How Short Our Memories
I wanted to write a post today about the Bonus Army of 1932 but then I thought about my international audience and I thought No! The posting of a tragic, sad moment in our history will only feed the stupidity of the left and be used against us and me to uphold the idea that the US is evil
In response to someone this post is going to be written instead.
How short our memories.
Maybe I should have said, have you ever read or listen to ANY speech given by my President? If you have then you may remember (or maybe you chose not to) his speech of 15 September 2001.
Excerpt;
“Now we honor those who died, and prepare to respond to these attacks on our nation. I will not settle for a token act. Our response must be sweeping, sustained and effective. We have much do to, and much to ask of the American people.
You will be asked for your patience; for, the conflict will not be short. You will be asked for resolve; for, the conflict will not be easy. You will be asked for your strength, because the course to victory may be long.”
We were told that it was going to be a long and drawn out war against those who think our way of life is a reason to kill us. Never in the history of this country have we taken the stance to attack any state or entity simply because we didn’t like them. Ever! I know you think we have. You are ignorant. Now, by saying that I mean that you have not the knowledge of history to make a reasoned determination of fact.
Let’s start in the 1750’s we kicked the french outta’ here over real estate.
In 1776. We threw off the bonds of the brits. I hope soon that the Irish will also.
In 1814 we finished the job with the brits.
In 1860 we had a domestic dispute. It’s nunyabusiness. We got over it.
In 1898 we argued with Spain over real estate. We won.
In 1917 we bailed out the brits and french.
We did it again in the 1940’s.
The 1950’s brought over 70 countries together to stop China from completely taking over Korea. We led the way.
In the 1960’s we agreed to help france in that whole Indochina thing. Ok, granted, mistake! Hindsight is 20-20. We never should have helped the French. Would they help us in a similar situation? They have already responded with a resounding NO!
From the 50’s until the 90’s we held the line in Europe and Asia.
So that makes us 9, 1 and 1.
Please explain to me which one of these conflicts is the one wherein we attacked simply because we didn’t like someone’s’ lifestyle?
Today we are engaged in a great war of conscience. Those we are fighting want nothing but to impose their idea of how EVERYONE should be. Would you like to discuss diversity or tolerance? Those we are at war with do not understand the meaning of those words. The enemy I am at war with wants nothing but the destruction of all you and I hold dear. I am amazed at the ignorance of those who neither understand nor hold this to be true.
So with that short history lesson, am I still jingoistic? I don’t think so.
My President lied to me? Did you know that Clinton is no longer the President? Oh, wait, I’m sorry, the single most criminal US administration in the 20th century is immune to any criticism because….well, I never figured that one out.
There have been 2 Presidents impeached in the entire history of this country. The first one was Andrew Johnson the 2nd one was Clinton!!!
President Johnson was impeached for violation of the Tenure of Office Act of 1867.
Clinton was impeached for grand jury perjury, civil suit perjury, obstruction of justice, and abuse of power.
Neither one was removed from office. Go and learn something about how our government works.
My President was given the most uptodate and reliable information available to him at the time and acted on it. Now all these years later we find out that some, a bit of it may have been wrong and that makes him and the entire country wrong. Wrong! The UN security council had put how many resolutions in place? How many times did the UN request Iraq to comply with them? The answer is 69! Yes, since 1990 the UN security council passed 69 resolutions asking Saddam to comply with the worlds requests.
See http://www.casi.org.uk/info/scriraq.html
The more you learn, the more intelligent you become.
The last and final point I want to make is……
Where and when did I EVER give you the impression that I do not accept differing opinions? Answer = NEVER!
Please do not give me soundbites and ABCCBSBBCNBCCNNSKYMSNBC bullshit. Instead, please make your case with facts and not half truths and lets have an intelligent conversation about it.
I shall repeat myself at the risk of being rude……..
JC, I could not disagree with you more.
Okay, I’m going to hop about here in response to your post. I’m gratified you felt strongly enough to make an entire post to respond to one of my comments, so I’ll happily attempt to reply to you.
Your original post equated even pro-war American politicians who have expressed reservations about its progress with Tokyo Rose, a WW2 propaganda mouthpiece of the Japanese Empire.
Now, that mightn’t be you seeking to quell dissent in relation to the war, but I would argue it is the intent of that piece’s original author. Only the most rabidly partisan Republican could even seek to equate the two. There is clearly a world of difference between democratically querying the progress of an expensive and bloody conflict halfway round the world and the enemy seeking to undermine military morale during a war.
