Posts Tagged ‘Gulf War’

h1

NOT JUST THE 2003 IRAQ WAR…

March 7, 2014

But the Gulf War a decade before!

Rachel Maddow is not my favorite of the MSNBC personalities- but GOOD JOB last nite on IRAQ – why the Gulf War and why little Bush had to follow in the same footsteps as his father, and WHY I FEEL EXONERATED.

For 14 years I’ve been saying IRAQ had NOTHING to do with 9-11 – the second invasion of that country was totally a Cheney/Bush/Condi and others plan LONG before Sept 11.  My position has always been that and caused a good many “heated discussions” among some good friends.

So now my position has been backed up with lots and lots of written documentation, footage, and interviews finally available at least to the Press….and although I am exonerated personally, it makes me sicker than it did as it was happening…because at least then, there always was that little chance that I was wrong. 

Now we all know, the dirty ugly way we started the 21st century with yet another Bush administration was in fact reality.  All those who died, or were wounded, or whose lives were deeply impacted by time spent fighting that unnecessary war did so for oil….led by men whose money came from the Oil Industry.  Makes me sick. 

And of course, one will never know, but perhaps if they had been a bit more FOCUSED on protecting the US , maybe they just would have picked up a signal or two that the emerging phenom of terrorists  that had certainly shown its ugly head in the Clinton Administration was not Democratic bumbling, but something they needed to “key an eye and ear” on.

Of course, I still have that second theory of motivation for it.  BIG Bush went into the Gulf War, accomplished his limited mission (no matter what you think of that mission) and got out…even though Cheney and others were advising otherwise. Then Cheney saw his chance by manipulating LITTLE Bush  in the dawn of the new millennium.  Remember MAMA Bush famous quote re Georgie Jr:  “He’s not my brightest son”.  No kidding.  I’ve always suspected that Cheney manipulated Little Bush by appealing to that “I’ll show him; I can do it better” little boy mentality about his father.

And although I am probably wrong, I can’t stop my mind from wandering to the same question I was asking post 9-11.  Why did we go to war in Afghanistan?  Yes, they were “harboring” the man who planned 9-11.  But was the Bush Administration so full of hubris they really thought they could WIN a war that Russia had fought endlessly there with no good results?  Did they forget we ARMED the very people we were now going to fight against?

Was there ANY attempt to do what Obama finally planned and did- kill Osama bin-Laden?

And do the Bushies and the evil Dick Cheney have ANY regrets for their missteps?  Or, was it just the macho cowboy BS we had to put up for the whole 8 years LITTLE Bush was in office?  He should have started painting earlier, if you ask me.   That has thankfully, kept him out of sight and out of mind. (although I continue to have this nagging thought…does he really see himself as another Eisenhower-a great General who became President and then retired to become an artist?)  YIKES!

And for all the repos who have been against Obama not just because he is a Democrat, nor for the color of his skin, but because he voted NO to going into Iraq?  Yes, those same ones that started the spin already on today’s crisis…Obama is weak; we need to get tough and go in, confront the Russians, and push back. 

Just take one minute and ask yourself.  Is this 1950? 1960? 1970? 1980? 1990? 2000?   We don’t have such a good track record in our wars through those sixty years, do we?    We have ended neither the FIRST one in Korea, nor the LAST one in AFGHANISTAN…so now, I guess, we have to revert to our winning tactics…world wars with more deaths or a long cold war while all the little kids have bomb drills and hide under their desks to survive a nuclear attack.

One more time….Being against war is NOT Unpatriotic despite the Bush propaganda machine; and what is wrong with trying Cooperation and Collaboration and Compromise? It’s not as macho, but just maybe…we could save lives, money and achieve something peacefully.

 

 

Advertisements
h1

QUESTIONS OF THE DAY

August 26, 2013

I’ve only read the first section of the paper this morning, and already I have been distracted with some significant “food for thought”:

First, an OPINION EXCHANGE with a eye-catching headline – OH, IT’S ONLY BIG BROTHER:

“Is it the general public’s comparative lack of indignation over the NSA surveillance scandal that is surprising, or is the real shocker that journalists, activists and politicians feel so outraged?”

Personally, I think David Rieff asked the wrong question.

 The FIRST question should be “When we pay these people to be the eyes of our country, why did they not know these things before Snowden leaked them?

