Bush = War

Maybe I'm reading things wrong but the language I'm hearing used by the Bush administration and from the neo-con blogs leads me to believe they have decided, in interest of the US, they must create democracy in the middle east and they are willing to do it militarily. They in fact think it's God's will for them to do so. The attack on muslims in the states has already begun with the likes of Ann Coulter as their mascot.

Coulter wrote in a syndicated column on September 12 that in responding to terrorists "we should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."

The problem with Ms. Coulter's words is she thinks 'all' muslims are terrorist as do the neo-cons or at the very least they can't be trusted 'because' they are muslim. There's more than one problem actually. She's a bigoted nationalist. Let's get that straight from the getgo.
The following was found in the comments of Cao's blog (found in the Neo-con links on the left).

"Unfortunately, the imams and holy men of Islam are calling for all muslims–especially the “moderates” to pick up the sword–in the United States. It appears to me as though that’s begun. It already happened elsewhere–in Canada, in Britain, in the Netherlands with the murder of Van Gogh…it was only a matter of time that it would happen here."

The true face of Islam is showing. They disregard all laws and freedoms people possess and make sure that people know that they will enforce their Sharia law in the lands of the infidel.Comment by Cao — 2/14/2005 @ 5:42 am

Bush say's yesterday that Syria is out of step with democracy in the middle east. Who is Mr. Bush to tell a 'middle east' country they are out of step?

"We've recalled our ambassador, which indicates that the relationship is not moving forward, that Syria is out of step with the progress being made in the greater Middle East, that democracy is on the move, and this is a country that isn't moving with the democratic movement."

As many of us were saying before his re-election Mr. Bush has a much bigger war plan than Iraq. He makes it seem he's doing everything he can to avoid it. Of course, he is now trying to mend fences with those he scorned before the Iraq invasion. Taking on Syria and Iran with the US military stretched thin already will take 'allies.' I for one will be in the streets day and night marching against any move of the french government to align itself with a US invasion plan.

"Iran is different from Iraq, very different," the president said. "There's more diplomacy, in my judgment, to be done. And we'll work very closely with our European friends and other nations."

After days of escalating US-Syria tensions following the assassination of Lebanese former prime minister Rafiq Hariri, Bush emphasized a multilateral approach as he pushed Damascus to withdraw its 14,000 troops from Lebanon.

"My first goal is to remind both Americans and Europeans that the trans-Atlantic relationship is very important for our mutual security and for peace, and that we have differences sometimes, but we don't differ on values, that we share this great love and respect for freedom," Bush said.

"I look forward to working with our European friends on my upcoming trip to talk about how we can work together to convince the Syrians to make rational decisions," he said.

This kind of language doesn't work here in Europe. We know all too well Mr. Bush's idea of 'values, love, respect and freedom.' Our neo-con buddies will let you know they don't expect help from 'old europe' and don't want it either.

Vice President Dick Cheney raised the possibility in a radio interview last month that Israel might attack Iran if evidence materialized of a successful nuclear weapons program.

One questioner at yesterday's news conference raised that possibility, but Bush sidestepped the issue, saying: "Iran has made it clear . . . they don't like Israel, to put it bluntly. And Israelis are concerned about whether or not Iran develops a nuclear weapon, as are we, as should everybody."

He did declare that the United States would support Israelis "if their security is threatened."

I'm more concerned about US and Israeli nuclear weapons as they are the only ones who seem to be intent on using them on other people.

It looks like Russia is lining up with Iran at least for the moment.

"Iran's latest actions convince us that Iran indeed does not intend to produce nuclear weapons, and it means that we will continue our cooperation in all areas, including in nuclear power generation," Putin said. "Of course we hope, dear Mr. Rowhani, that Iran will strictly adhere to all of its obligations."

Deja vu anyone?

Ah well, nothing like a little war mongering and hate to start out the day. I wonder who's going to getted nuked first? I'm sure if the US has anything to do with it, they will cast the first stone.

