 |
|
Add to My Group
|
October 28, 2007 at 08:07:29
What Will it Look Like After the Dems Declare they Refuse to Further Fund the War by Rob Kall Page 1 of 5 page(s) |
|
 
|
I asked leading progressives what it will look like when and after the dems inform Bush that they will no longer fund the occupation. Responses came in from Dennis Kucinich, Cindy Sheehan, Jeff Cohen, Mike Malloy, David Swanson, Swami Beyondananda, Brent Budowsky
Progressives, myself included, are calling for refusing to fund the war any further. The word is that Dems in congress are afraid they will be cast as failing to provide for the troops. I figured that if we explored the possible responses, plans could be made on how to effectively deal with them.
So I started talking to people, asking them what they thought things would look like AFTER the congress refused to fund the war any further.
What would Bush do?
What would the Republicans do?
What would the media do?
What would the pentagon do?
What would retired generals do?
I put the word out to some of our writers, got a few replies, and spoke to Dave Lindorff and then, set up an interview with Democratic presidential primary candidate and congressman Dennis Kucinich. Kucinich has been the most outspoken advocate for de-funding the war. We talked about how this would work.
First, I spoke to journalist Dave Lindorff. Here's what he had to say:I think that they've decided that they want the war to continue 'til november. I dont' think they're afraid at all. I've concluded that they want Bush in power and they want the war running. (He writes about this in his article Dead Men and Women Walking)
Emanuel has actually said that-- that Bush in power is good for Democrats and that the war is good for democrats.
If dems cut the budget for the war, the military would have to come up with contingency plans for how to get out. It would change the debate entirely. Obviously, there would be plenty of people saying we're cutting and running. But there would be plenty of retired generals saying it's about time. The dems would be cheered by the troops coming home.
With 70% of Americans and 80 or 90 % of Dems wanting the war to be over, who are they worried about-- the die hard republican core who hates them anyway?
For one thing, democrats would finally NOT be called wimps, which is the disaster they face next november.
Only 11% support them. Everyone sees through them. THis crap about we need 60 votes in order to do anything is just ludicrous. It's 41 (in the senate )to stop legislation.
Rob Kall is executive editor, publisher and site architect of OpEdNews.com, President of Futurehealth, Inc, more...)
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
| 37 comments |
|
What about Iraq and the world?
All of the comments talked about the political situation within the US, as though that were all that mattered. But, there will be repercussions in Iraq if the US pulls out prematurely and those repercussions will work their way back to the US and then what? What I read was completely self-centered. "How can we use this to our advantage" was the only real concern. This bespeaks a complete indifference to what happens in the rest of the world and that is the defining characteristic of the sociopathic personality. Charlie Manson is running the Democratic Party. by Joe Zingher (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 8:55:03 AM  (0+)
|
|
Reply: Nonsense
The war is itself making us less safe. It is the war that fuels terrorism, not a withdrawal. by Rick Fisk (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 29 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 8:59:17 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Pure nonsense
Will you ask the same question 6 months from now? 6 years from now? Iraq will never be stable with the presence of foreign troops. Let's punish the neocons and those who started this war, not the American people, who have to sacrifice the lives of their sons and daughters. Those who predict disasters in Iraq are the same people who predicted it was going to be "a cakewalk". Those who want to support the continuation of war funding need to enlist now. It's time to bring our troops home, not just from Iraq but the rest of the world. Americans will not like it if foreign troops are on our soil. by Babyhuey (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 34 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:13:01 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: ahhh another first time right wing commenter
Sociopath, thy middle name is neocon .... or dubya. It is generally wise, before making a major decision, to think through the consequences, to consider how it will affect your self. You think this is pathological? And what qualifications do you have to make such a remark? The article DOES discuss consequences in Iraq-- Kucinich discusses getting an international force in. Even without that discussion, raising this question is reasonable and certainly not part of a total plan, merely one discussion among many on considering contingencies-- something that the right wingers running the US have clearly failed to do again and again. by Rob Kall (952 articles, 4177 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 2:34:05 PM (0+)
|
|
Rob, you're missing the point
The democrats are not scared of the people. They won't defund because they do not want to end the war in Iraq and they don't care what their constituents think. by Rick Fisk (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 29 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 8:58:08 AM (0+)
|
|
Your article should've been titled "Why the Dems Won't Refus
Refuse to Fund the War." That's really what you wrote about. I guess at the last second, some wishful thinking kicked in, and overpowered you. Every person you spoke with told you the Dems won't stop the funding. by Richard Mynick (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1552 comments [255 recommended, 5 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:03:41 AM (0+)
|
|
How much is enough?
