Karl Rove (appropriately named with a Germanic “K” and not a French “C” beginning his first name) let the world know that conservatives are he-Men and god-Warriors, and liberals are wimpy indicters and analyzers. The latter probably can’t get women, either. After 9/11 conservatives “prepared for war” so much so that they left a stupid tax cut in place with bold promises of more to come to make sure that the country couldn’t pay for its new and improved war, which it can’t. It was the non-appeal to the spirit of sacrifice that war inevitably brings with it that should have been the tip off that their preparations were lacking a few key ingredients, like common sense.
And maybe the preparations were never all that sincere to start with. What the conservatives really saw were the chances to sew up more votes and huge contractual pay days.
The facts are that except against emaciated countries that can’t adequately defend themselves our military has not been this weak since before the Civil War. With “preparations” like these we better hope our real enemies stay very quiet.
Karl was pretty effective as a behind-the-scenes puppet master, but out in the open he comes across as just another right-wing jingoistic dork – another Dick Cheney with no vocal resonance. You have to wonder what made him want to give up his splendidly crafted mystique. Boredom? Jealousy? Perhaps political ambition? He’s tired of making kings? He wants to be one himself?
George W. Bush, in a moment of painful self-revelation, let it slip out that he “thinks” about Iraq every day. I should hope so. Maybe even twice a day. Maybe one day a week he budgets three thoughts to the subject. Wouldn’t you? I can see General George Washington being asked: “How often do you think of the American Revolution (while it was in progress)?” His answer: “Every third day.” Or: “President Lincoln, how often do you the think about the War Between the States?” His answer: “What?”
What has been the product of all this daily “thinking” for Mr. Bush? Nothing new for two years. He has promised that he is “not giving up,” though. There is still hope. This is an okay response in a dictatorship or a monarchy. In the United States, however, George had better figure out a way to keep the country from “not giving up” on it and him. Keep in mind the only difference between George III and George W. is a few collapsing vertical lines and one tiny spot.
Nearly three thousand years ago, the Greek poet Homer told the story of King Agamemnon who took his country to war because its national honor had been offended. Actually, his brother’s wife had been kidnapped, and some say a little too willingly. But Agamemnon downplayed this last fact and instead made appeals to Greek pride that are remarkably similar to the Rovian-Bushian appeals of today. Aggie also didn’t get much into the Aegean trade routes and market share disputes the Greeks were having with the Trojans at the time.
To allow his army to set sail Agamemnon had to kill his own daughter, Iphigenia. This is how you change the direction of the wind. After ten years of a military stalemate in Asia Minor, the Greeks developed an exit strategy, called the Trojan Horse. Agamemnon returned home shortly thereafter, where his wife Clytemnestra stabbed him to death in a bath-tub even before he could get the ten-years worth of combat grime washed off.
Oh yes, by the way, Agamemnon had won his war.
Do you think Homer was trying to tell us something?
George W. has promised us a special message on the war to be delivered from the Fort Bragg Special Forces base in North Carolina. Have you noticed how his and Rove’s time and travel plans are starting to resemble that of Yasser Arafat’s near the end – from safe house to safe house?
I can already see the sea of Special Forces guys and gals sitting behind him to create that impressive and imposing photo image and enjoying the speech from the rear. Since we have seen the picture before, the world will be waiting to see if there is a gram of newness in what he says.
What’s your bet?
Bart Whiteman
bartwhiteman@aol.com
* * *
Nobody likes war.
Your continuous insistence that our leaders took us to war for selfish reasons is what will keep Republicans in power. It's one thing to disagree about going into Iraq. It's another to insist that it was done for any selfish individual or group of individual's personal profit.
Reasonable people can disagree. Irrational people will continue to act that way and never will be taken seriously by the reasonable people.
Mike Thompson
mikethompson@catt.com
* * *
A few questions for Mr. Thompson:
Do you want to keep the Republicans in power or do you want them out of power? Are you gloating over me or warning me? Am I helping or hurting your cause? Bush's decisions on virtually everything since he has been president, including the war, have been consistent with benefiting a few people. The Republicans have their eyes set on maintaining power through any means necessary regardless of what I say. If we are watching a fine example of how to run a war and how to build a democracy, then I guess I'm just an old fashioned monkey's uncle. If you prefer to watch lives and money go down the drain in silence (with no end in sight), then please be my guest.