Americans who want peace better get out there and say so, plus sign any impeachment petitions you can find. Mediation doesn't work with Bush. It's his way or the highway.


"I wonder who's going to getted nuked first?"

Tough question. I hope it is no one, but my guess would be a toss up between the United States and Israel.  

Posted by tomslick
2/18/2005 07:32:00 pm  
I would be very surprised if the US had anything to worry about unless the Bush team chooses to ignore warnings as they did prior to 9/11. Israel is another matter because of it's location and inhumane acts towards the Palestinians. We all hope that no one gets nuked and that includes Iran and Syria. They are the ones that are being threatened.

It seems to me what should be on the discussion table is a world free of nuclear weapons. Then we would not have this worry. But, of course the US won't hear of giving up their nukes will they? In fact, Bush is now responsible for countries deciding they must arm themselves for their own protection. Wow! Yea Bush! What a leader of the free world. 

Posted by Dianne
2/18/2005 11:15:00 pm  
First of all, where the hell do you people live? Is there a planet somewhere that hasn't gotten the news? We live amongst people who are ideological zealots. They will nuke you just as quickly as they'd nuke a neo-con. Do you not care about your safety, your future, and the future of your children? Yes. Democracy is the answer. Check out the historical facts on this, Libs... there have not been any homicide-bombers out of democratic countries. If Syria and Iran are next, so be it. I'm tired of being held hostage to the religious zealotry of the Middle East. Enough already.

Hello? McFly? Anyone home? Are you people all idiots, or is it just a few of you who don't get it? I'd much rather bring the terrorists together in a land far far away from my hometown to duke it out than to have them blowing up their homicide-bomber children in Anytown, USA's mall. Grow up. Get a clue. Get a backbone and join the rest of the real Americans, would ya? As General Patton would tell you, "all real Americans love a fight." 

Posted by Dawn
2/20/2005 05:35:00 am  
"all real Americans love a fight ",

Heil Hitler-Bush, Dawn! 

Posted by WhyNot
2/20/2005 06:01:00 am  
"First of all, where the hell do you people live? "

Actually we come from around the world..US, France, New Zealand, South America and hope to be adding more nationalities soon.

"there have not been any homicide-bombers out of democratic countries."

Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols weren't homicide-bombers? But, perhaps you meant to say suicide-bombers? No matter... France and the UK are certainly democratic countries along with many others who have had more than their share of homicide bombers.

"If Syria and Iran are next, so be it. I'm tired of being held hostage to the religious zealotry of the Middle East."

Do you realize there are over 1000 known cults within the US? They would be your everyday domestic terrorist. They are watched by the FBI because of their potential for extremist criminal activities. Most are not professional but fragmented groups that breed the McVeighs and Nichols of the world. They are not Muslims. They are typically white, racist, Christian identity movements i.e. religious extremist.

So, no we are not idiots. We are part of the reality based world community.

"I'd much rather bring the terrorists together in a land far far away from my hometown to duke it out than to have them blowing up their homicide-bomber children in Anytown, USA's mall."

Of course you would. But, there's a small problem. Take a look at our banner. It reads, "How much will they pay for your freedom?" I am constantly hearing 'freedom isn't free.' It certainly isn't. As you say, you would rather innocents in other parts of the world pay the cost of your freedom. That is what you said, isn't it? You don't want your children blown up or your home blown up, right? Much better it be 'theirs' right?

You haven't the slightest idea what being 'held hostage' means. Most American don't.  

Posted by Dianne
2/20/2005 07:47:00 am  
This is going to get a bad response, but, yes, from the view of the Average Joe in America, it is much preferable to have people die in Baghdad than in St. Louis.

As a matter of fact, if I had my choice of 1000 people dying in Baghdad to just ONE of my kids dying in a suicide bomb attack in the local mall...I think you know hwere I would stand.

It ain't fair, it ain't right, but it's reality.