Rob, is it not long past time for you to understand that looking to the Democratic Party for solutions to the myriad of problems besetting our nation and our world is a fatal flaw? What more proof do you need to arrive at this conclusion, which I have held for years and years now. The Democratic Party is a part and parcel of the problem and not the solution. Allow me to refer to your own article: Emanuel has actually said that-- that Bush in power is good for Democrats and that the war is good for democrats. So, the deaths of four thousand of our children and perhaps a million Iraqis is nothing more than a campaign tool...support that! Kucinich: Dennis is correct that the abysmal leadership willnever take that step, but see the first quote for the real reason. Budowsky notes: A resounding maybe...When JFK announced he was going to end the Viet Nam war, thus bringing the era of huge profits for the military industrial complex, he was conveniently murdered.....Im just saying here.... Rob and all, It is far past time to reevaluate our loyalties and decide that we who are still members of the Democratic Party have been brutally used to selfish purpose and our own trust betrayed. Those of us who love this nation must perforce want better for it than Emanuel, Pelosi and Reid. by ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:20:50 AM (0+)
|
|
Bye, bye, Nancy?
First, I agree and desire the intent of a funding refusal. That is EXACTLY how the constitution was structured - so the Congress can JUST SAY NO without being trumped by a veto. As far as Nancy refusing by her own little self? She is NOT the Speaker by decree or for life. Any such declaration by her alone would not cut off funds but simply trigger her immediate replacement by the House leadership backed by a majority of the Democrats. Nothing, however, would please me more than to see her go down in flames to Cindy Sheehan in 2008. So Kucinich was not dodging the question about her, or Reid, acting alone. He said it required the decision of the leadership and that is accurate. As to how we'd get a suitable UN force assembled with a redemptive mission while Bushco is still running things, I cannot even imagine. And what would Bush do? Massive assault on Iran/911 II/Pearl Harbor 3/WWIII/martial law come to mind as options. Maybe Nancy could be the first one incarcerated under HR 1955 - the new thought crime bill. The media? I'd say grab 'em by the collar and start slapping. Whatever the strategy, it should be an OFFENSIVE. Assuming that Hillary wins in 2008, she has already stated that the troops will still be there at least til the end of her, ahem, first term. Her domestic program? If it doesn't include single payer universal health care - and it doesn't - what more can you expect? A little less worse than Bush, maybe. Will she demand repeal of the Patriot Act and the endless flood of Bush/Republican legislation that has eviscerated the Bill of Rights? End Military tribunals? NSA spying? torture? Don't hold your breath. Some pork barrel domestic spending? Sure, but not much more. So the question becomes, how can overarching US imperial policy be changed regardless of whether Reps or Dems are running things? Pulling out of Iraq would be a great first step but if the underlying US imperial policy remains the same, the problem will just reappear in another time and place. Pulling out of Vietnam (thank God, at last!) simply shifted the focus of US policy to the middle east and then fired things up in Central America a few years later. Start by considering the Defense Department's new Africa Command that has just been established. Warfare is just economics in another form. Free Trade/WTO/cannibalistic capitalism, etc are at the root here. If the US and its allies - and by that I mean their complacent, consumerist populations as well as their governments - cannot face the very, very real crisis, - the clear and present danger - of climate change, peak oil, resource depletion, destructive development, environmental degradation, and population increase, then they really needn't worry about terrorism, Islamo-fascism, Russia, the Chinese, or a nuclear Iran. They've got maybe 20 years before EVERYTHING starts breaking down, maybe 50 till the collapse, and then centuries to ponder how they can ignore their stupidity and try it again in the same self-destructive manner. Good night and good luck. by Kyle Johnson (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:57:18 AM (0+)
|
|
Let's Not Overlook Bill Richardson; he is showing Leadership