I mean, do you REALLY think that Hilary Clinton and the others actively desire the defeat of America? Really? Why would they desire that? What would they possibly gain compared to what they would lose? Those people aren’t stupid. Their patriotism is sound, but they question current foreign policy. Like I said, dissent is the hallmark of democracy.
There is little doubt your current President has lied to you. The weapons of mass distraction, sorry, destruction, never existed. The dossier presented by Colin Powell at the UN was NOT the ‘most uptodate and reliable information available.’ It was a known farrago of lies concocted deliberately by British military intelligence to make the case for a war the UK and US leaderships desired. This was demonstrated by both the UK press and by Hans Blix before conflict commenced.
For sure there were UN resolutions against Iraq. There are significantly more serious UN resolutions against Israel, but I don’t see America carpet-bombing Tel Aviv. If the US wants to be the world policeman, then it doesn’t matter what the UN say or do. If they want to respect the will of the global community, however, then why didn’t they start at the top of the offenders’ list and work down?
East Timor, West Papua, Rwanda, Sudan… There are all manner of UN resolutions against all manner of horrors going on in the world. But America chose to pursue only one of those horrors. Why? Oil, of course. You’re running out, and this was an easy oil-grab.
And to sweeten the deal, paid for with the lives of British and American troops, Cheney’s company has hoovered up billions of US tax dollars. Suitcases containing millions of US tax dollars have simply, and literally, vanished in Iraq. To what end? Hard to say, given that Iraq is a bigger mess now than it has been in hundreds of years, which is really saying something if you read the history of the region.
I’m happy to discuss diversity and tolerance with you. You might be intrigued to know that so are the vast majority of the world’s Muslims. The big lie of the present era is that Muslims are in what you described as a ‘war of conscience’ with western civilisation. That somehow this is the Crusades Part Two, and it’s a fight to the death.
That’s dangerous because seeking the eradication of over a billion people is obscene, which is where that thinking ends. It’s also dangerous because it’s a vicious circle.
Militant responses to moderate Islam produces militant Islam, which produces 9-11s, which produces more militant responses, which leads to more moderate Muslims becoming militant, which leads to… Anyhow, you get my point, I guess.
I’ve travelled throughout much of the Islamic world. In places like Egypt, Syria and Palestine, the people are wonderfully friendly, perplexed at why their way of living is under so much threat from another, and concerned about the upscaling of conflict around the planet. Sound familiar? Yup, they’re very like Americans right now.
Furthermore, you can get a drink in those places, the local women can wear bikinis and make-up if they wish, and diversity is tolerated and warmly welcomed by the people, if not by the leaderships.
But there are problems. A lack of democracy is a major issue in most of those countries in North Africa and the Middle East, especially in those places seen as ‘friendly’ by the US, and I’m thinking of Saudi and the gulf states in particular there, as well as Iran, which isn’t friendly.
And when you consider that the combined economies of the Maghreb states amounts to less than that of Belgium, you can see that trade and inward investment are major issues too.
I’d love nothing more than to see America move towards developing democracy throughout the Arab world. It’s what those people deserve and it’s the role that America and only America can currently achieve.
But the current US leadership is not motivated by such lofty ideals. It’s interested only in what oil can be stolen at the cost of US lives. Resolving the Palestinian conflict would be the single biggest step towards peace globally, since the theft of their land and country by Israel is a major issue of anger and resentment to other Arab states. And if the sting was taken out of that anger, it would not be plausible or possible for the extremists in Pakistani madrassas (yup, another ‘friendly’ Islamic country, currently under military dictatorship, that I don’t see America overthrowing, despite their nuclear capacity) to preach hate to young people.
We’re at a crossroads in world history, where America can either pursue a global peace and the spread of democracy in places that greatly desire it, or continue to occupy sovereign nations, lose their own troops and money, oversee civil wars and conflict, suffer terrorist attacks and support corrupt regimes worldwide, all in the name and interest of stealing oil and lining Halliburton’s deep, deep pockets.
The world objects to the hypocrisy of the US leadership, and sees through the lies they feed the American people to the truth of their grubby motivations.
