Sound Destruction: WHO SAID THIS IN 1991?

Tuesday, December 06, 2005


"I think that the proposition of going to Baghdad is also fallacious. I think if we were going to remove Saddam Hussein we would have had to go all the way to Baghdad, we would have to commit a lot of force because I do not believe he would wait in the Presidential Palace for us to arrive. I think we'd have had to hunt him down. And once we'd done that and we'd gotten rid of Saddam Hussein and his government, then we'd have had to put another government in its place.

What kind of government? Should it be a Sunni government or Shi'i government or a Kurdish government or Ba'athist regime? Or maybe we want to bring in some of the Islamic fundamentalists? How long would we have had to stay in Baghdad to keep that government in place? What would happen to the government once U.S. forces withdrew? How many casualties should the United States accept in that effort to try to create clarity and stability in a situation that is inherently unstable?

I think it is vitally important for a President to know when to use military force. I think it is also very important for him to know when not to commit U.S. military force. And it's my view that the President got it right both times, that it would have been a mistake for us to get bogged down in the quagmire inside Iraq."

did you figure out who it is? click here to find out.

I guess they knew what they were getting into. he seems to have had it figured out in 1991.

I wonder what would have changed his mind?

money? power? love?

yeah maybe he did it for love...

maybe it was a combination of his love for power and helping to make his friends lot of money.

heuy lewis and the news must of had it's not "the power of love" it's "the love of power"...but I guess that's not as snappy a tune.

Image Hosted by

this week howard dean referenced the vietnam war and stated this:

"I do not believe in making the same mistake twice, and America appears to have made the same mistake twice,(I wish bush would) have paid more attention to the history of Iraq before we had gotten in there."

at least someone has some balls to admit we may be in over our head.

bush's response?

"I know we're going to win. Our troops need to hear not only are they supported, but that we have got a strategy that will win."

that whole comment is a bunch of shit...HE is the one who has not defined what winning is (ie. no clear exit strategy, no timeline) but yet he wants us to believe that if we have any other opinion other than "stay in till bush says we're done" then you are a nut who doesn't support our troops. then again...howard dean can be nutty sometimes.

I was eating lunch a few days back and heard a man talking (ok...I admit I was eavesdropping) about when he was in vietnam. he stated..."you know what the soldiers in iraq would say if we told them they were coming home tomorrow...they wouldn't say "...but sir my job isn't done yet" because they believe their job IS done. they went into iraq, took baghdad, found saddam and have done their best to secure the country. so they wouldnt say..."I would love to hang around..." they would say "we are going home? great! where is my bag...I need to pack!"

do we really believe that our troops do not want to come home?

the problem is that they have to do what the commander and chief says to do...

on the other hand it is our job as citizens to let our president know that he should be doing what is in our best interests as a county. he is hired to represent us! president I ask you...why don't you come join the majority of us who believe that:

1. this war was a mistake
2. you mislead us to war
3. we want the war over and our troops home
4. we don't trust you.

1.CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll, November 11-13, 2005 "In view of the developments since we first sent our troops to Iraq, do you think the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, or not?" 54% Made a mistake 45% Did not make a mistake
2.NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, November 4-7, 2005 "Do you think President Bush gave the country the most accurate information he had before going to war with Iraq, or do you think President Bush deliberately misled people to make the case for war with Iraq?"
57% Misled 35% Most accurate

3.NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, November 4-7, 2005 "Do you think that the United States should maintain its current troop level in Iraq to help secure peace and stability, or should the United States reduce its number of troops now that Iraq has adopted a constitution?"
57% Reduce number 36% Maintain level

4.ABC News/Washington Post Poll, October 30 - November 2, 2005 "Please tell me whether the following statement applies to Bush or not: He is honest and trustworthy
Yes: 40% No: 58%"

*sorry if this post rambles on and on...It's late and I needed to rant.