Bill Richardson argued persuasively in an Op Ed published in the Washington Post in September that the U.S. must exit Iraq now. Richardson wrote: Those who think we need to keep troops in Iraq misunderstand the Middle East. I have met and negotiated successfully with many regional leaders, including Saddam Hussein. I am convinced that only a complete withdrawal can sufficiently shift the politics of Iraq and its neighbors to break the deadlock that has been killing so many people for so long. Our troops have done everything they were asked to do with courage and professionalism, but they cannot win someone else's civil war. So long as American troops are in Iraq, reconciliation among Iraqi factions is postponed. Leaving forces there enables the Iraqis to delay taking the necessary steps to end the violence. And it prevents us from using diplomacy to bring in other nations to help stabilize and rebuild the country. The presence of American forces in Iraq weakens us in the war against al-Qaeda. It endows the anti-American propaganda of those who portray us as occupiers plundering Iraq's oil and repressing Muslims. The day we leave, this myth collapses, and the Iraqis will drive foreign jihadists out of their country. Our departure would also enable us to focus on defeating the terrorists who attacked us on Sept. 11, those headquartered along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border -- not in Iraq. Logistically, it would be possible to withdraw in six to eight months. We moved as many as 240,000 troops into and out of Iraq through Kuwait in as little as a three-month period during major troop rotations. After the Persian Gulf War, we redeployed nearly a half-million troops in a few months. by Stephen Cassidy (5 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 11:05:55 AM (0+)
|
|
great, well organized, thoughtful analysis
Must agree with Malloy that the illegal occupation of Iraq will NEVER be ended by an act of Congress because they were complicit in its origination. Many outwardly or secretly still support the occupation because of oil and military-industrial special interests that copiously fill up their campaign coffers. So our only hope (besides removing most of Congress from office) for an end will be a future President that actually cares about something besides power and knows when something is ethically and legally wrong. And one that is willing to stand up to the fascist media interests. Don't hold your breath. by John F Howes CPA (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 28 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 11:27:36 AM (0+)
|
|
I've given up on the Democrats
The Democrats love the anti-war posture and then they turn around funding the war and pushing for the next one. The top-tier presidential candidates are the worst. by Babyhuey (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 34 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:06:29 PM (0+)
|
|
Wishful thinking?
The title of this thread is wishful thinking because the DUMMICRAPS have repeatedly proven they have NO BALLS! by Ben Marble, M.D. (23 articles, 0 quicklinks, 230 diaries, 349 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:17:23 PM (0+)
|
|
this is not even funny
I hope this was not e-mailed to any of our troops trying to complete this mission. These kinds of thoughts coming from "back home in America" is psychologically devastating to our troops fighting. Since I’m speaking to children I can use this for an analogy; when you tell a two-year-old child "no more baby bottle, big kids use sippy cups". Every time the child reaches for the cup, will you slap him/her in the face? These mindless mixed messages that our troops are receiving from back home in safe America are more psychologically devastating to our troops than the war itself. How does it feel to be the biggest contributor to posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD)? Especially when our military is doing a damn good job! by Pat Smith (5 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 70 comments [11 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:25:44 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: You're confusing two very different things.
The main point is that the war is a dishonest crime, and the US government is committing horrific war crimes to steal Iraq's oil. That's the main thing, and everything else is far secondary to that. As far as "the troops" go, we are not the slightest bit obliged to pretend that what they are doing is justified, simply because they are "our men and women in uniform." If their mission is just, we should support them in the mission. If their mission is unjust -- as it is -- we should show our support for them by bringing them home. You're confusing the justice of the mission with concern for our troops. These are two very different things. by Richard Mynick (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1552 comments [255 recommended, 5 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:54:24 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: This is sick...
says Pat ...."our military is doing a damn good job!" Wrong, Pat, dead wrong. And Rob, you omitted one very important question ; What will the MIC do with Dems who choose to stop funding this illegal war ? Answer ; the MIC will stop funding those Dems and some of those Dems just may be found floating face down in the Potomac !!! Ardee and Rich, as consitent as these two chaps are have once again hit the nail on the head. by Tony Forest (7 articles, 18 quicklinks, 166 diaries, 1429 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 1:01:30 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Know a bit about child abuse, pattiepace7?
