but that’s not what i want to talk about today. maybe another day. today? i would like to engage in what some might refer to as beating a deceased equine, or to be specific, expressing some anti-war sentiment. i begin by referring you to this intelligent and well-thought out list of Jason’s, and say ‘what he said’.
also, i have a few words to add about why i think it’s such a bad idea to attack (another) country and keep calling this the war on terrorism. first, consider this: Statement attributed to bin Laden praises recent attacks. now let’s assume for the sake of argument, Bin Laden is alive and kicking and very much in a leadership role. let’s factor in the global aspect of the latest acts of terrorism. with this in mind, consider the folly of targeting a piece of real estate (in this case, Iraq) when the actual enemy is everywhere, and far, far more of an imminent threat.
my conclusion, (an opinion of course), is that invading Iraq isn’t going to make us any safer. it’s going to cost tens of thousands of American lives (realize, we’re not talking missiles from distance this time, we’re talking about going in and fighting block by block, hand to hand). over and above those casualties, it’s a given that we will experience an increase in international terrorism. Americans will be targeted everywhere we are, and by a far larger group of folks. i’m sure Bin Laden and his associates are thrilled beyond belief that the US is taking such a hostile and aggressive stance. what a recruitment tool this is.
and what a great drain on our resources, investing so much military might in this fight, using traditional tactics and weapons, when terrorism is a decentralized system, when there are folks out there, two or three or 19 of them at a time, planning and executing horrifying attacks with stealth and economy.
the answer to the inevitable, ‘well, how do we deal with global terrorism, then?’ is we don’t know. we have a lot to learn, but instead we’re following our leaders into carrying out something they had intended to do from the get-go, at a time when our resources would be much better directed toward figuring out more effective strategies to make the world a safer place to live.
See, you point out what’s been bothering me along. We started this aggressive behavior in response to one group, a group still functioning as we speak, a group who is all but forgotten now, in favor of going after someone who has in know way apparent to the general public threatened us. I’m so confused by it all.
That should say in *no* way apparent … I’m going to rest now.
yeah, remember when it was all about ‘going after those responsible’ and ‘bringing them to justice’? and now it’s about ‘pre-emptive strikes’ against targets that are only questionably related to the original.
Clearly I’m not an expert in these matters but the plan outlined in the link below strikes me as madness.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2320625.stm
i can’t imagine how much damage that bit of instanity would do. just can’t imagine.
That article was a bit unsettling, huh?
I think mg said it best when he argues that people rag on the CIA/FBI for not acting on info they had or may have had pre-September 11, but they also criticize President Bush et al for “taking a proactive stance on what we know is going on in Iraq. You can’t have it both ways.” Couldn’t have said it better myself. I don’t wish war on anyone, anytime, but I think it would be a grave mistake to NOT go in and eliminate Saddam’s regime while we still have a chance at doing so. Lives will be lost, definitely, but wouldn’t you rather we play the upper hand while we still have it?
although i did ask (once, long ago) ‘what did they know and when did they know it’ about our current administration’s foreknowledge of 9-11, i certainly have not been ‘bagging on them’ for not being pro-active enough, since it would be in direct opposition of my own rather liberal views about personal freedoms to recommend the ’round ‘em up/blow ‘em up’ approach to prevention. i think i have, several times, bagged on the FBI/CIA for having gathered so *much* (and wanting to gather even more) information, without the ability to analyze it and find the patterns within it.
i am not bagging on the government now, to protect me at all costs. i fear a ‘pro-active’ government. you know — like that McCarthy fella. he was *real* proactive against the commie menace.
and speaking of the FBI/CIA, remember that recent letter? The letter, together with other reports from the CIA, paints a worrisome picture of Iraq’s pursuit of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. But it does not promote the White House’s view that Iraq presents an immediate threat to the American homeland and may use Al-Qaida to carry out attacks.. so as you see, our own CIA does not support this sudden urgency to invade Iraq. certainly Saddam is an asshole. but … this big rush? this urgency to bypass the UN and mount a unileratal attack?
and the thought of what we are rushing in to do, and the consequences — both in the further danger we put ourselves in, and the projected casualties. there *are* better ways of making the world safer. working with the UN. keeping our promises to the bombed out refugees of Afghanistan. things of that nature.
and here. Jon has some good things to say about this too.
kd, true words you have said. The US seems to excel at spending money and lives on defense! Is Bush aware that the citizens of the US will be NO SAFER if (when) he goes ahead as planned and attacks Iraq? I cannot agree with you more. It all seems so senseless to me……..sigh.
