RRC Archives

I think the most interesting thing about the war in Iraq is that those of us on the left cannot comprehend how those of you on the right can just slap a sticker on your car, hoist your flag, and just accept whatever comes out of the mouth of the president as if it is your patriotic duty.

Meanwhile, those of you on the right cannot comprehend how those of us on the left can not support the war of a generation, the fight against islamo-fascism, and (add your jingoistic catchphrase meant to construct the logical fallacy of your choosing here).

It is bewildering to me that there aren't somethings that we can agree on.

Can we agree that things aren't going well in Iraq?

Perhaps the media coverage is biased, but Baghdad still doesn't have a consistent power grid after what? three years. Stay the course?

There is a body count accumulating daily that has nothing to do with Al-Qaeda, but rather shia militias and sunni insurgents. What we are doing now isn't working except in the kurdish provinces that don't have the sectarian divisions of southern iraq and a ten year headstart because of the no-fly zone (and their own private army in the form of militias)

Can we agree that these failures are not due to the media or the critiques of the left, but by the POLICIES OF THOSE IN POWER.

Does the buck stop somewhere in this "era of accountability" or what?

I guess Rumsfeld departure is somekind of accountabilty, but if this war continues this way for another two years, I think we can all agree that Bush has driven yet another corporate enterprise into the ground (can you say Harken energy?)

Can we agree that things aren't going well in Iraq?

Perhaps the media coverage is biased, but Baghdad still doesn't have a consistent power grid after what? three years. Stay the course?

There is a body count accumulating daily that has nothing to do with Al-Qaeda, but rather shia militias and sunni insurgents. What we are doing now isn't working except in the kurdish provinces that don't have the sectarian divisions of southern iraq and a ten year headstart because of the no-fly zone (and their own private army in the form of militias)

probably not.

when the sources that peeps on the left continually espouse are the same sources that feed the news in the first place (ABC, CNN, NYTimes, etc.) its wonderful and all that you're paying attention, congratulations for being a good citizen and trying to get the answers and formulate an informed opinion; but those sources are admittedly biased. Talk to the soldiers/sailors on the ground to get a realistic take on the situations. From time to time I have heard the odd grumble, but by and large all those guys/girls all come back with stories about the silent majority that are struggling everyday against insurgents/ militias and are immensely greatful for what the soldiers are accomplishing. Not one of those sources spend any amount of time on the hospitals being built- the doctors and nurses being trained; the schools, etc... its always about a body count. and that gets to the biggest thing about media- they need to sell; and there are enough people willing to pay for the morbid; enough leftists that want to feed on more negative news about our military, about an administration that they don't like- so they keep producing it, and it makes it seem like a larger issue than it might actually be.

but that's just me, call me a puppet for G.W. if you will.

What is it that the soldiers are accomplishing?

Hospitals? Schools? Power grid?

Perhaps.


Seen this one:
s
http://youtube.com/watch?v=m9A_vxIOB-I

Winning the hearts and minds.


Wouldn't all of these things come together more effectively if:

A) There was actually a secure situation in Iraq (see earlier posts about bungled policy and planning; see medals of honor given to paul bremer, george tenet, et. al. for what?)

B) We weren't spending millions upon upon millions of dollars to unaccountable contractors and to lockheed martin to build billion dollar jets.

I admire the soldiers on the ground. They work hard, they believe in their mission, but I just think they are being fucked by the civilian leadership.


I don't hate the military when I say that, I just hate seeing people being exploited by and dying for cronyism and dirty oil politics.

If genocide in Iraq was such a driving issue behind our needing to intervene and get rid of Saddam Hussein, why has there been a DEAFENING SILENCE when it comes to DARFUR.

Because we don't care about the Iraqi people, just the oil under their feet and their geostrategic location next to Iran and Syria.

Let's just keep deluding ourselves, the soldiers, and their families with the idea of our noble mission.

The rest of the world doesn't buy it, and neither do I.

Oh, and have you seen this one:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=m9A_vxIOB-I

Winning the hearts and mind.

The story the media doesn't tell us.

A lot of people are gonna be nonplused by "the good we are doing that doesn't get enough attention". It's a hollow sentiment and even shameful in the context of the misery.

To me it's like pointing to a new and better levy and updated stuff in New Orleans after somehow purposefully steering a hurricane in to demolish the place. Except it's much much worse. We should do what we can while we're there, but it will be so far from justifying the whole and it's lack of coverage has nothing to do with people hating or supporting this war. Just like it has nothing to do with wishing the troops safety.

