlist Hussein's aid, they were rebuffed. I'm not saying that Hussein was a great guy, by any means. He's an evil fuck and the world is better off without him, and his sons, who were even worse.
On the other hand, had it not been for the U.S., he never would have risen to power in the first place. Dumb.
Now, watch, ladies and gentlemen. Crid will offer no response to any of this. Just as he failed to address the fact that only conservatives were forwarding the idea that Saddam Hussein was acquiring nukes, he will be as tightlipped about the fact that conservatives were claiming that Saddam Hussein had ties to al Qaeda. He will, however, attack me personally again. And then maybe later on, he will present the same tired argument all over again, just as if the facts to refute them were never presented. That's Crid's modus operandi. Forward an argument, ignore the responses, forward same argument. Hey, it worked for Goebbels. If you plan on staying here, get used to it.
And by the way, I'd like to see the receipt for the flowers, too, Crid. I doubt your sincerity, too. We lose a exemplary human being, reasonably intelligent with an admirable desire to serve his nation, and yet we retain the dregs of humanity like Bush, Cheney and Rove. If natural selection works this way, there's no hope for the race, that's all I can say.
I still haven't the slightest idea of what to say to his father, who lost his only child. We expect to bury our parents, but burying a child is too awful to contemplate. "I'm sorry for your loss" seems inadequate to the point of repulsiveness.
And Louis is getting flowers, by the way. And his dad is getting a sympathy card from me (as soon as I figure out what to say to something like this).
Patrick, the Goddess Fan at June 9, 2005 9:03 AM
It was callous for the reasons I wrote above- it is not unusual these days to know someone whose family has directly suffered a casualty in this war. Over 12k Americans have been killed or wounded. But you automatically disregard the possibility that Patrick knew someone he respected that was a casualty. Do you wave your hands in a blind persons face when you first meet them?
But it is indicative of your repeated "bury your head in the sand" response to any opposition to this war. The other is "well, you just hate Bush". You disregard completely that this war began on false pretenses. Then you say I hate all war, like that is a cowardly character flaw.
Some wars are just. The elimination of the Taliban was justified. The elimination of Hitler, Mussolini and Imperial Japan was justified. Gulf War 1 and 2 were unneccessary and could have been avoided. Hussein actually asked for the Bush Senior administration for permission to invade Kuwait, and was told that it would be viewed as an Arab-Arab matter with no American intervention.
(Maybe there should be a national discussion about avoiding future wars by not propping up dictatorships and flooding the world with arms and munitions?)
My hatred of this war is that our citizenry, both in uniform and out, were lied to, and an adequate explanation for these lies has not come. If Clinton had wagged his finger and claimed irrefutable knowledge of WMD's and invaded Iraq, my response today would be the same. Clinton ordered some bombing in Iraq, but he had the intelligence to apply the force in an appropriate manner.
I hate that our commander in chief sends our troops into harms way but doesn't have the guts to directly respond to tough questions in a possibly hostile forum. He only responds to prepared softball questions while troops fight his war.
I hate that there is no answer 2 years later about what we are going to do with this country that we occupy.
I hate that the money this war costs America each day could be better used for things like conservation, health care, education, etc.
Your link regarding military authoritarinaism made me laugh- yes it sucks. So does religious authoritarianism. Apparantly those are our two choices? How about a political system that directs our military to accomplish an achievable goal and steps aside. Think Truman/Eisenhower Roosevelt/Eisenhower.
Like most of us here, we had fathers, uncles, and grandfathers fight in just wars. We had fathers friends and brothers fight in unjust wars. I bet a soldiers death would be better if the cause he was fighting for was true, not fabricated after the fact.
Regime change may be contagious? Dream on. Arrafat died, so there was a regime change. Lebanon rose up after the assassination of a popular nationalist. The eastern bloc countries (i.e. Ukraine) have been changing for two decades now, like rotten teeth being replaced by new ones. Bush supporters may take credit for this spread of democracy, but Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are no closer to freedom today than they were after the first gulf war.
(Sorry to all readers this is unedited and choppy- I don't have the time to go over it all today)
eric at June 9, 2005 5:48 PM
You got one part right...
> had it not been for the U.S., he never would
> have risen to power in the first place
We owe the Iraqis, big time. It would have been great to know how we could have repaid this debt without losing blood, sleep and treasure.
> Bush supporters may take credit for this spread of democracy...
Gracious of you. Your dawns must be dark... waking up to argue that the little brown people aren't into freedom.
Crid at June 9, 2005 6:49 PM
"Unedited and choppy"? I wish my posts were so unedited and choppy. Thanks very much for your response, Eric. Very well done.
Patrick at June 10, 2005 7:22 AM
Crid wrote:
>You got one part right...
>
>> had it not been for the U.S., he never would
>> have risen to power in the first place
This is bullshit. See numbers 4 and 7:
http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/20030327.asp
The French were responsible for Saddam Hussein's regime, just as they are for the genocide in Sudan:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31552
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2721963.stm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-659974,00.html
nash at June 10, 2005 7:19 PM
"You so conveniently skipped over the rest of the arguments I presented about how Bush and his flunkies lied, lied, lied, about nuclear weapons in Iraq."
Except they didn't. Sorry it took over 12 years to fix this.
Radwaste at July 17, 2017 8:26 PM
Leave a comment