You talk about those of us who are trying to extricate troops who are being betrayed by right wing leaders and voters who stupidly, or for partisan or for-profit reasons want to keep the war going? We know and have written how a significant percentage of right wingers have been abused and now suffer from PTSD, but it appears that YOU are engaging in what is called projection-- seeing in others what may very well be in your self. The troops are waking up. More and more of them know that BUshco is betraying them and being supported by right wing profiteers and religious nuts who keep the war going as part of their pathetic apocalyptic beliefs in the rapture. I wrote about this almost exactly two years ago, here: by Rob Kall (952 articles, 4177 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 2:42:55 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Pattipace
Support the troops by getting them the hell out of Iraq! Their post-traumatic problems are the result of killing people! by Bob Gormley (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 1094 comments [65 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 3:05:16 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Just for emphasis
Mr. Mynick has rebutted this right wing talking point very well indeed, yet , in spite of the many times this garbage gets slapped down,the stale and false talking point keeps rebounding. Does this point to a refusal of those on the right to actually think things through? Are they incapable of processing thought and must rely upon the propagandists like Limbaugh et al for their political opinions? Have they no shame at blatantly displaying a total and complete lack of depth or any grasp of the political and military situation? by ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 5:42:47 PM (0+)
|
|
The anger management problem of the corporate profit machine
This article has gone astray from its inception and does not serve it's goal. Never-the-less, I have absolutely 0 faith, let me repeat 0, 0, 0, (can we see the zeros yet?) in the Republicans and Democrats to do anything good for the people of the United States of America, and indeed the people of the world (which is how we should be looking at Government now). Everything I hear and read, even the most outside the box sources fail to realize that we already have a major vacuum of fear and pain in this country that can only be filled with another civil war against corporate America. Because it is corporate America that has attacked the people. Like a common bully going after the week and small, America has 0 honor and integrity. Allowing the Government to be founded to any degree of profit has caused this collapse. The only legitimate reason for any government to exist is to SERVE THE PEOPLE! A PROFITING GOVERNMENT does NOT SERVE THE PEOPLE! IT SERVES PROFIT! The press's only reason for existence was to SERVE THE PEOPLE! Freedom of the press was instituted to stop GOVERNMENT THAT DOES NOT SERVE THE PEOPLE! The press has been orchestrated into a fine tuned regulated conservative indoctrination media outlet that empowers the Government to control the people through guilt, shame and fear (terrorism). Legal help is regulated to those who have money, and labor earnings are reduced to increase the bottom line of those who are economically patriotic to those who create and support the laws that have usurped ALL of the Constitution's basic foundation of human rights. ALL OF THIS IS BY DEFINITION AND ACT OF TREASON AGAINST THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, and the FOUNDING CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! The purpose of creating the United States Government was quite clear to the founders of this country. Put THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE in charge of the GOVERNMENT, NOT THE WILL OF THE GOVERNMENT in charge of THE PEOPLE! The above statement simply is not a reality, that is, to anyone with honest open eyes and a real education straight from the two documents that started it all. by Darin Walker (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 1:10:37 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Well said ...
