Tuesday, May 24, 2005


The war rhetoric is picking up again! Better get out the bombs because we could get nuked, and we won't know if it's Iran or not!

If this line of thought is going anywhere, then it's not just a slippery slope, but an overhang with a dull thud and the sound of breaking bones at the bottom.

Though it may seem sensible to some, (to keep looking for the next target to bomb back to the stone age, just in case,) keep in mind there's a long list of targets to go for. Can the US keep bombing another nation every two years, just in case some unknown nation might want to nuke us? And if the world believes that's our course, like we seem to be advertising that it is, then doesn't this become a self-fulfilling prophecy? How long before someone does make a premptive strike against the US to prevent their nation being bombed back to the stone age?

And what if it's a currently friendly nation, or the action is supported by someone we believe to be a friend? What then, do we logically take this to it's end conclusion and try to fight the whole world at once?

After Iran, the dubious list continues to grow, Syria, Libya, Saudi Arabia, India, Pakistan, China... When do we stop taking out nations because they may be a threat someday?

And this notion of taking out Iran and thus shutting off oil exports from the Middle East is a horrible idea. The Middle East supplies most of the nations of the world with oil. If the US takes out the Persian Gulf out of commission, all the nations of the world will have a stake in our actions and will see the need to participate in the Middle East, with or against us. And who's with us, when it comes to starting such a conflagration?

And after that war get's going, how can the US, while busy in the ME, guarantee imports from any other nation. How can the US respond to other emergencies? Does the US just learn to live with 80% less oil? Does China learn happily to live with 50% less oil? How about the rest of the nations of the world? Do they happily watch their economies crumble, their industries dry up, their food supplies run low, and do nothing to secure their own supplies?

Maybe I'm hysterical on this point. Maybe I haven't a clue. But this sure looks like a high risk endeavor to me. The benefits are that, we know Iran won't produce the materials to nuke US soil. The downside is, the list of nations that might do this increases, while the economic and military costs to the US will be staggering.

Sometimes, diplomacy is the best course of action. If you try to persuade everyone with a punch to the head, at some point, your actions will produce very negative feedback.

Engaging in diplomacy does not make one a pacifist. If you think it is, you might reread Sun Tzu, another great pacifist.

Tuesday, May 10, 2005

Who's Responsible?

A lot of ink has been spilled over the War on Iraq. A lot of finger wagging has been directed at the current White House Residents. And there's no doubt that the War on Iraq is their baby.

After all, they decided to have the war, and spent countless hours building a marketing strategy for this grand endeavor. Then they went out on the road and sold the war with a frenzied zeal.

Being 'big picture' folks, they mostly didn't really worry about the planning of the war or it's aftermath, that was left to the military to figure out. Only Donald Rumsfield was reported to have taken a personal hand in the daily planning and firing of staff, (staff that had constructive criticisms). And why not? Donald Rumsfield cut his wartime planning teeth, helping to manage the day to day operations in Vietnam, from the front lines in Washington DC. Who else could be more qualified to manage this newest quagmire?

But these people aren't the whole story. Though they did do a lot of personal marketing, these marketing efforts were mostly press conferences and small stops in coffee shops. The real marketing came from the media.

And who really pounded the pavement and worked damn hard to get the war going? Who are the these Iraqi War Cheerleaders? Who else should have as much or maybe even more credit for getting this war started? Who else but the radio pundits, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Mark Davis. If you're a TV fan, you've probably got your own list, but for myself, most of my news comes from the internet, radio and the paper these days. I mostly watch TV for Stargate, and fall asleep during the endless hours of crime dramas my wife enjoys. So radio is where I hear the most propaganda extolling the virtues of killing Muslims for Jesus.

These guys were on the radio, day after day. They explained endlessly that Iraq had Nuclear Weapons, an active Nuculear(sic) Weapons Program, Botulism, Anthrax, Sarin Nerve Gas, Rape Rooms, Human Meat Grinders and Comfy Chairs. Where is that Human Meat Grinder now anyway? Granted the eyewitnesses to this thing all proved to be media seeking, lying narcissists, but surely there's pictures of that thing somewhere?

These guys worked harder than Cheney, sycophanted more liberally than Rice and explained the dangers of Iraq endlessly in simple terms that even Bush could understand. In fact it began to sound after a while, like the White House was getting all of it's information on Iraq, straight from the Rush Limbaugh Show!

So when it comes to getting the war rolling, these guys deserve a lot of credit. In fact, without them, I believe that this war would never had gotten rolling. So give them a hand, they worked hard to make this war happen. Where the Bush team concentrated on the big picture, these guys worked out all of the marketing details to really sell the war.

And look what they accomplished! Through their hard work, sweat, sycophanting and preaching, they got the US into a war with the following benefits:

1. $Trillions is final costs.
2. Will last for years yet. Both Rumsfield and Cheney have publically stated that the US military will probably stay in Iraq for 20 years. Hrmmm, perhaps #1 is too low?
3. Already well over 100,000 dead people. Heck, maybe it's 200,000 dead people, but we're not counting, are we?
4. 1,600 dead Americans.
5. Worldwide terrorism is setting stratospheric new records, if we leave out Iraqi statistics.
6. Constant bombing in Iraq as a few irregulars continue to fight back.
7. An Iraqi government that requires the constant presence of armed guards, so they aren't killed by their constituents.
8. New reports of deaths everyday.
9. An occasional slaughter of a village, town or city for payback.
10. A nation salted with depleted uranium, soaking the soil, water blown in the air. And keep in mind this stuff is only mildly radioactive, it's chemical toxicity is what generates autoimmune diseases, tumors, cancers and birth defects.
11. A US military enjoying the benefits of constant exposure to depleted uranium so we can have a Gulf War II Syndrome.
12. A loss of 3 million barrels per day of oil production. Woohoo, but isn't Exxon happy about the prices? After 2008, do you think they'll name oil tankers after more of the White House staff or will 'The Condoleeza Rice', remain the only one?
13. A world firmly united, against the US. But as has been pointed out by Bush and many celebrities, the US doesn't need the rest of the world. The rest of the world needs the US. Guess the US is supposed to be Atlas, supporting the weight of the world.

Yup, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Mark Davis worked very hard for all of these things. And they are proud that they made these things happen. In a recent email to me, Mark Davis explained that the Iraqi adventure is a great and noble war, like WWII. As the War on Iraq and WWII were both begun as unprovoked attacks on soveriegn nations, I can see some similarities and can see where Mark is coming from. Before the Iraqi war, Rush, Sean and Mark went on endlessly to explain how the US attcking Iraq would be like Hitler attacking Belgium, Poland, France,... No wait, that's not it. It was more like, the US attacking Iraq would be like the US reluctantly being dragged into a European theater of war, that was already ongoing and being doggedly won by Allied forces. Wait, they didn't say it like that either. Well, you were there. You remember how it went.

So anytime you'd like to express your opinion, thank these fine gentlemen for their hard work. They worked hard to get over one hundred thousand people killed, trillions of dollars wasted and to destroy a nation. Has anything you've ever done, had such an impact on so many? Let's give credit where credit is due. How many people have died today, because of your hard work and dedication?