I can't stress how disgusted and dissapointed I am with the people who are still in denial:
"Oh no our soldiers are good and educated, they would never do that!"
"Our soldiers would have no motive to lie".
"I would never trust a former Republican guard officer".
"I can't give judgement until the investigation is over".
Well people, picture this. Suppose I had published a similar account of Iraqi Fedayeen pushing two American soldiers in a river, drowning one of them in the process. Would you have reacted in the same manner? Would all you armchair analysts say "Oh no, lets not rush to conclusions. We should wait for the investigation results"? Would you all suddenly be so 'open minded'?
No, you would be jumping all over it crying and condemning the 'murderous' Fedayeen.
You have no idea how insulting this all is to me.
I kick myself, because I should have known THEN: I should have known then that if this grand Iraqi experiment in democracy were to go wrong, we, the people of the United States, would never examine ourselves critically, would never troubleshoot our own plans, our own execution--oh, no. We'd blame the victim. It's what we do with rape and it's what we do with any other situation we Keystone-Kops our way into, then hastily blunder out of again. It's our oldest and noblest tradition, and it's right fucking here in the words of our President:
PELLEY: Do you think you owe the Iraqi people an apology for not doing a better job?
BUSH: That we didn't do a better job or they didn't do a better job?
PELLEY: Well, that the United States did not do a better job in providing security after the invasion.
BUSH: Not at all. I am proud of the efforts we did. We liberated that country from a tyrant. I think the Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude, and I believe most Iraqis express that. I mean, the people understand that we've endured great sacrifice to help them. That's the problem here in America. They wonder whether or not there is a gratitude level that's significant enough in Iraq.
No, Mr. President, that is not what I wonder. Believe it or not, I have got through every day since this grotesque misadventure began without wondering whether the Iraqi people were thanking our soldiers, or you, or me, enough. I first believed, then hoped, then hoped against hope, then despaired of us ever being enough for THEM.
No more experiments in democracy abroad. No more, no mas, es todo. Until we can work out how in the hell we elected the kind of guy who asks, in all seriousness,
That we didn't do a better job or they didn't do a better job?
--I don't want to hear about it.
Did you ever write Zeyad a letter of apology and support, Mr. President? Did you ever say, "What happened to your cousin was tragic and wrong, and I am wholeheartedly sorry for it, and I want you to know how much I appreciate you and every other Iraqi blogger who stands with the United States even despite these abominations?"
No, you did not.
Neither did I. Oh, I mean--I left Zeyad a comment, I think.
That's a lot of consolation, isn't it? A comment.
12 comments:
Only this jackass could kill over half a million people through his almost supernatural combination of arrogance and incompetence and expect them to be grateful for it. If you needed the essence of this administration's total moral bankruptcy and squalor distilled into a couple of lines, there it is.
sorry, but I have to call bullshit on this:
"Well people, picture this. Suppose I had published a similar account of Iraqi Fedayeen pushing two American soldiers in a river, drowning one of them in the process. Would you have reacted in the same manner? Would all you armchair analysts say "Oh no, lets not rush to conclusions. We should wait for the investigation results"? Would you all suddenly be so 'open minded'?
No, you would be jumping all over it crying and condemning the 'murderous' Fedayeen.
You have no idea how insulting this all is to me."
And I find it insulting to equate the American military with the Fedayeen Saddam. I'd second guess a story like that about American military for a good reason: that isn't the behavior of 99% of the people we have over there, and when our people do something wrong, from Abu Garib to Haditha, we do something about it.
The Fedayeen Saddam are the perfect inverse of that idea: brutality in the cause is their modus operendi. I'd believe this story much more readily about the Fedayeen because they have a demonstrable histroy of doing this kind of shit.
Sorry, but you know what I have to call bullshit on?
(1) Anonymous commenters who mask their arrogance with fake-sorries, i.e. "Sorry, I have to call bullshit on this."
(2) Anonymous commenters who miss the point in order to nitpick.
You know, you got balls. The wrong kind of balls, but you got 'em. Because, really:
And I find it insulting to equate the American military with the Fedayeen Saddam. I'd second guess a story like that about American military for a good reason: that isn't the behavior of 99% of the people we have over there, and when our people do something wrong, from Abu Garib to Haditha, we do something about it.
What have we DONE about it? Ooh, ooh! Did someone get a dishonorable discharge? A-boo-hoo-hoo, a-boo-hoo-hoo. Did someone get, OMFG, demoted? Did someone--jeepers creepers!--lose rank? Seriously: What the fuck have we done about Abu Ghraib or Haditha? In a way that would matter to those people to whom those things were done, stupid, not in a way that would appease your totally-not-biased-at-all conscience.
