Does it have to have a direct impact on me personally in order for me to justify my outrage? Is it not acceptable that I am ashamed of how this nation has chosen to justify and conduct its war in Iraq? Are my concerns for impact that these actions have had on our national security and economic well being both now and in the future unjustified? I doubt it.When I was in grad. school, one of my professors told me a story of being scuttled out of Germany during the rise of Hitler. He had the same pacifist mentality and even told me he has psychological issues with seeing anyone in a uniform, police included. I believe what he told me as a basis for his beliefs because he had no axe to grind. However, he told me he sees no need for war-ever.
I do not believe W is using fear to create war for no good reason. I do believe he may be using fear to justify the steps he has taken to prevent another attack. I believe he, as would I, would rather be criticized for going too far than not far enough and allowing another attack. Don't you think those 3000 people in the towers would have preferred BC and early W to do more? None of you have told me yet how this fear has had any direct affect on your lives either.
My question, before, was how have these supposed civil rights violation that the W naysayers are crying about affected them?
My answer is that it does not have to. It is enough that the W. administration is justifying actions that could affect our civil rights in the future.
I am not happy with how they have conducted the war either and it does bother me that some soldiers died unnecessarily because of that. But that is on W squarely.
I think that some of the W. supporters here would disagree with you. The burden also lies on the congress people who voted to go to war, the people who re-elected them, and now the congress that can cut funding and bring the troops home. Additionally the burden lies on the propaganda machine that continues to crank out the spin (FOX, Rush, etc.) When the sh*t eventually hits the fan a few heads will roll, but not nearly enough.
OK i'll bite-The best possible senario to me is to:
1. Get out. The shi'a and su'ni will battle it out until someone emerges just as Saddam did.
2. Any other country who begins to emass troops on the Iraqi border will be bombed into camel poop by the USA, after posting warnings to that effect. NO TROOPS.
3. Sit down with the House of Saud and tell them that 1. They will furnish oil to the USA at a pre-negotiated fair and equitable price. If they do not and side with OPEC then the USA will leave them on their own. The same thing applies to them as it does to Iraq...no outside interference or bombs away. The Saud's are no fools...without the USA they are so much sword play with the Wahabbis (sic) as well as devout Muslims everywhere.
4. The USA gets it "holier than thou" head out of its nether regions and negotiate and contract for oil with whomever will give us the best price.
5. Build more nuclear plants with the money we are wasting rattling our sword universally...while countries like Venezuela go communist.
Just my opinion and subject to change by better info or a plan.