We are being held hostage...to a world mindset that WE are the enemy. If 9/11 hadn't happened (and it did...one can't ignore the implications no matter how much one tries), then the world would be a vastly different place.

But it isn't.

The new reality does require new answers. King George has an answer...the challenge is not to just knock his answers, but to come up with valid ones that take into account the new reality while remaining true to traditional liberal values. I see a dearth of that in the blogosphere or in the mainstream media.

The same applies to Social Security, etc.

This is not JUST a problem for the U.S. The paradigm is changing for Europe, Asia, and everyone else, both in terms of entitlement issues and foreign policy issues.

Come up with a cure, rather than spending the bulk of your time trashing someone else's solution. 

Posted by Buckwheat
2/20/2005 10:57:00 pm  
"As a matter of fact, if I had my choice of 1000 people dying in Baghdad to just ONE of my kids dying in a suicide bomb attack in the local mall...I think you know hwere I would stand.

It ain't fair, it ain't right, but it's reality.

Well, at least your honest, Buckwheat. But, I have to say I'm surprised by your response. I guess you don't fit in as well here as I thought you did.
This is not an American blog. It's a blog that's trying to think with a world view. You and Dawn are thinking from your culture alone. You say without a embarrasement you prefer others to die to save your own skin and way of life. That's not just reality and wrong it's a crime and horrendous.

I agree with Ward Churchill. With this kind of mentality no doubt America will see more harm come to her shores. I can hardly imagine what an Iraqi visiting this site would think after reading your statement.

"Come up with a cure, rather than spending the bulk of your time trashing someone else's solution. "

We were coming up with cures before the invasion of Iraq but the US didn't want to listen. You still don't. You are only interested in ideas that promote your welfare and your way of life. If you think George Bush is interested in diplomacy then you're not as smart as I thought you were. If Bush could get a all hands on invading Iran today from 'old Europe' the soldiers would be on their way there now.

We are moving away from the US. It has to be. Look for Europe, China, Russia etc. to form their own alliances in the years to come. That is if Bush doesn't provoke someone into a nuclear attack.

You should spend more time thinking out of the almighty American box.  

Posted by Dianne
2/20/2005 11:58:00 pm  
To BuckWheat:

“if I had my choice of 1000 people dying in Baghdad to just ONE of my kids dying in a suicide bomb attack in the local mall...” ,

Well, nice for you. *I  wouldn't. If I had to trade my kid's life in exchange for the death of 1000 innocents and took the bargain on, I'd never be able to look at myself in the mirror again.

“but it's reality”,

Obviously YOUR reality. Not mine nor than of many, I hope.

“We are being held hostage...to a world mindset that WE are the enemy”,

You got it the wrong way around. It's the world that's being held hostage by the US. And it is the US which keeps finding enemies everywhere.

“If 9/11 hadn't happened (and it did...one can't ignore the implications no matter how much one tries), then the world would be a vastly different place.”,

9/11 happened 1000 times over for decades in France and England. But I guess it mattered not to you guys, right?

*THE* 9/11, i.e. the only one that counts for you, actually had virtually the entire world crying American tears of support, sympathy and more. For months after that you guys had unprecedented support to go after the perpetrators. 4 years later, French soldiers still get killed every day in Afghanistan along with US ones to find Osama (2 more just yesterday).

But you guys fucked it: because you are so unbelievably selfish and egocentric, and the Osama hunt, 4 years later sill leads to fuck all, you just had to invade a third party which had nothing to do with it. Murdering 17,000 civilians in the process.

You need a culprit so bad in the US, don't you? Something endemic in your culture, maybe? If the culprit is impossible to find, then let's hang somebody else instead. The nearest tree will do.

Oh, how I love the *American Way*. 

Posted by WhyNot
2/21/2005 06:02:00 am  
I didn't support the war in Iraq. Iraq at the time was no threat at all to the U.S. (or anyone except it's own citizens).