Mr. Thompson clearly puts himself in the class of “reasonable” people and insinuates that I am to be found elsewhere. Ultimately, it is will not be Mr. Bush who will be given credit for having gotten us into this war and having prolonged it. It is all the “reasonable” people who sat by and had no problem with thousands of unknown, innocent people dying far away and out of sight so that we might maintain the delusion that this was somehow making us safe and secure at home more so than we already were. It is the “reasonable” people who have not seen that the various disclosures about our handling of prisoners, and the garish juxtaposition of highly paid, profiteering contractors and relatively spoiled military troops side by side with a practically destitute populace and a tattered band of “insurgents,” who have somehow fought the greatest military machine on the planet to a draw have made our image around the world darker and darker with each passing day.
The “reasonable” members of the current administration have let it be known that we are probably in for it in Iraq for the next decade or so. I would argue that is wishful thinking using the present strategy. At what point does the American public say “enough?” Based on the political bent of the people managing the war, it would seem that what has been really at stake (other that making some dough) is the ability to claim victory in Vietnam, which is the event that has really stuck in the craw of these people. Past validation through present triumph. And what if triumph never comes? Do we look elsewhere to another needless war to find that elusive creature?
If these are the attributes of “reason,” then I will gladly pass on them for the time being.
Bart Whiteman
* * *
A big thank you to Mr. Whiteman for this article. I loved it. I absolutely love it when liberals write this kind of stuff and put it into print. All of the people reading this today should rejoice when they read liberal diatribe and when they actually put their thoughts into printed text. This is why they loose elections. This is why they cannot put any plans together let alone two coherent sentences.
Notice with me, if you will, the line of thought. It is very simple and easy to parse.
Attack Bush.
Attack the War.
Attack the military.
Then Attack Bush again.
Come up with no other solution.
It is perfect and that is why they loose elections and will continue to do so.
So for the last time, at least for this one hour, here are the facts and rebuttal. Our military is not weak and to say that it is never been this weak since before the Civil War is absolutely absurd. The U.S. military is the most organized, the best trained, the most mobile and best armed fighting machine in history. And what other "strong enemies" are out there to match up with? I am not sure what Whiteman is trying to accomplish, whether it be an attack on Bush or an attempt to demoralize the military.
We went to war in Iraq in the best interest of our national security. In case all liberals have forgotten, there was a terrorist attack on 9-11 where 3,000 died and building came crashing down around us. We vowed, "Never Again" and we meant it. So that means that when there is a threat or a growing one out there you take action. Do not wait until it happens again. But action for liberals means talking and thinking and whining. Liberals lick their wounds and sue for terms of peace. Conservatives like Bush and most of America, think that we do not negotiate with terrorists and thugs. Remember World War II, Hitler and British Prime Minister Chamberlain? Chamberlain's tactic was the typical liberal one of negotiation and look what happened, the world had to go to war to stop a madman. You can do it now or you can do it later. Only later the cost is higher and I don't mean financially.
Everyone knows that Saddam was looking to acquire nuclear materials to make a warhead. He already had chemical ones and if he got the other, he would use them and probably against us somewhere in the world. So do you wait until he gets them and uses them before you stop him? Do you wait until a dirty bomb goes off in at the US Embassy in some European country before you act? Bush said no, we cannot wait until that happens. The liberals cried and whined some more but it was the right thing to do. Mr. Whiteman, even Bill Clinton knew that Saddam was a threat to U.S. interest. I know that stings a bit because the Clinton's are the new messiahs of the U.S. but it is true and the truth sometimes is painful.
So, please keep writing this kind of nonsense and please keep offering no other solutions. Please keep encouraging your liberal friends in the House and Senate to bring the business of the country to a halt and we will all see you at the ballot box. What would it be like for there to be no liberal government anywhere? We can only hope and pray. Mr. Whiteman, keep it coming. You cannot buy good material like this.
Joshua Project
joshuaproj@yahoo.com
* * *
I’m so glad Mr. Project has given us the “final” word because now we can all hush up and be good little boys, while the big boys solve all the world’s problems. Somehow, the constant appeals from the right for silence or noise (as long as it is “helpful” noise) just ring emptier and emptier. His election victory brag is just fine and dandy, too, since this has nothing to do with winning elections, and I am not running for anything.
Mr. Project is parroting Mr. Bush in trying the keep those dots connecting 9/11 and Iraq in place. The trouble is they keep wanting to wander away. They won’t behave, either.
The right started this ugly fight in America, and they just get arrogant, smug, and surly if anyone dares to question their infinite wisdom. I will do my best to keep Mr. Project stocked with my “nonsense,” so he can sit at home and doodle on it to his heart’s content.
