Decius wrote:
] digitalreporter wrote:
] ] Only a few thousand stalwarts, activists like Noel Ainsley,
] ] took to the streets to sound the alarm, shocked but refusing
]
] ] to be awed by the promised pulverizing. They did nothing
] rude
] ] or radical, simply questioned the edicts of authority.
]
] Good to hear the peaceniks in Canada were actually peaceful.
] Not so much in San Francisco if I recall. The only arguement
] made for the Iraq war that was compelling was the imminent
] threat arguement, made by Blair. If Stratfor is believed (and
] I do) the real reasons were never argued. Blair's argument has
] been crushed almost as much as you can crush it. Iraq/Al'Q
] links are scarce. Even Bush/Cheney admit the relationship was
] budding, not developed, which precludes the idea of imminence.
] The WMD are non existent. Scott Ritter said so much at the
] time, and the media simply tried to write him off as a kook.
] He was dead right.
]
] I still think that it was reasonable to worry that Iraq might
] give WMD to Al'Q. The guy gave cash to Hezbollah. However, I
] worry about a lot of things. The question is how likely was
] this to happen on short order. Turns out not too likely at
] all.
]
] But please don't call the peaceniks patriots. I supported the
] invasion of Afghanistan, but I was uncertain enough on the eve
] of the Iraq war to seriously consider whether or not I should
] protest. I might have, if the rallies weren't run by
] International Answer. I'd rather stand with Bush, when he is
] wrong, the Internation Answer at their best moment. These
] people are not patriots. They hate the United States and they
] hate democratic government. They hate capitalism, and they
] hate certain kinds of freedom.

It's never going to be black and white. Good and evil. People who see it like this are fools. Including Dubya. When people question my stance against him, it's not because I think he's an idiot or hate Republicans in general. It's because he lied. The reason why we went to Iraq has been well documented here and elsewhere. It was to influence the region with our western/capitalism presence. If he and the administration would've just SAID THAT, I think it would've gone a long way towards credibility (albeit Imperialism!). Instead, he lied and said it was about WMD and/or Al'Q and/or whatever. For a brief moment, the whole world was behind us. Now the whole world is against us. And it's because of this shit.

If anyone over there needed their asses kicked, it was the Saudis. They're responsible for 90% of this crap. They float the money to the jihad'ists in Israel and all over the world. They shake our hands with a knive behind their backs in the other hand. The quicker we can lessen our dependance on their products, the quicker we see anti-US Islamic fundamentalistic terrorism whither. And I think that having a cozy relationship with the "new Iraq" is a step towards that day. I think that was the plan the whole time.

But I still disagree with the whole concept of killing people to achieve any of this. Lieing about it just makes it 10x worse. And it's us and our children who will ultimately pay the price for this indescretion.

RE: The Calgary Sun: Turns out peaceniks were the real patriots all along