Intelligent War Debater's Journal|
[Most Recent Entries]
Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in
Intelligent War Debater's LiveJournal:
[ << Previous 20 ]
[ << Previous 20 ]
|Tuesday, August 22nd, 2006|
Young, Hip, and Muslim?
I'm a young American Muslim who is sick and tired of only hearing about Islam in headlines. So I've started a new line of clothing and gifts that is geared towards young, modern Muslims who are ready to make their own headlines. Some political, some funny, some religious, and lots of ARABIC! So check it out, please spread the word if you dig it, and check in periodically for new designs.
And if you like it, WEAR IT WITH PRIDE!American Muslim
|Saturday, November 19th, 2005|
What in the Fuck is Intelligent War(t) Debate?
Debate by intelligent folks about war, I assume. I have trouble believing that exists though. I support the war because I have to. It is ongoing and my taxes pay for it. But, it is stupid as fuck, the only people who have any good reason to fight it are the iraqui resistence because it is a person's country, not a king's or an elected king's.
So, as it is stupid, emotionally, and on the more passionate side of my intellect, if there be a difference, I cannot support it. War may be inevitable, so imuch so that I cannot call for punishment to war crimes, the whole thing being a crime of which we are all guilty and so all exempted, but it is unecessary to shed blood to fight it.
We are empty-headed blackhearted masochists, the lot of us, so for what in the fuck are we fighting, I ask you, what?
|Wednesday, October 13th, 2004|
My Letter to the Publisher
Hank Waters, Editor and Publisher of The Columbia Daily Tribune, has not endorsed a candidate for President yet. I wrote a letter to him. The letter won't be published. 30 days before an election the Daily Tribune switches to paid election letters only, and I didn't send in $25. But this is my attempt to persuade him, personally, to endorse John Kerry for President.
October 13, 2004
Mr. Henry J. Waters III
The Columbia Daily Tribune
I know it is too late to publish this as a letter to the editor. I hope it is not too late for this letter to persuade the editor. This letter is personally to the editor and publisher, Mr. Henry J. Waters III.
Dear Mr. Waters,
I am 44 years old. When I was growing up, the great villain was Russia. The Soviets were an evil empire. They imprisoned their citizens without trial and without justice. Their armies invaded foreign nations on flimsy pretexts and installed puppet governments. Their client nations, like North Vietnam, tortured our soldiers. Pravda meant “truth” but it was full of government propaganda and lies. The Soviets were a rogue nation. International law meant nothing to them.
Somehow the United States has become the new Russia. Even though the weapons inspectors found no weapons, Mr. Bush ordered an invasion. Many many Americans still believe that Iraq and Sadaam were involved in the 9/11 attacks, and it wasn’t true, but the President’s team led them on. Our soldiers have tortured, our soldiers have murdered. The Bush government got the legal opinions to justify torture and to set aside the Geneva Conventions.
On foreign soil there is an American Gulag. We have locked up thousands of men on the merest suspicion. At home, the Justice Department has led a continuing fight against fairness and accountability. There are secret laws, secret trials, secret prisoners. We are losing the principles of justice that make America special.
The President has bungled the occupation. He guessed wrong, over and over again. He fired the advisors who were right, and he listened to the yes-men who were wrong. Our soldiers are dying. We’re bankrupting the nation. We’ve pulled the home guard away from home, away from their families, away from their jobs.
The tax cuts to the richest were supposed to lead to more jobs, but the job numbers are low and the jobs have lower pay and lesser benefits. The administration crippled the air pollution laws that would protect my 7 year old son.
Sadaam is an evil man, and it is good that he is out of power, but the end does not justify the means or the cost. Will we be safer, in the long run? Not as long as the United States kills the innocent alongside the guilty, in front of the eyes of the world.
Mr. Waters, we must not rehire this President. I thank God that we have been given a strong and worthy candidate to oppose him. Senator Kerry is a man of sense. He is practical and pragmatic. Our forces are in Iraq, where the President put them, and we need Mr. Kerry to go to bat to support them. They need winnable goals, clear plans, and a chance to make it home alive.
Senator Kerry is not a perfect man or a perfect candidate, but I choose him over President Bush for his health care proposals, and I hope you will too. I choose Senator Kerry over the President for his economic stand and honesty, and I hope you will too, Mr. Waters. I choose Senator Kerry over the President for his military proposals, and I hope you will too. I choose Senator Kerry over the President for his foreign policy vision, and I hope you will too.
I urge you to endorse Senator John Kerry for President of the United States.
|Monday, October 11th, 2004|
Can you help us googlebomb a pro-Kerry site about Kerry's views on the Iraq war?
