Tuesday, December 20, 2005
OpEd: LP On Iraq & The Bush Administration
Here we go, folks. The Sunni Muslim "list" is having a fit over election results in Iraq as the partial tallies are being released by the election comission. The Beeb has your story: (Link)
So, where's the fun I mentioned? What if the elections in Iraq collapse because of this pitiful tribal infighting that got them into trouble in the first place? You see, Saddam was a Sunni. The Sunni tribes are a minority in Iraq, and have long been bullied by the Shiah, who hold a minority along with the Kurds, both of whom were big targets of Saddam's wrath. A bit of reading up on Bush I's own goofed up war (if he wanted Saddam gone, he had the perfect excuse, he pulled a Hitler and went into Kuwait uninvited) and the aftermath will show that this situation was severely limited during the much-simpler No-Fly Zone years.
The Kurds pretty much lived autonomously in Northern Iraq under the NFZ, developing a more westernized society without fear of Saddam's persecution. They had Internet infrastructure, cell phones, and pretty-much unabated free trade, so they no longer had a reason to be upset with other tribes. In Central Iraq (where-in lies the majority of the infamous Sunni Triangle), the Shiah and the Sunnis still walked an uneasy line betweenn violence and peace, but international pressure kept this tension strongly limited. Shiah in the South of Iraq fared better, as their NFZ kept Saddam's influence to a minimum as well.
Bill Clinton's bombing of Iraq during his term as President was both stupid and productive. Stupid because it was simply to distract the nation from the Lewinsky mess (which failed, and he got lambasted for it). Productive because it simply provided further proof that Saddam was incapable of being any sort of immediate threat to the United States, or even to anyone within his own borders.
It wasn't until after the 9/11 Attacks that we heard about Iraq again. It was then that the US invasion of Afghanistan was in full swing, and the "evil" of Saddam began to "rise" again.
The Administration let fly that they had found evidence linking Saddam to bin Ladin, and that he was trying to buy radioactive materials in Africa for a weapons program. It was also revealed that he had quite a few mobile biological weapons labs (run by folks they recently released from prison - Link) capable of producing quite a bit of bad stuff.
These were cited as valid reasons for invading Iraq in 2003.
Since then, it has been pretty much disproven that Saddam had any direct ties to bin Laden at all, and if any WMDs have been found in Iraq at all, they were a few rare leftovers from Saddam's tyrant years, pre-1991 Gulf War and long since unable to do much damage at all. The Africa story was also proven false, and led to the joy that is the Plame CIA Leak scandle.
The war has not gone well. Not long after the start of the war, US forces marched into Baghdad, and Bush II landed himself on the deck of an aircraft carrier to proclaim "Mission Accomplished." That we had done what we set out to do. And what had we done? Had we found WMDs? No. "Well find them," Bush said. But still no WMDs. They caught Saddam, and brought him before a tribunal (sham or no sham, Saddam does in fact deserve to be tried and punished), but that's a minor vicotry at best. The real problem still persists almost three years later.
Insurgents (or "terrorists" if you believe the Bush Administration) are killing US troops, Iraqi and US civilians, blowing stuff up, taking hostages, executing said hostages, making demands... Need I go on? Over 2,100 soldiers have died in Iraq to date, most of them since Bush made his little declaration from the carrier deck in 2003.
And where are the cries of foul with regards to the so-called "reconstruction" contracts? A whole mess of these things took taxpayer money and handed it straight to Dick Cheney's old employer, Halliburton (a company which he still holds significant interest in, mind you) and its subsidiaries, often without so much as a chance for other companies to make a bidding offer. Taxpayer Money. The Vice President. Suspicious much?
After 9/11, the government passed the USA PATRIOT Act, broadening the powers of law enforcement agencies (especially the CIA and FBI) to perform surveilance activities, and removing quite a few of the checks and balances that prevent abuse of such power. Such abuses have been reported, but not widely heard of, and are currently being investigated. It also created the Transportation Safety Administration, who's No-Fly List has caused countless headaches at airports, and coming soon, a bus or train station near you.
The government has also attempted to create a National ID Card (can you say Papers Please? Link) via the RealID Act, which was snuck in with an appropriations bill which funded the Iraq conflict. Since no Senator in his right mind would vote against money for troops, it passed without debate. In three years, when this becomes law, you'll all be the proud owners of an ID card which gives the government alomost unabated access to quite a chunk of your personal data, and gives them a way to keep track of your movements and activities.
George Orwell, eat your heart out.
They created the Department of Homeland Security, unifying some departments and creating a few new others, bloating the size of government (something Republicans are supposedly against) and thus increasing the budget. Which, by the way, they spent the surplus of within a year and returned us to years of deficit. Not to mention the National Debt has risen quite a chunk thanks to the fact that George W. Bush has borrowed more money during his five years in office than all the previous presidents before him (all the way back to that other, more respectable George W.) put together.
This war has cost the taxpayers over $280 billion. And what does it have to show for it? 2,100+ US Casualties, 27,000+ Iraqi Civilian Casualties (Link), a nation invaded, destabilized, and made worse than it was before we invaded, and a very, nasty case of Big Brother and Taxpayer Looting at home.
Bill Clinton got impeached for lying about getting a hummer.
See where I'm going with this? What the heck do you have to do to get impeached? Lie about an affair? Be responsible for the unnecessary deaths of nearly 30,000 people? Which one is worse, do you think? Sure, the affair is immoral. But isn't killing and war immoral, too? Isn't lying to the people you're supposed to be leading? Isn't it immoral to pry into the private lives of those people in the name of national security?
