"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties. Truth was never put to the worse in a free and open encounter..."
~ Milton
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~Benjamin Franklin

Reading:
A Fistful of Euros
Andrew Tobias
Angry Liberal
Archy
Bad Attitudes
Common Dreams
Fablog
Hullabaloo
Informed Comment
Madelaine Kane
Mahablog
Obsidian Wings
Off the Kuff
Orcinus
Sarah Kendzior
War and Piece
Washington Monthly

Books
The Emerging Democratic Majority (Judis & Teixeira)
Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them (Franken)
Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot (Franken)
The True Believer (Hoffer)
Still Being Bushwhacked

All Book Reviews
Race, Gender, and Sexuality
It's always "us" vs "them"
Women's March on (fill in your location)
Children learn what their parents teach them.
You Got My Support. But.
Even Endangered Penguins Do It

All Race, Gender, and Sexuality
Campaigns and Voting
Where do we go from here?
It's always "us" vs "them"
Some interpretations
On and on I go
Just appalled

All Campaigns and Voting
Lecture Circuit
It Was 40 Years Ago Today
July 2, 1964
Pledge
May 14-15, 1970
The Erotica of Bare Knees

All Lecture Circuit
Media
The Liberal Media, At It Again
Fairly UNbalanced
P.S.
What's this?
OHMIGOD

All Media
Big Brother
Shoulda' Guessed
Where did my country go?
You know what you never thought you'd read?
Not in his name
Sleight of Hand

All Big Brother
World O'Blog
It's Vocabulary Time!
They wrote it
Mighty-fine blogging
Other People Said....
Phillipines

All World O'Blog
Aimless Ranting
It's always "us" vs "them"
So, I'm thinking with half my brain
Do You Know Peter?
Long, Little Privacy Rant
My Takeaway

All Aimless Ranting
Archives
February 05, 2017 - February 11, 2017
January 22, 2017 - January 28, 2017
January 15, 2017 - January 21, 2017
November 13, 2016 - November 19, 2016
October 09, 2016 - October 15, 2016

All Weekly Archives


Electioneering
Open Secrets
Political Wire Exit Polls
Politics1
Polling Report

Information
American Research Group
Center for Democracy and Technology
Center for Public Integrity
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Congressional Report Cards
Death Row Roll Call
DebtChannel.org
Democracy Now
Economic Policy Institute
FairVote Colorado
Foreign Policy In Focus
Global Exchange
Human Rights Watch
Independent Judiciary
Inequality
Institute on Money in State Politics
Institute for Public Accuracy
JobWatch
Lying in ponds
Media Reform
Media Transparency
Move On
One World
Open Democracy
Pew Research Center
Project Censored
Public Citizen Health Research Group
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Take Back The Media
The Urban Institute
WHO Outbreak News

Connections
XML & RDF
Peevish for PDA



Blog Directory


Search








Credits
Powered by Movable Type

Site Design by Sekimori





All content © 2002-2005 Anne Zook

November 09, 2005
So, How 'Bout That War?

No, of course we didn't use the banned white phosphorus as a weapon in Falluja. We used it for "target-marking" and "illumination" over the city. If some of it fell on people, well that's gravity's fault. Something falling on someone isn't our fault. They shouldn't have been living where we wanted to bomb.

Sigh. War. Did we have to? I agreed with the invasion of Afghanistan and would have agreed if we'd hung around there and finished the job thoroughly (which we did not). I never supported (this will come as a surprise to you), I never for one instant supported invading Iraq. It was a stupid idea then, the "reasons" we were being given were patently false, and it's created a mess the world will be decades cleaning up. (The U.N. says, you broke it, you fix it.)

Looks like the U.K.'s Blair has jumped on the Evil French bandwagon. He's saying it's the fault of the French that the USofA (and U.K.) invaded Iraq. Because we all believe that a U.N. resolution would have stopped the Bush Administration. Mmmhmm, sure we do. (France is Blair's Clinton.)

War crimes. That's a reasonably "new" concept in history. In the past, almost nothing that happened in the course of waging "war" was considered to be a "crime. We have a different view of the situation these days, and even though I'm aware of the dissonance of a "legal war" or a "good war" the truth is that, human beings being what they are, it's still necessary to resort to violence in order to accomplish some goals.

But I don't think the media should minimize war crimes. People have to know the true cost of the action they've undertaking. They need to understand that "crimes" go along with war, and that that's one good reason why we should never go to war except as a desperate last resort.

The Bush Administration's approach to elective slaughter in the name of corporate profit doesn't really make the cut as a decent reason.

And they certainly shouldn't forget, or allow us to forget that we've been torturing people. We've killed prisoners.

Under the "management" of the Bush Administration and with what's sounding like the complete and whole-hearted support of Vice President Dick Cheney. (Which approach, from our CEO-in-Chief, probably explains much about why every business venture he laid his hands on went down in flames. He's incompetent. Anyone starting to grasp this?)

Bottom line? If you're the "world's sole remaining superpower" as the USofA is so often said to be, you can't just act unilaterally, deciding to kill tens of thousands of people because you're aggravated. We have a responsibility, to ourselves and to the rest of the civilized world, and we're not living up to it.

And everyone hates George Bush, which gives the country a black eye. Not even Reagan's warmongering Admininstration(s) were so thoroughly loathed.

Although....

The current conundrum is how to check the drift toward the emergence of three separate geographic and political entities -- Iraqi Kurdistan, Sunni Iraq and Shiite Iraq -- as they were more or less before Winston Churchill drew lines on a map after World War I.

Why check the drift? Who are we to decide what other people's countries should look like? If Spain decided, after all these years to give the Basques the separate nation they've always wanted, would we be intervening? If the U.K. separated entirely from Ireland, would we go to war over it?

Could we, just for one moment, really give up our delusions of empire and realize that even brown people of non-christian religions are entitled to autonomy and self-determination?

Posted by AnneZook at 09:51 AM


Comments

I think many Americans are scared of seeing maps and countries change because it shows a possibility that in the future all our States won't be as United as they are now, and that's a frightening thing for them to admit to themselves.

Posted by: Elayne Riggs at November 11, 2005 07:04 PM

We're not that United now but I take your point.

History is the chronicle of evolution, and evolution means change. No matter how hard the reactionaries and the frightened little boys struggle to turn the clock back to some imaginary time of social perfection, things are going to change.

The only question is whether we're going to pick where we go, or be the victims of historical forces and our own cowardice.

Posted by: Anne at November 12, 2005 11:06 AM