The BBC article references the NYT; I posted a link to that article over here, along with a couple of links to stories about the “what did they know…” and how they apparently don’t want anyone else to know the answer.
Well, it didn’t get Bush’s daddy re-elected, and I hope the same holds true here. Of course, the chaos will have already begun by then. This one’s a little better timed, right? If they can hold off until January, they’re golden.
It makes me so frustrated, you know? How am I supposed to be proud of my country when my government is apparently peopled with hypocritical little boys who didn’t have enough fist fights growing up to expel all their rage?
Feels Like Monday
Catalina pics here (a few–he’s putting up more today, I think) and here. I haven’t even developed my film yet
LMAO! Okay, I got it now …
Since I was quoted here, might as well throw my opinion into the mix. The BBC article you reference as being “insane” seems remarkable logical to me. According to the article, the occupation plan is one of many being discussed right now, and is the least likely to be executed. It makes me feel WAAAY better to know the government is running through several scenarios, likely choosing the one with the best overall outcome – the one that is safest and most efficient – rather than just going to war without thinking of the consequences. How is that insane?
Talking isn’t doing. See Afghanistan, where the administration won’t even allow US military personnel out of Kabul. In Iraq, if there are military personnel on the ground post-war, they’ll be far from concerned with civil society, and far more concerned with guarding oil fields, if I’m reading this particular President and his cronies correctly.
ok. as far as the occupation scenario, well, occupying a country where the general population HATES America, in order to bring … what, peace? like those other occupations over there in the middle east that are working out so well? doesn’t sound like the most realistic plan to me. hence my agreement with the ‘crazy’ comment.
my point in the post was that there are lots of non-military things we could be doing to make the world a safer place. i meant diplomatic and humanitarian things. i meant diffusing some of the prevailing world opinion that we’re jerks, rather than confirming it and adding to it.
First, a direct quote from the article:
“While opposing an occupation of Iraq or turning it into an American protectorate, Iraqi opposition groups say that a temporary foreign presence working with an Iraqi civilian government would be acceptable. ”
The general population in Iraq doesn’t necessarily hate the US, and if they do, its mostly because they’ve been told by their government how evil we are. Invariably, in such a situation, when that government is out of power, they’ll certainly come to love American Democracy.
Second, what non-military things? More sanctions? Those have worked so well in Iraq (and China, North Korea, Cuba) so far. Iraq agreed to UN weapons inspectors in ’91 – a diplomatic decision they’ve chosen to ignore completly. We can make as many plans to inspect as we want, if they don’t want to be inspected, what other option is there for getting that done?
nonono. not sanctions. no. working with the UN. working to ALLEVIATE sanctions which affect the Iraqui people. keeping our promises to afghanistan.
and we were over there inspecting for, um, about 7 years. there is a very comprehensive report by one Scott Ritter, (a Republican, incidentally) who is campaigning against this war on the basis of having been the one in Iraq doing the inspecting?
here is an article on his report
And the Iraqi opposition groups, having lived in London for years, may not have the credibility one would hope for; it’s why the administration is now thinking of occupation rather than putting them in as interim governors of the country.
Commenting, so the trackback will show up. At least, I hope this will work, I’m curious …
yes, that’s how it works — page has to rebuild, comments do that, trackbacks show up!
and may i say i’m quite disappointed that no one has at least chuckled over the title? i mean c’mon, it was meant to add a little levity to an otherwise grim situation.
people, people. *sigh*
Well, I thought it was funny, but have no idea what it means so I didn’t want to show my ignorance by speaking up about it.
just sound it out. say it out loud.
I just said that out loud.
Oh dear.
And the question remains…
Why? Why attack Iraq? kd summed up so many of my thoughts, and so beautifully. Go visit her. To add
The Larger Context
Last year at this time, we worried because we felt that we could do nothing to stop terrorists from attacking us. This year we fret that we can do nothing to stop our government from doing whatever it pleases.