just read it

Doonesbury@Slate - Daily Dose

"Congress and Bush enacted an $87.5 billion package last November for this year's U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. In April 2003, a $79.5 billion measure was approved for that year's activities. "

This is what the war is costing us people. 764 solder's lives, and 192 Billons dollars.

And what is our return? What have we gained? No WMDs, but of course we stopped the horror that was Saddam. And thats a good thing right? I mean just forget the fact that Bush has single handedly mortally wounded the NATO Alliance, the fact we have troops "blow[ing] off some steam" as Rush says by by pseudo-sodomizing some of the same people we are liberating. We "stopped" WMD proliferation in Iraq while we overlook our ally Pakistan selling outlawed Nuclear Weapons Technology. We removed a horrible dictator who didn't value civil rights, so overlook our other allies who are just as guilty of denying its citizens these rights.

And Powell was right when he told Bush if we start this war, we will have to own Iraq. And we do. The administration glosses over it everyday, but the line between fighting Saddam's Army and fighting in the Iraqi Civil War was crossed a *long* time ago. And take a look at the deaths per month: the Iraqi Civil War is killing us faster than Saddam ever could or did.

That is what we have in Iraq now. Civil War. Think about that. Civil War. Yet there are no UN peace keepers helping to secure and police the country. No UN assistance in drafting a constitution, or in organization a vote. No Red Cross personal visiting prisons like Abu Ghraib until the Army so nicely invited them yesterday. Iraq is engaged in a Civil War, and because of Bush's arrogance, we are largely fighting it alone.

So, to get where we are today, its costing us 764 deaths and 192 Billion Dollars. But its not over. We aren't leaving. We can't. Iraq is in anarchy. Yet we insist on transfering sovereignty of a country that is so unstable that it requires 138,000 US, not Nato, not UN, but US troops to stay until 2006 by June 30 for some stupid ass reason or another. Why? This is a country where the major faction leader who is even the closest to a moderate, Sistani, is calling the quasi-defined government we are supposedly handing sovereignty to illegitimate. Yet we stick by this meaningless date of June 30, instead of creating a government that will in some way be effective and will be viewed as legitimate to even a small segment of the Iraqi population.

And to those who say that having an democracy in the Middle East, an "island of stability, "a "foothold" is worth the cost, I ask you to remember. Remember the last "island of stability" the US tried to create in the Middle East. And by "tried" I mean preemptively overthrew a government and set up a government that was more alike to our thinking. It was Iran. It was the Shah. And People saw it was a puppet government, and the Ayatollah Khomeini was what we got. "The Great Satan" is what we got. Radical Islam as mainstream policy is what we got.

Yes we rebuilt Europe at the end of WWII. We also had the support of our biggest trading partners, a strong economy, and no brain drain or job flight. We have none of that now, and oh by the way, the war to liberate the country is still raging, and is bloodier than ever before.

Ultimately, its the Iraqis who will suffer from our vanity, our belief that the US, and not the UN, and through them the whole world should rebuild Iraq. Sure we can do it, but it will be half done, like some 50 year old Hollywood star that looks beautiful in glance, but whose insides rot.

What will the return on our investment of blood and bucks be in Iraq, and will our current policies create the best return? I have no answers, but the are Things to Ponder

Things To Ponder : Return on Investment in Iraq

] Then Rush Limbaugh put it all in perspective, after a
] caller remarked that the "stack [of] naked men" was "like
] a college fraternity prank."
]
] RUSH: Exactly. Exactly my point! This is no
] different than what happens at the skull and bones
] initiation and we're going to ruin people's lives over it
] and we're going to hamper our military effort, and then
] we are going to really hammer them because they had a
] good time. You know, these people are being fired at
] every day. I'm talking about people having a good time,
] these people, you ever heard of emotional release? You of
] heard of need to blow some steam off?

[ Jesus. There's so much wrong with this I don't even know where to start. Fucking asshole Limbaugh. If you need to demean someone in this fashion in order to "have a good time" or get some "emotional release", then you're a monster, and deserve no less than the harshest punishment under military law. A dishonorable discharge shouldn't even be a question... the number of years spent in a dark, cold, uncomfortable cell should be the only topic of discussion as pertains to these individuals. It's like slamming puppies against a wall for fun, only worse, because it's not to cute and cuddly, but dumb, animals, but to real people, with intellect and, well, once they probably had some dignity.

You want to talk about hampering our military effort... you have no concept of how much damage these acts have done to america. None. We've engendered more hatred and anger with a few photos than I ever thought possible. This war is lost. Period. The message is gone. The good intent, whatever there was, is gone. The enemy is stronger than ever, and we're to blame. More Americans will die as a result.

But then, I suppose someone like Rush would argue that it wouldn't be a problem if the military would have suppressed these photos. Torture and humiliation is bad PR, but it's a necessary OUTLET for our uniformed men and women... we just need to keep quiet about it, for the safety of the US fucking Fatherland. Fuck you Rush, for insulting the thousands of HUMAN BEINGS that make up our armed forces. No one can call themselves a patriot who believes that actions such as these are anything less than reprehensible. End of story. -k]

Wonkette

Acidus wrote:
] ] (CNN) -- Sinclair Broadcast Group has ordered its seven
] ] ABC stations not to broadcast Friday's "Nightline" that
] ] will air the names and photographs of the more than 500
] ] U.S. troops killed in the Iraq war.
] ]
] ] In a statement online, the Sinclair group said the
] ] "Nightline" program "appears to be motivated by a
] ] political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the
] ] United States in Iraq."
]
] And of course the order to pull the program isn't political
] either.
]
] We have talk about this on Memestreams alot, and this is yet
] another example: Who do you trust for news, when the news is
] filtered by large companies. This is complete and utter
] bullshit

[ It sure is. How about this... even (especially!?) if the show is motivated by a political agenda, it should be shown, because that's how people become involved in the political process. For fucks sake, the State of the Union is seldom more than a couple hours of presidential auto-eroticism and we don't censor that... fuck man, this year the president's dick sucking wasn't even that good, talking about steroids and mars and god only knows what the fuck was going thru his brain.