"If the commission does not take steps to restore justice to other lists, we will demand a new election be held." -- Adnan al-DulaimiGo figure, right? You see, what comes next is the fun part. Because meanwhile, elsewhere on the planet, a new poll shows that Bush's approval rating has "shot up" to 47% (Link -- via Fark, again from the BBC) on the Administration's trumpeting of the elections in Iraq as a "success."
So, where's the fun I mentioned? What if the elections in Iraq collapse because of this pitiful tribal infighting that got them into trouble in the first place? You see, Saddam was a Sunni. The Sunni tribes are a minority in Iraq, and have long been bullied by the Shiah, who hold a minority along with the Kurds, both of whom were big targets of Saddam's wrath. A bit of reading up on Bush I's own goofed up war (if he wanted Saddam gone, he had the perfect excuse, he pulled a Hitler and went into Kuwait uninvited) and the aftermath will show that this situation was severely limited during the much-simpler No-Fly Zone years.
The Kurds pretty much lived autonomously in Northern Iraq under the NFZ, developing a more westernized society without fear of Saddam's persecution. They had Internet infrastructure, cell phones, and pretty-much unabated free trade, so they no longer had a reason to be upset with other tribes. In Central Iraq (where-in lies the majority of the infamous Sunni Triangle), the Shiah and the Sunnis still walked an uneasy line betweenn violence and peace, but international pressure kept this tension strongly limited. Shiah in the South of Iraq fared better, as their NFZ kept Saddam's influence to a minimum as well.
Bill Clinton's bombing of Iraq during his term as President was both stupid and productive. Stupid because it was simply to distract the nation from the Lewinsky mess (which failed, and he got lambasted for it). Productive because it simply provided further proof that Saddam was incapable of being any sort of immediate threat to the United States, or even to anyone within his own borders.
It wasn't until after the 9/11 Attacks that we heard about Iraq again. It was then that the US invasion of Afghanistan was in full swing, and the "evil" of Saddam began to "rise" again.
The Administration let fly that they had found evidence linking Saddam to bin Ladin, and that he was trying to buy radioactive materials in Africa for a weapons program. It was also revealed that he had quite a few mobile biological weapons labs (run by folks they recently released from prison - Link) capable of producing quite a bit of bad stuff.
These were cited as valid reasons for invading Iraq in 2003.
Since then, it has been pretty much disproven that Saddam had any direct ties to bin Laden at all, and if any WMDs have been found in Iraq at all, they were a few rare leftovers from Saddam's tyrant years, pre-1991 Gulf War and long since unable to do much damage at all. The Africa story was also proven false, and led to the joy that is the Plame CIA Leak scandle.
The war has not gone well. Not long after the start of the war, US forces marched into Baghdad, and Bush II landed himself on the deck of an aircraft carrier to proclaim "Mission Accomplished." That we had done what we set out to do. And what had we done? Had we found WMDs? No. "Well find them," Bush said. But still no WMDs. They caught Saddam, and brought him before a tribunal (sham or no sham, Saddam does in fact deserve to be tried and punished), but that's a minor vicotry at best. The real problem still persists almost three years later.
Insurgents (or "terrorists" if you believe the Bush Administration) are killing US troops, Iraqi and US civilians, blowing stuff up, taking hostages, executing said hostages, making demands... Need I go on? Over 2,100 soldiers have died in Iraq to date, most of them since Bush made his little declaration from the carrier deck in 2003.
And where are the cries of foul with regards to the so-called "reconstruction" contracts? A whole mess of these things took taxpayer money and handed it straight to Dick Cheney's old employer, Halliburton (a company which he still holds significant interest in, mind you) and its subsidiaries, often without so much as a chance for other companies to make a bidding offer. Taxpayer Money. The Vice President. Suspicious much?
After 9/11, the government passed the USA PATRIOT Act, broadening the powers of law enforcement agencies (especially the CIA and FBI) to perform surveilance activities, and removing quite a few of the checks and balances that prevent abuse of such power. Such abuses have been reported, but not widely heard of, and are currently being investigated. It also created the Transportation Safety Administration, who's No-Fly List has caused countless headaches at airports, and coming soon, a bus or train station near you.
The government has also attempted to create a National ID Card (can you say Papers Please? Link) via the RealID Act, which was snuck in with an appropriations bill which funded the Iraq conflict. Since no Senator in his right mind would vote against money for troops, it passed without debate. In three years, when this becomes law, you'll all be the proud owners of an ID card which gives the government alomost unabated access to quite a chunk of your personal data, and gives them a way to keep track of your movements and activities.
George Orwell, eat your heart out.
They created the Department of Homeland Security, unifying some departments and creating a few new others, bloating the size of government (something Republicans are supposedly against) and thus increasing the budget. Which, by the way, they spent the surplus of within a year and returned us to years of deficit. Not to mention the National Debt has risen quite a chunk thanks to the fact that George W. Bush has borrowed more money during his five years in office than all the previous presidents before him (all the way back to that other, more respectable George W.) put together.
This war has cost the taxpayers over $280 billion. And what does it have to show for it? 2,100+ US Casualties, 27,000+ Iraqi Civilian Casualties (Link), a nation invaded, destabilized, and made worse than it was before we invaded, and a very, nasty case of Big Brother and Taxpayer Looting at home.
Bill Clinton got impeached for lying about getting a hummer.
See where I'm going with this? What the heck do you have to do to get impeached? Lie about an affair? Be responsible for the unnecessary deaths of nearly 30,000 people? Which one is worse, do you think? Sure, the affair is immoral. But isn't killing and war immoral, too? Isn't lying to the people you're supposed to be leading? Isn't it immoral to pry into the private lives of those people in the name of national security?
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Benjamin FranklinBush isn't the only one to blame. The American People are also to blame. For allowing this to happen to themselves by allowing this administration to continue alomost completely unchecked. It's time to clean house now before it's much too late...