We're working on raising the google ranking of http://www.kerryoniraqwar.com
, a site designed to set the record straight about Kerry's consistent position on Iraq. If you can take a minute to paste our banner and key words on a webpage or in LJ User info, we'd really appreciate it (google ranks a site based on how many sites link to it and include their key search terms). We've already heard from undecided voters who say that now that they've seen the site and know the truth about what Kerry has been saying about Iraq, they'll vote for him.
We've also heard from Dems and volunteers who are grateful to have it as a resource. IWe want to make it easier to find.
The truth about John Kerry's consistent position on the Iraq war. John Kerry hasn't been flip-flopping. George Bush just hasn't been listening. ( Read more...Collapse )
|Friday, August 6th, 2004|
MoveOnPlease.org: Democracy Inaction
presents Bushwhacked in 30 Seconds.
Bushwhacked in 30 Seconds is an ad contest that's intended to bring new talent and new messages into the world of mainstream political advertising in a way that hasn't been seen since Willie Horton went out the swinging prison gate.
On the website, you can view the winning ad, "Bush is Hitler And Worse." Some of the other finalists include:
"If Bush Wasn't President Ray Charles Would Still Be Alive."
"Didja Ever Hear Him Talk? What A Dope."
"I'm Pretty Sure Bush Killed A Baby When He Drove Drunk."
As Abraham Lincoln said, and we're paraphrasing here, "You can fool a lot of people a lot of the time." We're counting on it. MoveOnPlease.org's Bushwhacked in 30 Seconds
|Monday, July 26th, 2004|
Kerry's Campaign Calender
Weeks ago, the Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry invited himself to speak at the graduation ceremony at a small Ohio high school, a reflection of his eagerness to get in front of voters in one of the nation's most hotly contested swing states. A glimpse at his appointment calendar reveals that he's pushing the strategy further...Kerry's Campaign Calender, August 2004.
|Thursday, July 8th, 2004|
|Sunday, June 27th, 2004|
|Tuesday, June 1st, 2004|
|Sunday, December 21st, 2003|
Another news fabrication, like the Jessica Lynch rescue? Here's a summary and page of links to the story of Saddam's capture ... by the Kurds. They stashed him in the hole and led US troops there, and we took the credit for finding him. http://www.correspondences.org/archives/000507.html
Thanks to mactavish
for the link.
|Monday, October 6th, 2003|
|Monday, September 8th, 2003|
Today's letter to the President
I sent this to firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject line: Recant! Repent! Withdraw!
Dear Mr. President,
Your policy to continue exposing US troops to danger is wrong. The invasion of
Iraq was a terrible miscalculation. You have been badly misled by your
advisors. Our occupation of that nation will not stop world terrorism, or even
slow it. Our men and women have died in vain.
Stop. Stop. Stop. Stop.
I do not know if you believe your advisors and are a victim of their lies, or if
you are knowingly lying to the American people about Weapons of Mass
Destruction, a link between 911 and Iraq, the Niger/uranium "deal",
and all the rest.
Our forces have used kidnapping of innocent people as a tool. Our forces have
reintroduced Napalm into war, and then lied about it.
You have turned the United States into a world image of brutality and stupidity.
I am ashamed of what you have done in my name.
|Wednesday, August 13th, 2003|
|Wednesday, June 18th, 2003|
|Monday, June 16th, 2003|
Why is the President comparing skeptics of Hussein's WMD program to Neo-Nazis?
And if you folks think that assessment is a little harsh, consider this: the reason I've put the Reuters (via Yahoo!) article behind the lj-cut is because it contains a phrase that IMHO is a bit beyond the pale. I mean, look through the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League websites and see whom else that phrase is connected to. And what groups.
Being a proponent of Free Speech i'll defend his right to say it, but Bush or his speechwriters should know that the use of such a phrase demeans the truth
of a 20th century atrocity that killed more people that the all the combined
actions of Hussein had, would, or could
have killed. To be fair to the President here --more fairness here than he deserves, IMHO-- we liberals have been using equally inflammatory phrases like "Nazi" and "Fascist" when it comes to this Administration. Aside from the fact that it's inaccurate --this Administration is more Totalitarian than Authoritarian-- this is wrong and I hope it will stop.
Yet I'm reminded of an incident that journalist John Lukacs reported in his history of Watergate. Just as the crisis was unfolding, one of the conspirators, H.R. "Bob" Haldeman, spotted the Democratic operative and political prankster Richard Tuck. Enraged in that whiny, victimized way Republicans tend to be --where they justify their misdeeds by saying that the Democrats do it too (and imply that it's morally right for them to do it as well)-- he walked over to Mr Tuck. Whom, it must be said, had played some mean but clever and (believe it or not) perfectly legal pranks on his boss when he was running for Governor of California in 1962.