If America is concerned about democracy, why won’t it push to see democracy introduced in Saudi, Egypt, Pakistan, in the apartheid state of Israel? If America is concerned about nuclear proliferation, why doesn’t it take action against Israel and Pakistan, two known nuclear powers in a tinderbox part of the world?
Clearly the American leadership is not motivated by the things it says it is motivated by. Hence they are lying to you and continue to lie to you, all the while lining their pockets with Saudi kickbacks and stolen Iraqi oil and US tax dollars at the cost of American and Iraqi lives.
OH, and just to add, I have indeed read Bush’s speeches. Often with horror.
See here: http://skinflicks.blogspot.com/2007/01/lies-they-tell-part-two.html
And in relation to the outsourcing of US torture, something I omitted to mention above, you could usefully see here: http://skinflicks.blogspot.com/2007/01/old-europe-grows-set-of-balls.html
And in relation to Iran and Israel, see here: http://skinflicks.blogspot.com/2006/12/theres-more-than-one-holocaust-being.html
In relation to Saudi, see here: http://skinflicks.blogspot.com/2006/12/evil-that-men-do.html
In relation to American support for Saddam Hussein, see here:
http://skinflicks.blogspot.com/2006/11/getting-rid-of-evidence.html
And in relation to the demonisation of Arabs in US media, see here:
http://skinflicks.blogspot.com/2006/10/planet-of-arabs.html
As you can see from the above links, I am fairly well informed about the global geo-politik going on here, both within the US, and around the world. I feel it is a terrible shame that the US public are not made aware of their leadership’s shoddy and dangerous involvement in foreign affairs. If they were, I am sure that they would inform their leaders that such activities are deeply un-American and run contrary to the very principles which founded the United States.
Sorry, missed a few. Here’s Bush on democratic dissent:
http://skinflicks.blogspot.com/2006/12/criticising-my-authority-is-classified.html
And here’s the US leadership’s hypocrisy on torture:
http://skinflicks.blogspot.com/2007/01/idiots-rule.html
Please Stand By
Due to technical difficulties beyond our comprehension all intelligent comments have been temporarily suspended.
Please Stand By
Hi brian, an interesting read from you and JC. I’m inclined to agree with JC for the most part – I view America as being founded on solid, decent principles, but the current administration is clearly (to many of us outside America, at least) a mouthpiece for greedy industry. I don’t claim to have the extensive knowledge that you or JC have, but it’s clear that America’s involvement in Iraq is vastly different to their involvement in somewhere like Sudan, where they’re still in the throes of the Darfur conflict. What’re your thoughts on the reason for this, if you reject the notion of oil being a factor?
Here from Michele’s and wish I hadn’t. Agree with JC 100%.
Unfortunately Brian, I have to say that I too am with JC. While it seems to be in the nature of most Americans to be well-meaning and generally decent folks, the current administration has developed a siege mentality towards their war. It was not a war backed entirely by public support and Congress got it tight to authorise it too.
As JC said, the choice of states seen as allies by the US is bewildering. After all, in London, an Islamic school recently won a court case in which it was defending its sright to call Jews ‘pigs’ and Christians ‘Crusader animals’. That is frankly the most offensive threat to my religion I’ve heard in a while, and the school is bankrolled by Saudi money. Is this what they want to impose on people in England?
I digress though. While I do think that America should foster democracy, it should also take itself out of the whole Israel situation. That has been nothing but bad news for all concerned, and I don’t see the point in supporting a nation that has actually started wars. The only thing that is happening is that America is being associated with Israel, and is getting a bad reputation off the back of that. Definitelly, Israel should be disarmed, because the day will come when their paranoia reches fever pitch, and they’ll launch a nuke at Tehran, Damascus, or Riyadh. America will be dragged through the mud with the scenario that will unfold there.
If it wants to be seen as a genuine bringer of peace and hope to the Arab people, it needs to dissociate itself from the perceived enemy of the Muslims. While Bush will never do that, if the next administartion can stop supporting Israel at all costs and encourage a Palestinian state*, then maybe peace could be brought to the region.
Right now, though, Bush is in a serious hole, and he is going nowhere but down with it. Whoever’s next to be Commander In Chief better be ready to deal with the shit he leaves in his wake.
*If you’ve heard of the Irish Palestinian Solidarity Campaign – shower of cunts, they are – I’d like to point out I have nothing to do with them. A two state solution just seems logical to me.
Dude! I just listened to some of your podcasts – you have a voice as deep as mine! Holy hell!