Blogger Doug said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

10:46 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

10:46 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

I guessed Rumsfeld. Same diff. That might be the best lefty rant I've read in a while. Your fourth point "we don't trust you" is a really important one. When I hear the administration talk about needing the freedom to (torture) pursue every opportunity in the war and terror, I don't think about security versus morality. I think "what's the point? You're just gonna f**k it up, anyway. Forget the war on terror. F**k up something small and less expensive"

10:47 AM  
Blogger Maine said...

*slow clapping*

I always use the American parallel. If China invaded us to save us from the apparent tyranny of our leader, then opted to stick around and try and convert our government to Communism... how many guy down in South Carolina would have to tie bombs to themselves and walk into government buildings before they realized that you can't change a people's long standing ideology by force, whether it's "good for them" or not?

And you can hold me to this... There is no way in heaven, hell or earth that Iraq can be converted to a stable democracy in the next 20 years. You've got very, very passionate people there who will defend their ideology until they are all gone and dead. And the more of them that die, even more are born out of support for their kin.

We cannot, cannot, cannot, cannot meet that proposed goal.

11:10 AM  
Blogger strider said...

thanks doug...that really means a lot to me.

maine...i tottaly agree with you...from the begining this has been a mess and to clean it up will take a while...

and cleaning it up doesnt even include establishing a democracy...thats kind of like a bonus on top of cleaning up the mess.

lets just hope we can figure a way out soon before it gets worse (which it will)

8:25 PM  
Blogger strider said...

by the way doug...i agree...thank goodness he didnt get a hold of social security and fuck that up.

we should just let him persue things like going to may cost a lot in the long run but if thats what he is focused on then maybe he wont f up other shit. f'ing up the other stuff may cost us more in the long run anyway.

8:28 PM  
Blogger Laura said...

Sorry Strider but my comment has nothing to do with your post. Sar I think you'll get a kick out of my Dec. 7th post. Have a good one!

8:58 PM  
Blogger Tan Lucy Pez said...

Wow! I love this post. GOOD for you.

I love a good rant that agrees with my personal rant inside my head.

9:30 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Yes, Strider! The balance of the second term should be dedicated to colonizing Venus! Astronauts are easier to come by than soldiers and office buildings.

8:38 AM  
Blogger Sar said...

Again, where is my comment from yesterday?! I'm not very happy with Blogger lately!

That was an outstanding rant, Strider. You're long overdue. You make many an excellent point, all of which I agree with.

It makes me batty that this is the same moron who declared Mission Accomplished. No wonder he has no exit strategy. Like someone lost in a revolving door, he doesn't know whether he's coming or going.

11:03 AM  
Blogger Sar said...

Laura - Thanks for the heads up. I did check it out and loved the snark! :)

11:04 AM  
Blogger tlm said...

strider- Social Security was fucked up long before President Bush rolled into town.

doug- I'm all for colonizing Venus. Excellent idea! (I hear it's Mostly Sunny, and 900°F there today.)

1:56 PM  
Blogger tlm said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1:56 PM  
Blogger AP3 said...

Great rant. Scary stuff.

7:07 PM  
Blogger Alice: In Wonderland or Not said...

It is of course a mistake and of course everyone wants the troops home… so far it doesn’t look like there is even half a plan in the works for that. Quite a mess this inept administration has gotten us into…and oh yeah the voters… oh yeah the democratic party for not even knowing how to go out on a limb and run a real campaign.

10:51 PM  
Blogger sevenpointman said...

Howard Roberts

A Seven-point plan for an Exit Strategy in Iraq

1) A timetable for the complete withdrawal of American and British forces must be announced.
I envision the following procedure, but suitable fine-tuning can be applied by all the people involved.

A) A ceasefire should be offered by the Occupying side to representatives of both the Sunni insurgency and the Shiite community. These representatives would be guaranteed safe passage, to any meetings. The individual insurgency groups would designate who would attend.
At this meeting a written document declaring a one-month ceasefire, witnessed by a United Nations authority, will be fashioned and eventually signed. This document will be released in full, to all Iraqi newspapers, the foreign press, and the Internet.
B) US and British command will make public its withdrawal, within sixth-months of 80 % of their troops.