I think Bush has fucked up big time in the post-9/11 era. I find his sudden "forgetfulness" about Osama unforgivable. I find his tolerance of North Korea's nuclear program, while railing about Iran's, just plain stupid.

You take, from one statement, based upon human instinct(and I would find it hard to believe that an Iraqi, or any other parent, would think in any other way than I do), that I WANT Iraqis to die, that Americans WANT Afghans to die. We don't.

Where is the great European uproar about the Sudan? Where are the troops being sent in to stop the slaughter of 10 times the number of Iraqis who have died in a war based on failed policy and stupidity?

It isn't there. It's happening in a faraway place to a country that doesn't have strong economic ties to Europe, so the silence is deafening.

I don't want Iraqis to die...or Sudanese. I don't want a million South Koreans to die because a tin cup dictator has decided he has enough nukes to fend off the U.S. at some point in the future. I don't want Europe dragged into a nuclear conflict in the Middle East caused by Israel and Iran.

I think it's high time the world collectively decided that enough is enough. Act in congress...to stop genocide, to stop the proliferation of weapons that can, in an instant, cause as many deaths as WWII, and to not make anyone have to choose whether to sacrifice their child or 1000 people people on the other side of the world.

The "American Way" has traditionally, throughout our history, been isolationist. READ, as someone here said. The world, unfortunately, no longer allows that luxury.

Long-winded, I know, but hopefully it expands on a comment left with little context. 

Posted by Buckwheat
2/21/2005 11:55:00 pm  
Sorry Buckwheat but my human instinct for self preservation is as strong as anyone's but my convictions are just as strong. If an international law were passed that said any country wanting to make war had to do it on their own soil it would perhaps make people think before grabbing their guns.

I can point you to people who think the only good Muslim is a dead Muslim. But, I can't believe you haven't seen these people yourself. But, in case you haven't let me know and I will be glad to educate you.

We point out the faults of Europe just as well, Buckwheat. (big sigh) WhyNot is French and never fails to remind people of French tyranny and what they learned from it. This never seems to make a difference though. We are just a bunch of anti-Americans. (another big sigh)

You are still writing from the concept that America is the hand of almighty good in the world and it just ain't so. There is good in America just as there is good in France, Germany, Russia etc. etc. But, there is an overwhelming amount of bad that is squeezing the lifeblood out of good people around the world who are unable to fight back.

Act in Congress to stop genocide? Congress is lobbied and in the pocket of big corporations. Their way of stopping genocide is to overthrow governments and set theirs in it's place. No mention of giving back to the people what is rightfully theirs. Giving the people control of their resources? No indeed. What do you think would happen to America if they did this. I imagine the rich American lifestyle would plummet. Hell, you would probably have another depression. Too much of the richness of America has been bought with the blood of men, women and children of poor nations. Yes, Europe is guilty also but since we're not as wealthy we must not be doing it right. Perhaps we should learn from the states??

I do READ. But, I read more than US media. I read news from India, Palestine, China, Japan etc. etc. I read it till my eyes hurt and I get sick to my stomach. I'm angry because I do read.

US isolationist policies came about because it was thought America could lead the world toward freedom and democracy more effectively through example than through military action. Of course, this didn't stop the US from enriching it's own coffers from the wealth of other countries. Any problems that ensued from this the US was too happy to be isolationist on. Bush's new 'create world democracy' policy is based on America's need, whether that be ideological, territorial, commercial or military, and not out of any since of justice or moral values. If this were not so Isreal would not be supported in it's inhumane actions against the Palestinians and this is only one example.

We need a whole new way of thinking to happen on this planet. I believe Europe and other countries are beginning. The US is lagging behind because it's greedy and cannot think of itself as anything but the 'only' superpower. Leveling the playing field is out of the question. I'm afraid what will happen to this planet if we don't change your minds and your hearts.

Posted by Dianne
2/22/2005 01:07:00 am  



<< Home