I do believe that Hell has frozen over

[averygoodun42]

Soooooo... Am I the only liberal in America who thinks that sending more troops into the quagmire is better than withdrawing completely? Seriously. I know that people are upset and think that this is going to be another Vietnam, which is quite possible, but the difference between Vietnam and Iraq is that WE STARTED THIS FREAKING WAR!!! Vietnam we went in after fighting had started to try and get oil rights. With Iraq WE were the ones who went in and screwed everything up, so WE should be the ones to stay and clean up the mess. True, a good deal of Iraqis probably don't want us there, but to leave them on their own at this point would be... immoral.

The other difference between Iraq and Vietnam, so far, is that right now only soldiers are being sent over. I do have a problem with the National Guards' deployment, but even so, they signed up. They knew, or should have known when signing up, that they were saying that they would die for their country. Dying is always best avoided for as long as possible, but it is a known risk of the job.

Now, just to clear up any misconceptions - I thought at the time that invading Iraq was beyond stupid, and, depending on the reason, possibly Evil, and there was a good reason Papa Bush didn't even try to depose Saddam the first time round. That reason is pretty damn clear at this point. I think that the current Bush invaded without any thought of how to win the war (for real), and for that he should be mortally ashamed of himself.

I also think that executing Saddam was damn stupid, not only for the ethical question of government sanctioned murder, but, well, has anyone heard the term "martyr" for gods sake?!?!?!

But... I can't believe I'm about to write this, but kudos to President Bush for taking the decidedly less popular, and more responsible, path now.

However, if he changes his mind, he has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that he has absolutely no redeeming qualities or merit as a "leader" and should step down immediately.

Of course, that would make Cheney president... *shudders*

/rant

:-)

ETA: I suppose I should say that we overtly started this war. Some claim that the CIA fostered the Vietnam war, but if so, that was covertly. Covertly starting a war makes a hell of a lot more sense because then you can pass the blame off on someone else when it goes awry. Not admirable, but more intelligent, politically speaking.

Comments

[averygoodun.livejournal.com]

Yep.

Well, my brother got told that rising in the ranks would b a snap even though he wasn't a citizen. He's intelligent and worked hard, and found out after 6 months that he was ineligable. I don't know what the story was with my other friend, but probably that had as much to do with bad timing as lies.

Also, the States have, more or less, been at peace for so long (minor troop deployments aside) that I think it was a shock to those who signed up for college money to find out that they really are expected to kill people, and risk their lives in return. Not saying that's smart, but I think that's the case for a lot of them.

Ah, I see. Yes, I was saying that. I can see your point; it would have been easier to have deposed Saddam then, but politically it still wouldn't have been a good move. Besides the nationbuilding that would have been involved, I suspect Bush Sr. still had a use for Saddam being in power. He was probably one of the people involved in putting him in power in the first place, after all.

[raygungothic.livejournal.com]

I thought Saddam's being in power in the first place was Britain's fault, not the US'? I'd better look that up.

[averygoodun.livejournal.com]

Perhaps it was Britain's fault (can't remember), but the US was kind enough to arm him. :-)