I guess if you're one of those cold geo-poly guys you look at whether things are better or worse. Most say worse, even through the false dilemma of 'are we better off without Sadaam?'. I even read a spin lately of how Iraq's economy is booming (their word), and cell phone ownership has skyrocketed. It's surreal.
Over 600,000 people have died so far (yes, the methodology of the survey checks out and it is the best we have to go by) and we started it.

Happy Holidays to all the world...

Lokl wrote: ...but those sources are admittedly biased...

Bullshit. Though the people that gather and report the news tend to VOTE more liberal than "average" the news itself tends to be TOO objective in allowing the "other side" its say even though what it is saying is utter and complete nonsense. There is no "doubt" that global climate change is occurring at an alarming rate and that it is caused by the actions of humans but because a very few marginal scientists on the payrolls of oil companies shout (at the remarkable volume level that millions of dollars can deliver) the "liberal" media feels it is compelled to include their "side" of the story without flat out accusing it of being what it is: BULLSHIT. Just because news outlets deliver news that is counter to what heir fuhrer is saying doesn't make them biased. It makes them FACTUAL. You know: "Reality based."

...Talk to the soldiers/sailors on the ground to get a realistic take on the situations. From time to time I have heard the odd grumble, but by and large all those guys/girls all come back with stories about the silent majority that are struggling everyday against insurgents/ militias and are immensely greatful for what the soldiers are accomplishing.

So the majority that say they want us to leave but are also worried about what will happen when we leave are... not the majority? You see, it's like after the 2004 elections when right wing pundits referred to the "vast majority" of Americans that supported George W. Bush. This despite the fact he was not elected legally and more importantly, more people voted for his opponent than voted for him.

This is also a play off the old "a few bad apples" defense and the continual BULLSHIT whining that the "good news" isn't getting reported. What is the "good news" exactly? That you can't turn your goddamned lights on most of the time? That the streets are full of shit because we bombed the sewer system into little bitty pieces? Oh. We built a school. That cancels out the fucking car bombs.

Not one of those sources spend any amount of time on the hospitals being built- the doctors and nurses being trained; the schools, etc... its always about a body count.

So the stories about the fact that the hospitals in Bagdhad have no supplies, ask people to bring sutures, alcohol, etc., the stories about the doctors and nurses getting the fuck out of there because they can afford to are all lies?

...and that gets to the biggest thing about media- they need to sell; and there are enough people willing to pay for the morbid; enough leftists that want to feed on more negative news about our military, about an administration that they don't like- so they keep producing it, and it makes it seem like a larger issue than it might actually be.

The media you watch doesn't need to sell, do they? Fox News is based on loss leader thinking like CBS was in days of old, right? Rupert Murdoch has never stooped to the lowest fucking level of stinking goddamned filth, has he? Yes, he has. And he does. When people listen to someone like Rush Limbaugh and believe that he has any sort of integrity compared with actual news operations, they are not only fooling themselves but they are contributing to the decline of our country. Rush Limbaugh defines himself as entertainment (as do ALL of the right wing pundits) so he never has to correct himself (ever heard that?), and he is free to make innuendos and flat out false statments. Same goes for Bill O'Reilly (the frothing moron), G. Gordon Liddy (convicted felon), Oliver North (convicted felon), and the whole Fox "News" set-up. The fact is that the media reports facts. The people you listen to report propaganda. The two are often mutually exclusive these days.

but that's just me, call me a puppet for G.W. if you will.

No. I have other words for people like you. Much worse than any I've used so far in this diatribe.

come on alan..you forgot the libs Mike Moore, Al Franken and the entire Air America list in the entertainment category...remember, you post FACTS, we listen. at least give us the full list to give you some credibility.

I have other words for you. Much worse than any I've used so far in this diatribe. You drank the kool aid. (swallow hard)

Alan Evil wrote:
No. I have other words for people like you. Much worse than any I've used so far in this diatribe.

and you expect anyone to even bother reading that/ or even listening to you?

way to try and have a responsible conversation with a lurker. ASSHAT!

and read again. when did I ever quote Limbaugh, Ollie North, Fox News or any of it.

Go try and stick a flower in an AK-47.

gulliver wrote: ...To me it's like pointing to a new and better levy and updated stuff in New Orleans after somehow purposefully steering a hurricane in to demolish the place....

let me understand this right. You honestly believe that katrina was "somehow purposefully steered" into NOLA?

why do I ever bother to have discussions with climbers that exsist beyond:
"that's a cool line right?"
" George Bush is an asshole!"
"yeah I thought it was a cool line too."