Let me rape your 12-year-old sister or daughter, because I'm stressed and I'm scared and I'm bored and I'm horny. And then let me issue you an apology for it. You will, of course, accept it, for I am the exception, not the rule, and you know 99% of my countrymen didn't MEAN it. It was like an accident!
What have we done, anonymous asshole? What have we done, coward? What have we done, armchair general?
What have we done, you fucking chickenhawk?
Oh, Christ.
What have we done, you fucking chickenhawk?
I'm not even going to bother with the rest of your ridiculous rant, Ilyka. You've obviously been fed a whole lot of crap from your newer stomping grounds from a lot of people who, like you, don't know the first fucking thing about what they're talking about. Like first, How To Be A Commander In Chief. Seriously, write Zeyad a fucking letter?
What's your point, Ilyka? You happened to see some conservatives commenting and speaking up for OUR SIDE in the war (which, I might remind you, despite the fact that it's not here in America, we're STILL IN), you knee-jerk respond that They. Are. Wrong.
Zeyad is Iraqi, therefore he is right. Bull. Shit. I have no beef with Zeyad or anyone else like him, but just because the guy is Iraqi and because he's lost loved ones does NOT make him the authority--no more than it makes anyone else so.
But Zeyad and those commenters are beside the point, anyway, right? 'Cause it's really about that evil Christian Taliban wingnut fascist President, right?
Christ. I just have to laugh at how easily you change your tune after changing your company. If you HAD TO (I know, I know, it would just kill you) hang out with conservatives for six months, you'd be singing a different tune all over again. Nice moral compass.
But this chickenhawk shit makes me fucking howl.
Like you have ANY room to talk!
HA!
And in case you wanted to make any paranoid accusations, no, "Anonymous" wasn't me. You know my IP. But you also have NO WAY of knowing whether that person is a "chickenhawk" or not. Either way, if you haven't served (which you have not), STFU with the chickenhawk shit. It's not your place to say it. None of the fucking moonbat chickenhawk patrol, that I've seen, has a right to say it. When veterans say it, OK. Not some goddamn always-been-a-civilian who barely, *barely!* takes an interest in the military or the war at all.
So I'll "call bullshit," non-anonymously.
And for the record: Screw you for equating the actions of the US military or Bush with the barbaric shit they do in those medieval tribal gangs over there. And this:
What have we DONE about it? Ooh, ooh! Did someone get a dishonorable discharge? A-boo-hoo-hoo, a-boo-hoo-hoo. Did someone get, OMFG, demoted? Did someone--jeepers creepers!--lose rank? Seriously: What the fuck have we done about Abu Ghraib or Haditha? In a way that would matter to those people to whom those things were done, stupid, not in a way that would appease your totally-not-biased-at-all conscience.
What the fuck do you want? Do you even KNOW the sentences handed down for Abu Ghraib? Should we...say, kill Lynndie England and all her family members? 'Cause that's exactly the kind of shit the Fedayeen did. Should we, I dunno, give 'em the kind of "justice" the Iraqis would ask for? Fine. Then I suppose you won't find there's any problem if we do that for ALL the militia scum we capture and detain. Oh, but noooooo...extreme punishment is Only Allowed if it's done on our military members (NOBODY ELSE), so I can feel as though I've properly "apologized" to the world on behalf of Big Bad Bully America.
Straw-armchair general.
/eyeroll
Go ahead, scream at me too, 'cause your lefty friends have taught you well. Disagree, and you are brainwashed, stupid, and insane, right?
YAWN.
Stick to the strawfeminist meme. With this, you are completely talking out of your ass.
Not only are Iraqis grateful for our efforts on their behalf, but the Vietnamese are grateful that we at least tried--in an ill-fated war screwed up first by McNamera, then Johnson, then the antiwar movement.
Americans who go to Vietnam are treated very, very well--because we tried.
And in Iraq, we still have every chance of success, unless the antiwar movement forces another premature withdrawal.
I dunno what's gotten into you, Ilyka: do you really think the Iraqis would be better off if we'd left Saddam in power?
Sigh. Sheelzebub responded well, but let me add a little something:
What the fuck do you want? Do you even KNOW the sentences handed down for Abu Ghraib? Should we...say, kill Lynndie England and all her family members? 'Cause that's exactly the kind of shit the Fedayeen did. Should we, I dunno, give 'em the kind of "justice" the Iraqis would ask for?
Beth, at least get straight what you're arguing against.