 Even I, a commoner out here in the Midwest, was well aware of some of this activity since it emerged shortly after 9-11; have followed  it as much as general public could, I think, including the alterations to tamp it down a bit, and I mentally assumed risk and worth had been duly judged.  Despite concerns Obama himself expressed about the practice since it began, I sensed –perhaps inaccurately- that once he became President, he was briefed on facts not generally known in public and thus, had not yet taken action.  That, I think, was reinforced in his first official speech on the issue after Snowden when he said he welcomed a review and positive input on how to minimize the down side of this initiative.

The SECOND questions should be:  What makes common bedfellows of journalists, activists, and politicians?  Oh yes, we all like to focus on admirable words like “truth” and “love of country”, and “agents of change”, but we often overlook another: Big Egos drive them in search of name recognition, ratings, and good polling numbers.

And one more time, they manipulated the public, trying to make Snowden a Hero exposing the enemy – our government.  Ratings soared, but as the general public absorbed more facts, the hyperbole died down.

YES, there are many issues we have not faced as we transition into this digital world we have created.  There is a wealth of information available by non-political experts – a pile of it is sitting on the corner of my desk .  Whether you are “just” a citizen of the US like me, or a politician, journalist, or activist, it is our common responsibility to explore with open minds, listen to both sides and then come together to craft  new guidelines that minimize risk, and capitalize on strengths of this new world we find ourselves in.

That will not happen until we stop clinging to “This is the way we have always done it.” It might surprise most of us, but we have NEVER always done it the same way.  The strength of our US system is its flexibility to change to meet the needs of its citizens as we go forward.

 

The second eye-catcher in Section A today came from a Letter to the Editor by Neil Anderson of Richfield:

The STRIB’s Front Page (Above the Fold) shares a report that 330 people died and an additional 3000 were impacted from Syria’s use of chemical warfare.

Still first section, 10 pages later, the STRIB published Neil Anderson’s opinion.  That opinion stated that 1,100 were killed and hundreds wounded as it described the very same incident.

 Hmmm.  I will skip the additional hyperbole about a “do-nothing President Obama” and simply say…it is not hard to fact-check in today’s world.  Neil Anderson might want to try it!  That should keep him busy while Obama, his staff, the military leaders , and informed legislators continue to review and debate options in development since the first rumor of chemical weapons surfaced. 

I am not sure, but I presume this was what the FIRST President Bush did when we learned of what Hussein did as Desert Storm was launched in response to the Kurdish situation and Kuwait.  He took time to GET THE FACTS, and more importantly, HE LISTENED to experts around him, and together they crafted a plan that ensured that we could go in, alleviate the situation with minimum cost of American lives and dollars and GET BACK OUT.  He had UN support, and Saudi Arabian, UK and Egyptian troops as well as $36 million of Saudi Arabian financial support (approximately 1/3 the cost of the entire 7 month action.) He launched an effort that was supported around the world, and more importantly, succeeded in its stated mission.

Neil Anderson is certainly entitled to state his knee-jerk reaction; and likewise, is entitled to skip the facts and urge the government to act without a plan.  After all, there is a precedent set for that as well.

On 9-11 we were attacked here in the United States; the mastermind of that attack escaped to hide in the mountains of Afghanistan.  It may have been a good match, as Afghanistan is a savage place-and in my mind, bin Laden was a savage person.   But one would have expected a bit of caution along with that emotion and flag waving, as it was no secret that the RUSSIANS had fought for years and years in Afghanistan and in the end, could not win and withdrew defeated.  One would have hoped we had evaluated that, identified why the Russians could not win, and had developed a plan to ensure the same would not happen to us.  But apparently, that was too much to ask; and hubris won-we went to war.

Within days, the second President Bush and his neo-con staff launched the Afghan War – and then just six months later launched the SECOND war on Iraq.  I, for one, am still not sure how the two were connected in the beginning.  Now, they are connected by a tremendous loss of lives in both, billions of dollars spent on a credit card over 7 years with no exit plan, no plan to repay the American people, no plan to help families to gave up members of their families, no plan to financially take care of returning veterans lucky enough to survive-many who returned home gravely wounded both physically and mentally, and certainly no plan to bring back from the dead all those who died for nothing.   

So I am glad to be a part of that majority of the voting public who have voted for President Obama TWICE…because we trusted he would collaborate, listen to experts, and ultimately develop a plan that could yield the best  results for the least risk-for the crises he was sure to encounter as President.  By voting YES for Obama the majority voted for a man who represents the 21st century.  At the same time, we voted NO to a repeat of the gun-slinging cowboy of the 19th century that did so much damage to our country as this new world dawned around us-damage we still have not been able to make right.