a scribble and a revisitation of old topics...

[crookedeye]

Man, I keep hearing those on the right crow on and on about how stupid anyone could have been to oppose the war after seeing that statue get pulled down. And yet the news keeps verifying assertions made back in my own old rant. The prognostications:

But achieving moral clarity often requires hiding certain realities. From the beginning, the neocons took a much more alarmist view of Soviet capacities and intentions than most experts. As late as 1980, the ur-neocon Norman Podhoretz warned of the imminent "Finlandization of America, the political and economic subordination of the United States to superior Soviet power," even raising the possibility that America's only options might be "surrender or war." We now know, of course, that U.S. intelligence estimates, which many neocons thought underestimated the magnitude and durability of Soviet power, in fact wildly overestimated them.
I have to admit that I too wildly overestimated the amount of evidence of WMDs that would be found in Iraq. They did have pesticides, though. And agricultural supplies can be really threatening, just look at that tractor guy.

As one former Army officer with long experience with the Iraq file explains it, the "physical analogy to Saddam Hussein's regime is a steel beam in compression." Give it one good hit, and you'll get a violent explosion. One hundred thousand U.S. troops may be able to keep a lid on all the pent-up hatred.
Good thing we protected the Ministry of Oil... I actually heard a radio interview where the only defense offered for the fact that the U.S. troops protected The Ministry of Oil and not hospitals from looters was that the oil belonged to the Iraqi people. Unlike the hospitals or museum, I suppose?

But why am I making a fool of myself for bringing this up? Bush's words were "passed into history", all the fun exiting battle stuff is over. What could be more tedious and boring than paying attention to an issue that has passed into history? Pay no attention to those Shi'ite demonstrations...

Meanwhile, U.S. intelligence has discovered fresh evidence that, prior to the war, Saddam moved quantities of biological and chemical weapons to Syria.
Old news by now, and its funny how we've suddenly stopped hearing anything about these ever since Syria brought up the "WMD-free zone" idea...

And to top it off, one of the most well-known and respected bloggers earnestly links to this article proudly admitting what a boon this war has been for religious extremism:
The other big religious winners will be others who have been favorable to the war--fundamentalist and evangelical Christians, conservative-leaning Jews, even anti-Saddam Shia clerics. Such groups had already been gaining ground in the battle for the religious hearts and minds of Americans; their embrace of the current realities, as opposed to '60s flashbacks, guarantees that their voices, and ideas, will be more valued in the years ahead.

And they're not above a little mud-slinging either:
Thus we have found mainstream religious figures like Bob Edgar, who moved seamlessly from being a liberal congressman to leading the National Council of Churches, at antiwar rallies. There they were joined by those who advocate the suicide bombings by children of other children, allies to regimes that brook no faith but their own, as well as the "pagan" nation of lightly churched areas such as San Francisco or the west side of Manhattan.

Question the president = support suicide bombings of children! I guess we have no choice but to do whatever the president wants. Feel free to correct any fallacies found above, if there's stuff here that I'm way off on just let me know.

Comments

[pawpad.livejournal.com]

I'd add the Bagdad Zoo to your list of places-left-unprotected.

Heehee I like your scribble. The bright blue whipples remind me of my childhood in the 80s. ;D *lurve*

-Pagan from the San Francisco area, who, surprisingly, does not support suicide bombings