This country resembles Mussolini's Italy now more than anything the Founding Fathers had in mind. by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 1:20:35 PM (0+)
|
|
Having it both ways
During the anti-war march yesterday a chant broke out "f*ck the Republicans - f*ck the Democrats! The feeling out on the streets, and indeed in the populace at large - other wise explain why 50% don't even bother - is that neither party gives a rat's ass about what the people think. With very few exceptions, Kucinich, and yet even though he's the been right from the get-go and is the smartest of the bunch, no one gives him a snowball's chance in Hell (?), which says a lot about our screwed-up collective mental state in this country, not one of these so called representatives of the people are anything but. It's the money and their own asses they care about as innocent people die, as these cretins position themselves for their self-serving reasons. War baby! Every state benefits from war. Hence we won't see an end to it until it consumes and destroys us. And all the postulating in the world isn't going to change that. by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 1:13:59 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: you should turn this into an article
we'll run it. Title it Chant at Peace Rally: Eff the Dems and Republicans by Rob Kall (952 articles, 4177 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 2:46:11 PM (0+)
|
|
They can pull funding to the troops.....
and even pull the troops, they won't pull Blackwater and the security foreskins funding or troops. So we end up again with the "least of two evils" once again. To pattiepace or whatever....Rush Limbaugh gets his mouth heard from "back home" enough.....SO WHY NOT ROB KALL!! by Joe Rathbun (8 articles, 4 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 142 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 3:13:23 PM (0+)
|
|
Mr M called it
I want to see an Independent Party, that way, people that want to have a definable identifiable voice separate from the Halliburton hangers-on can still have some type of representation in our process today. The Iraq war is a multi-billion-dollar runaway fraud against the public, a thinly-veiled oil grab, and unless Congress has a secret stash of integrity and moral courage they haven't opened up yet, what we're seeing today will likely continue. That is, unLESS there's Quite A Few People that start contacting Congress daily, if not hourly, adjuring them to examine the error OF their ways and actually do something to bring the war to an end. Nancy 'impeachment is off the table' Pelosi isn't going to lift a finger unless that happens, but this one really is a matter of conscience, we're being blackmailed at the gas pump to shut up and leave well enough alone, the energy biz people INCLUDING Cheney have this racket ALL figured out. But, if they got impeached for their oil war, that'd kind of wake people up, I think. But, until or unless something like that happens, it'll keep being the Big Money vs. the Little People. Now, put on your tracking collar, and go to work, 'citizen'... by truthtruffle (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 111 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 3:13:57 PM (0+)
|
|
ITS ALL THE CONTROL OF THE CFR,TC GLOBALIST
ALL THIS COMMENTS OMIT THE FACT THAT THE GLOBALIST ARE IN CONTROL. I GUESS NOBODY TALKS ABOUT THIS, JUST LIKE NONE OF THE CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT DO,THESE GLOBALIST HAVE MEMBERS IN EVER BRANCH OF OUR GOVERNMENT AND THEY HAVE AN AGENDA. I HEAR SOMEONE MENTION RICHARDSON WELL HE'S A MEMBER OF CFR, AS ALL OF THE TOP TIER CANDIDATES FROM BOTH PARTY'S ARE, THESE PEOPLE HAVE AMASSED SO MUCH POWER IN THEIR 30 40 YEAR AGENDA, ITS MONEY POWER GREED AND THE WAR MACHINE, THATS ALL THEY CARE ABOUT. AND THEY HAVE TO BE STOPED. ONE WAY TO START TO STOP THEM IS FOR ALL AMERICANS TO PAY OFF THEIR CREDIT CARDS AND THEN CUT THEM UP AND NEVER GET ANOTHER , SEE THIS IS FOOD FOR THE GLOBALIST AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE CAN STARVE THEM TO DEATH,ALSO COULD STOP BANKING AND US MONEY ORDERS AND CASH TO PAY BILLS OR BUY WHAT YOU NEED. AND TAKE YOUR MONEY OUT OF THE BANK. IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DID THIS FOR 6 OR 12 MONTH, THIS IS ONE WAY TO STOP THEM. BUT THIS IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE AMERICANS ARE WEAK, SOFT, PROGRAMED, LAZY, AND HAVE BEEN DECIVED FOR SO LONG THEY THINK IT NATURAL. BUT THERE IS A DAY COMING THAT WE ALL WILL WISH WE WOULD HAVE LISTEN TO THE WARNING OF OUR FOUNDING FATHERS. AND IT MAY BE SOONER THAT WE THINK. by RICHARD SHADE (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 460 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 3:36:40 PM (0+)
|
|
Continue article
This is still a good article to pursue, clarify, and get answers to. We must start at the beginning if we are going to straighten up this country's government, and ending this war is a big step in that direction. We must be willing to plea bargain the officials to get somewhere in ridding the bad ones, but not such that we let the big baddies off the hook. We have to set a hard example of them just like they do us at the bottom. This will ensure a lesson well learned for any future administrations to wreck havoc of the people and human rights. by Darin Walker (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 5:39:49 PM (0+)
|
|
"Do"?