WE DON'T BLAME LYNNDIE ENGLAND FOR ABU GHRAIB, YOU GODDAMN IDIOTS. She did wrong, but she's also a scapegoat, and nobody scapegoats an enlisted person like a wingnut.
What Auguste said.
Our President and his war apologists have switched rationales for this ridiculous war several times. First, it was the WMD's. Saddam was an "imminent threat." Then, suddenly, it was *never* the WMD's or a threat, it was that Saddam was a very bad man!
Nope. All these arguments were brought forth before the invasion ever took place. (BTW--love the fact that you and your type like to quote the President as saying that Saddam was an "imminent threat," when in fact what Bush declared was that he was no such thing--but shouldn't be allowed to become one.)
(Even though we were happy enough to deal with him and support him and the Baath party since the overthrow).
Certainly we used Iraq as a hedge against the Iranian threat: that was realpolitik of the type the Democrats appear to want to go back to.
Then, it was democracy!
It was always about democracy: the idea is that there ought to be a democracy in the area other than Israel, due to the prejudices against Israel in the region. Go back to Bush's speeches right before the invasion.
Then, it was human rights! Then, it was OMG! Fight terrorism! Except that Saddam had no ties to al-Qaeda,
Oh, how you all love to repeat that like a mantra. Too bad it isn't true.
and the terrorists in Iraq are there because, well, they've had plenty of opportunity to be there, thanks to our invasion. And they're able to recruit thanks to our invasion.
The thing is, AQ and related organizations are sending their fresh-faced recruits over there to blow things up, rather than here. And every time they blow up more ordinary Muslims in the name of radical Islam, they make more enemies.
Everyone sees this but the American left, which is still determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
But if we do leave, and it's because of your "activism," I hope you make yourselves read about the bloodbath that follows.
And I damned well hope it twists a knife in your heart.
Seriously? With Darleen, a policy of not engaging is in order. I am convinced that she is incapable of thinking past the usual neocon/Rush Limbaugh talking point of the day. As a general policy, I ignore at the moment. Hopefully, she'll realize one day that the invasion of Iraq was actually not the fault of Clinton, whom I rip on all the time for his many mistakes and stupidities.
Of course, in all of that, all the Repugs could ever focus on was a blowjob, as opposed to the bombing of an inconsequential pharmaceutical factory. Shows where both parties have erred, I guess. Don't matter, though. Whatever kills more brown people is all good, it seems.
I realize this is just a one-liner from a commenter that's off-topic from Iraq, but seeing as it's a support structure in an argument, I really want to address (but am not apologizing, as per your instructions)
Americans who go to Vietnam are treated very, very well--because we tried.
No, Americans who go to Vietnam are treated very, very well--because they have money.
Not because they tried.
I've been planning a trip there off and on for a few years now, and every year my father puts me off the scent-my father the retired military vietnam veteran, that is, the one who goes there still. He tells me a great deal about Vietnam and the culture there, and no where is there mention of prostrations of gratitude. It's about the all-mighty dollar.
Whichever side of the fence you sit on for the war, I can't imagine that in 30 years time Iraqis will be weeping with gratitude-people just don't work that way. No culture has done this-the Belgians, the Dutch, the French...after time people move on. So if this is the crux of your argument, better proof is needed.
PS-some of the comments in here read like books.
Re: the whole "outrage" because Ilyka called anonymous a "fucking chickenhawk coward." Seriously, people, context. I don't believe she referred to all Iraqi war supporters that way. As far as I could tell, that insult was directed solely at one person, who is presumably not any of the people posting their outrage under their names or handles. It was directed at a person who came in, posted anonymously, and effectively called Zeyad a liar. I don't happen to care for the whole "chickenhawk" thing myself, which is why I've never called anyone that, but if an anonymous troll comes to your blog and insults a person who actually lives every day with the impact of the war, accuses them of lying despite evidence that the American military has, on occasion, not acted with perfect honor, then, yeah, that particular person just might deserve to be called a "fucking chickenhawk coward." If you're going to post insults, at least have the moxie not to post anonymously.
that insult was directed solely at one person, who is presumably not any of the people posting their outrage under their names or handles
Right! Except I no longer presume that, because I'm not that firm a believer in magical coincidences. I insult anonymous and suddenly the Cotillion faithful show up, JUST LIKE THAT! Mercy.
Let that serve as a lesson: Use your damn name. Use a FAKE name if you want, 'cause I sure do--but if you post anonymously, odds are I'm going to be all "who the fuck are you?" and I'm going to treat you with no respect whatsoever.
Post a Comment