I'd argue, of course, that this program isn't a political stunt at all, but an ideological one... too many people have unbelievable trouble separating those two things. Yes, my ideals and moral beliefs inform my political choices, but that doesn't mean they're inextricable or even 1-to-1 (see, for example, John Kerry, who I support politically, but am not ideologically matched with). Obviously ABC likes the idea, at least in part, because it'll be so controversial, and in that sense, I'm somewhat put off by profiting from dead soldiers. However, I think the positive implications outweigh that. Regardless, it's not the company's job to censor political speech, ever. If they had tried to hide behind a "this isn't news, so we're not showing it as news" that'd be bullshit, but somewhat more defensible... I'm not sure if I'm happier that they're outright telling people that they're censoring speech that they believe is political in nature. I guess the MS community is probably mostly on the same page, but this should flatly outrage people of every political leaning, because this sort of censorship is the ideological enemy of free society.

Some particularly relevant bits from the article :

* "We find it to be contrary to public interest," [Sinclair general counsel Barry Faber] said.

ABC said that on the first anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks it aired the names and pictures of all those who died on that day.

"ABC News will continue to report on all facets of the war in Iraq and the war on terrorism in a manner consistent with the standards which ABC News has set for decades," it said.

* Sinclair's sta... [ Read More (0.4k in body) ]

RE: CNN.com - 7 ABC affiliates ordered not to air 'Nightline' - Apr 29, 2004

] At issue was a passage in Woodward's "Plan of Attack," an
] account published this week of Bush's decision making
] about the war, quoting Rumsfeld as telling Prince Bandar
] bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador to Washington, in
] January 2003 that he could "take that to the bank" that
] the invasion would happen.

] Pentagon officials omitted the discussion of the meeting
] from a transcript of the Woodward interview that they
] posted on the Defense Department's Web site Monday.
] Rumsfeld told reporters at a briefing yesterday that he
] may have used the phrase "take that to the bank" but that
] no final decision had been made to go to war.

This is continues a scary trend the Bush Administration has done since it came into the Whitehouse: Trying to Change history. They have already modified their robots.txt to prevent indexing of Iraq related information on whitehouse.gov, and now they are released transcripts that aren't complete?

Sure we have the Washington Post to nail their ass, but will we always? As Clear Channel grows in power, ask yourself this: What would a politian be willing to do for a company that could literally change recorded history with its hold over all forms of media?

Pentagon Deleted Rumsfeld Comment (washingtonpost.com)

] She cites another example. In September 2002, The Onion
] ran a piece called, "Al-Qaida Allegedly Engaging in
] Telemarketing." The piece told of the terrorist
] organization's nefarious plan to raise funds through
] various phone scams. It also showed screenshots of a
] videotape the CIA had uncovered in which al-Qaida's
] second in command, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, is seen with a
] headset, presumably tricking an unsuspecting victim.
]
] Thus, upon seeing the story, the Branch County sheriff's
] department in Coldwater, Michigan, which had been
] investigating telemarketing scams targeting the elderly,
] issued an urgent press release.
]
] "In the course of this investigation, it was learned that
] this is going on throughout the United States, and some
] of these telemarketing programs are believed to be
] operated by al-Qaida," the release stated. "The CIA has
] announced that they acquired a videotape showing al-Qaida
] members making phone solicitations for vacation home
] rentals, long-distance telephone service, magazine
] subscriptions and other products."

Wired News: Onion Taken Seriously, Film at 11

] Bush photomosaic of Americans who have died in Iraq since
] the war president entered office. Link

via boingboing

Bush photomosaic of American dead in Iraq

] Royal Device has on its own developped and built the
] biggest subwoofer of the world for an AUDIO/VIDEO room
] that can be also considered as the biggest AUDIO ROOM for
] private music listening of the world. The audio
] reproduction is focused on the speakers output capability
] more than electric power output of the amplifiers with no
] need of KWatts power supply lines, releasing more than
] 110 dB/1W/1 meter sensitivity starting from below 10 Hz
] focused on the listening position.

[ Wow. Now, that's a serious listening space. -k]

Ryan: that may be the sickest listening room I have ever seen. Completely out of control.

Giant Subwoofer, not suitable for 'blingin''

] When the 40,000 subscribers to Reason, the monthly
] libertarian magazine, receive a copy of the June issue,
] they will see on the cover a satellite photo of a
] neighborhood - their own neighborhood. And their house
] will be graphically circled.

[ Interesting marketing. Sure to get the debates running strong. -k]

Putting 40,000 Readers, One by One, on a Cover

] Guitar virtuoso performs Super Mario Brothers theme
]
] This is an absolutely stellar video of Japanes guitar
] virtuoso KeiicHi performing a rendition of the theme from
] Super Mario Brothers, hendrixing power-up and coin-grab
] sound effects by wringing his axe's neck with long and
] clever fingers. Tasty. 3.7MB WMV Link (via Boing BOing)

Guitar virtuoso performs Super Mario Brothers theme