Where it is written that these Democrats are capable of doing anything. They have been elected into the ruling class and are not likely to give up their health care and pensions. The rest of us are on our own. Veteran '66-68 by Roger (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [22 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:12:38 PM (0+)
|
|
Why NOT Kucinich?
I don't know...seems so many of us who know Dennis will be the best choice in the next election still say he has no chance. Why don't you support him, give him your time and money to defeat the fascists, and vote in the primary for him (and urge everyone else who hates what is happening to America too?). He has a wonderful chance when we help him win! I am so proud of the courage he shows. He is not discouraged, not feeling like we're lost. Let's not send that message out to anyone either. His is a message of hope, and don't we all need that? Let yourself imagine how we will feel the day after the election when we wake up, knowing that the occupation, the environment, our healthcare, peace and justice are all being addressed. Doesn't that feel good? Now, let it be. And so it is. by treehugger (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 38 comments) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:31:52 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Why not Kucinich?
Because no politician who refuses to play the game of corporate politics will overcome the party of Rhamm Emanuel and the DLC and win a nomination, thats why. Both political parties are controlled by the same entities, and, despite the flowery words there is a distinct lack of action that doesnt favor the continuing control of those wealthy donors. by ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments) on Monday, Oct 29, 2007 at 9:00:48 AM (0+)
|
|
The war is over when...
...the fact that 1,000,000 Iraqi civilians have died because of the war is known to the citizens of the United States. These citizens would be alive, in all proability had there been no illegal invasion. When that happens, now or later, the war will be over. Integration of the central fact is the unifying force that will allow all but a few citizens to realize what it means to either vote for or be indifferent in your resistance to someone who would do this. We can't expect to make the type of effort required to literally save the species when we're so naive about what has actually been done - one million dead. We didn't do it. They did and they need to be identified and shamed for their monsterous crimes. It's a small group of liars - the neoconservatives, the fake religious leaders who through misdirection got their followers to vote for this crew, and those who cynically manipuated public opinion to gin up a new war economy. The identification of those responsible for deaths must also extend to those who supported the UN sanctions against Iraq, strongly supported and perpetuated by Clinton. That caused 500,000 deaths to Iraqi children, according to a U.N. survey. It's a serious task. I'm not confident it can be done, as things stand now. But it must be done. by Michael Collins (130 articles, 20 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 485 comments [42 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:43:19 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: By the way..."the Dems" are complicit in the war, up to
...their necks. The "Dems" won't end it. The public will by demanding it, just like the public ended Viet Nam. by Michael Collins (130 articles, 20 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 485 comments [42 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:45:36 PM (0+)
|
|
You will lose everything.