C) Every month, a team of United Nations observers will verify the effectiveness of the ceasefire.
All incidences on both sides will be reported.

D) Combined representative armed forces of both the Occupying nations and the insurgency organizations that agreed to the cease fire will protect the Iraqi people from actions by terrorist cells.

E) Combined representative armed forces from both the Occupying nations and the insurgency organizations will begin creating a new military and police force. Those who served, with out extenuating circumstances, in the previous Iraqi military or police, will be given the first option to serve.

F) After the second month of the ceasefire, and thereafter, in increments of 10-20% ,a total of 80% will be withdrawn, to enclaves in Qatar and Bahrain. The governments of these countries will work out a temporary land-lease housing arrangement for these troops. During the time the troops will be in these countries they will not stand down, and can be re-activated in the theater, if both the chain of the command still in Iraq, the newly formed Iraqi military, the leaders of the insurgency, and two international ombudsman (one from the Arab League, one from the United Nations), as a majority, deem it necessary.

G) One-half of those troops in enclaves will leave three-months after they arrive, for the United States or other locations, not including Iraq.

H) The other half of the troops in enclaves will leave after six-months.

I) The remaining 20 % of the Occupying troops will, during this six month interval, be used as peace-keepers, and will work with all the designated organizations, to aid in reconstruction and nation-building.

J) After four months they will be moved to enclaves in the above mentioned countries.
They will remain, still active, for two month, until their return to the States, Britain and the other involved nations.

2) At the beginning of this period the United States will file a letter with the Secretary General of the Security Council of the United Nations, making null and void all written and proscribed orders by the CPA, under R. Paul Bremer. This will be announced and duly noted.

3) At the beginning of this period all contracts signed by foreign countries will be considered in abeyance until a system of fair bidding, by both Iraqi and foreign countries, will be implemented ,by an interim Productivity and Investment Board, chosen from pertinent sectors of the Iraqi economy.
Local representatives of the 18 provinces of Iraq will put this board together, in local elections.

4) At the beginning of this period, the United Nations will declare that Iraq is a sovereign state again, and will be forming a Union of 18 autonomous regions. Each region will, with the help of international experts, and local bureaucrats, do a census as a first step toward the creation of a municipal government for all 18 provinces. After the census, a voting roll will be completed. Any group that gets a list of 15% of the names on this census will be able to nominate a slate of representatives. When all the parties have chosen their slates, a period of one-month will be allowed for campaigning.
Then in a popular election the group with the most votes will represent that province.
When the voters choose a slate, they will also be asked to choose five individual members of any of the slates.
The individuals who have the five highest vote counts will represent a National government.
This whole process, in every province, will be watched by international observers as well as the local bureaucrats.

During this process of local elections, a central governing board, made up of United Nations, election governing experts, insurgency organizations, US and British peacekeepers, and Arab league representatives, will assume the temporary duties of administering Baghdad, and the central duties of governing.

When the ninety representatives are elected they will assume the legislative duties of Iraq for two years.

Within three months the parties that have at least 15% of the representatives will nominate candidates for President and Prime Minister.

A national wide election for these offices will be held within three months from their nomination.

The President and the Vice President and the Prime Minister will choose their cabinet, after the election.

5) All debts accrued by Iraq will be rescheduled to begin payment, on the principal after one year, and on the interest after two years. If Iraq is able to handle another loan during this period she should be given a grace period of two years, from the taking of the loan, to comply with any structural adjustments.

6) The United States and the United Kingdom shall pay Iraq reparations for its invasion in the total of 120 billion dollars over a period of twenty years for damages to its infrastructure. This money can be defrayed as investment, if the return does not exceed 6.5 %.

7) During the beginning period Saddam Hussein and any other prisoners who are deemed by a Council of Iraqi Judges, elected by the National representative body, as having committed crimes will be put up for trial.
The trial of Saddam Hussein will be before seven judges, chosen from this Council of Judges.
One judge, one jury, again chosen by this Council, will try all other prisoners.
All defendants will have the right to present any evidence they want, and to choose freely their own lawyers.

3:52 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Site Meter