Bart Whiteman
* * *
Mr. Whiteman,
Thank you for continuing to write your articles. It is nice to know there are still some intelligent people who realize the war is a stupid mistake and that our troops need to come home.
Contrary to what some people still believe, 9/11 was not connected to Iraq, even though people still believe it was and Bush tries to link the two for his own misguided purposes. All the war is doing now is creating a breeding ground for new terrorists.
Keep up the good articles. There are more and more people agreeing with you every day.
Vicki Hill
Hixson, TN
* * *
No one has said, not even President Bush if you have paid attention, that Iraq was involved in 9-11. Iraq is and was a factor in the war on terrorism. Terrorism is more than 9-11. More than Afghanistan and more than just Iraq. They are all pieces of the puzzle that make up this global war on terrorism. The war on terror is global and we have to be prepared to fight it when ever and with whomever. No one likes war but if it is necessary then we better be ready to win. But just for history sake let's remember that Wilson, a Democrat, was president during WWI. FDR, another democrat, was president during WWII. Truman during Korea. Johnson during Vietnam. So I am glad to hear the Liberal, Democratic perspective on War because they have such a good background in it and in causing it.
Have you not read the 9-11 Commissions report? There were ties between Al Qaeda and the regime in Iraq. With great perspective, Ms. Hill tells us that Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorists. Again someone is not paying attention to the news or the information coming out of Iraq. Those are not new Iraqi terrorists we are fighting are terrorists out of Syria, Iran and other Arab countries. They are coming to Iraq to fight the US army. I say good. Let them come. I would rather them fight our best and brightest on the battlefield than targeting mothers with strollers at the local mall on Main Street USA. And if you think for a moment that this was not about to happen just look at Israel and the targeting of women and children by the terrorists there at the market and pizza shops at lunch time.
My only challenge to the bleeding heart liberals out there is just give me something to think about. Just make a clear and coherent argument or offer something other than whining. You have no plan and you present no alternatives other than Bush is Bad and Clinton is Good. We are tired of hearing the whine without the cheese. Please just offer something other than the light heart dribble that characterizes every article and every speech we hear from you.
We conservatives do not want you to shut up. It is your American right to speak. Just have something to say from time to time.
Joshua Project
* * *
I hope Mr. Project has a lecture tour lined up in the near future, since he has so much wisdom to dispense to the poor unsuspecting masses. His “Me Tarzan, You Jane” approach to all this is enthralling. Here I get a lone voice of support, for which I extend my heartfelt thanks to Ms. Hill, and then he unleashes his torrent of pea soup green, generalized trashing like Linda Blair in her darkest Exorcist fury.
He starts out by saying that Mr. Bush says 9/11 and Iraq are not related, even though Mr. Bush made it pretty clear by his constant 9/11 references in his recent Iraq speech that he would like to keep planting the seed of that thought in the American public’s mind and that we are engaged in rightful revenge. He then pretty much loses his own argument by stating that when war is “necessary you better be ready to win.” That’s just it: the Iraq War was unnecessary. People are dying for no reason. We are blowing billions of dollars for no reason. We have made the terrorism threat worse than it was when the war started. And there is no end in sight.
Mr. Project’s ensuing history lesson wouldn’t get him a passing grade in Freshman History. He wants to lay warfare at the feet of the Democrats, which is a pretty good stretch of the imagination. It might be noted that two of the four Democratic presidents that he mentioned somehow ended and won their wars. It is also a ridiculous comparison to drag WWI and WWII into any comparison with the Iraq War. You’re talking Major League vs. T-ball.
Mr. Project goes on to say we have the same sorts of daily terrorist threats that they have in Israel. Maybe so, if you ignore the 8000-mile distance problem. That’s a long walk for a suicide bomber. He then doses out the real message that has gotten us in trouble with the rest of the world. Estimates have the number as high as 100,000 as the number of innocent Iraqis that have died during Bush’s war. It is just hunky-dory for all these nameless people to keep dying while we work out the kinks in our little democracy exercise and give horrible, tangible vent to our own internal feuding.
Mr. Project hates “liberals” so badly he can taste it. I think he hates them more than he hates “terrorists.” He wants to hunt down terrorists so he can show liberals a thing or two. The “whine” that Mr. Project hears is just the buzzing in his own ears. He somehow is missing the fact that the tide has turned. People are going to get more and more upset with the direction of things with every passing day, with every unnecessary death, and with every failure of leadership.
Bart Whiteman