First of all there is no such thing as an illegal war. War by its nature is not concerned with rules or laws. Secondly just because one side in a war quits and tries to go home doesn’t mean that the war is over. It just means that they have been defeated and the enemy has won that part of there larger overall plan of expanding there agenda. After one has successfully run off, defeated the other side the logical thing to do is to force the defeated to your point of view. To the victors go the spoils. So either the USA will stand down and accept the eventual fanatic version of Islam worldwide or the wars back on again. So tell me, at what point will the left fight for there culture? How many gays will have to be slaughtered in America by shar law before you fight? How will you except forced religion? Islam equals the end of women’s rights, is that going to be ok with you? Individualism is un-Islamic so will you be happy with the group think? Fanatic Islam allows for no education for girls or females in general, so your daughter’s life of ignorance is something you can live with? On and On! You call Bush a neocon yet he is the only one that is protecting the culture that allows for your progressive passions. You’re trying to run from a war that was started by fanatics with a world wide agenda. You will lose everything! by David C Beach (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 169 comments) on Monday, Oct 29, 2007 at 1:15:39 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Far worse than the fanatic Islam
is the fanatic American. by Tony Forest (7 articles, 18 quicklinks, 166 diaries, 1429 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Oct 29, 2007 at 2:50:11 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Do you
really believe this prattle? This only shows that you have spent far too little time in garnering your opinions, used far too little brain matter in thinking things through with an accumulation of data. I feel sorry for you but more so for my nation when it contains such as you. AlQaeda has around twenty thousand members, get it? Thats world wide too...Once our troops stop giving the impression that they are another christian crusade come to Islam peace will out. Muslims are not as you protray them, you have been duped. Your fault really! by ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments) on Thursday, Nov 1, 2007 at 9:01:11 AM (0+)
|
|
It's too easy to be biased
Articles like this are too simplistic in their depth of thought to be of meaningful discourse. Likewise those that canvass only one side of multifaceted complex issues regardless which side are not in any analysis an attempt to seek the truth, solution or accommodation. Those that shed objectivity like molted lizard skin are equally culpable for partisan nature of politics. Each side seeking ‘evidence’ that supports their extreme perspectives without discovering proof. All solutions that come from a situation from diametrically opposed points of view inevitably come from the Marriage of objectivity and acceptance of the other opinion. Tolerance is based in superiority i.e. I allow your opinion (I have right on my side and in my generosity allow you yours). So my objective is how best to convert you. Whereas Acceptance is a lot harder and is based on mutuality (we both have mutually valid perspectives) how do we best coexist? Honesty in writing is where all the facts do the work of convincing. Selectivity in facts have no more intellectual or moral weight than the raves of the so called shock jocks as they are all entertainment than truly informative. As I have said many time there is a big difference between the rhetoric of a candidate who isn’t a front runner, people who will never have to back their rhetoric with actions and those on the ground. Most importantly is the concept regardless of how or why it happened the US and partners broke Iraq and are indirectly responsible for 1million deaths most of which were innocents. It isn’t therefore a broad moral stretch to suggest that it is the US and coalition responsibility to fix it. One should ask why have or are the parteners leaving? To pack up and run in the face of the death of few thousand US military leaving what is left of Iraq to the inevitable chaos in my mind is unconscionable. What is needed is to stop the war and if current (mis)management/ strategy isn’t capable then get a new one(s)and stop with political games people are dying,for the love of humanity do it now. PS Humanity is the responsibility of us all (nations to speak and act on) This is not the time for National hypersensitivity. by Andris (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 531 comments) on Monday, Oct 29, 2007 at 2:36:52 AM (0+)
|
|
What Will it Look Like After the Dems Declare they Refuse to
Well Rob, I have to conceed, your article certainl got some off their collectives arses and made them put their thinkin caps on somewhat. Now that's gotta be an improvement, however, I reiterate my previous views, for Americans to think/believe/hope/dream/pray that the almighty Dems are gonna come chargin on their white chargers and save them from the evil Repugs, is just a whole lotta dreamin. The Dems have demonstarted very clearly, they SUPPORT 100% what the Repugs are doing, and I'll make a humble prediction too, no way will they EVER cease funding the illegal activeties happening in Iraq. Not in my lifetime anyway, and I'm 57, so unless somethins gonn happen to me shortly, we're in for one hell of a long wait . I wish the people of America were able to recognise the FACT, that their Govt is totaly corrupt and the only way to fix things, is.... START OVER. by Eddy Schmid (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 234 comments [17 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Oct 29, 2007 at 4:05:19 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: No false hopes
just covering the bases. See my article today Do Reid and Pelosi WANT The Occupancy of Iraq to Continue? by Rob Kall (952 articles, 4177 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Monday, Oct 29, 2007 at 11:21:51 AM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