"You S.O.B.!" Haldeman railed, "You started this!"
"Yeah, Bob," retorted Tuck, "But you
ran it into the ground."
(Sighs in frustration) This is yet another example of how the Conservative Movement that runs the GOP is rapidly running out of interesting ideas about where to take America and is falling back on that party's tradition of running things into the ground. ( Read more...Collapse )
|Saturday, June 14th, 2003|
we all know that as yet they've found no WMD's in iraq. however, what about the torture rooms/chambers there apparently were, and other evidence of the ways saddam tortured his own people? or is our main concern our security in proving we had reason to believe iraq was indeed a threat to the u.s. & israel etc?
they've not found much of anything
to my knowledge, but you would think that they would at least find & report any evidence against saddam they had or found; anything that makes the war seem credible
|Saturday, April 26th, 2003|
...this is big......
"Papers found Saturday by journalists working for the Sunday Telegraph reveal that an al Qaeda envoy met with officials in Baghdad in March 1998, the newspaper reported. Journalists found a three-page file on bin Laden inside a folder lying in the rubble of one of the rooms of the intelligence headquarters, the paper said."
"Separately, The Sunday Times reported that its own journalists had found documents in the Iraqi foreign ministry that indicate that France gave Saddam Hussein's regime regular reports on its dealings with American officials. The newspaper said the documents reveal that Paris shared with Baghdad the contents of private transatlantic meetings and diplomatic traffic from Washington."http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/26/sprj.irq.britain.iraq.ap/index.html
Thought you folks might be interested in this...
The following is from maverick urban planner James Howard Kunstler's web-journal.
I personally don't have much quibble with his assessment of the latest flare-up of the Iraq war, except to add "And some of 'em are even ours
..." to the end of the last sentence.
What do you folks think of this?
April 25, 2003
It's unfortunate that Defense Secretary Rumsfeld is now pretending the US will not establish military bases in Iraq once (or if) a coherent civil administration can be installed there. Establishing bases there has been very obviously Part B of the agenda (Part A being the removal of that vicious prick Saddam Hussein). The Iraq operation has been very much about putting a western police station in a geographically pivotal part of the Middle East. The reason for the police station is transparent: to monitor the activities of Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Libya, and Pakistan, and intimidate freelance organizations within those states who are intent on carrying out a Jihad against the West (and the US in particular).
Well, I said "unfortunate," but what's the alternative? To declare our intentions?( Read more...Collapse ) Current Mood: curious
|Monday, April 14th, 2003|
Conservatives, convince me, please!
disclaimer: I'm posting this for a friend of mine who wants feedback. Please comment!
Give me a good reason to support the Bush Administration's war with Iraq.
At first, it was National Security. Can't argue with that. Hey, I don't like missiles flying overhead any more than the next guy. So we sent in inspectors. They didn't find any weapons of mass destruction. So, we decided war was the answer. Some countries in the UN opposed us because we had nothing concrete to base our accusations on, so we pulled a "we're bigger than you, and we do what we want" on their asses. Seems funny to me that the leaders of the free world, the most advanced country as for as democracy goes, would be willing to operate on a "guilty-until-proven-innocent" basis.
Then, to avoid any stickiness that could come with finding out that there actually were no weapons of mass destruction, "Dubya" changed the reason why we were going in 2 days before we launched missiles. Iraqi liberation!! How noble!! We care that much about the Iraqi people that we don't want them getting pushed around anymore. Doesn't matter that our economy is sagging... Doesn't matter that we have bigger issues at home to deal with. We've got to save the Iraqis from a tyrannical leader!! (We don't mind the tyrannical leader in Pakistan because he's been cooperative with us so far... I'm talking about the Lieutenant General of their Inter Services Intelligence, Mahmood Ahmed, the real guy in charge)
So anyway, USA Today says that 60% of Americans whole-heartedly support everything about the war, and 5-out-of-6 of them think that Iraq was the country behind September 11th. Smart crowd.
Operation Iraqi Liberation (OIL) is coming to a close, and Syria is on deck. North Korea, a country with real weapons of mass destruction, has not really been addressed, and my bet is that most Americans know next to nothing about that country. The "Dubya" administration has successfully fooled the majority of Americans into thinking that the war was a necessary step towards our safety, and soon our economy will be booming thanks to the rebuilding our massive corporations get to do over in the broken Iraqi cities. Are we humanitarians or what! Oh yeah, and the company that gets to do all the oil cleanup and restructuring is Halliburton (Vice President Dick Cheney is the former CEO of this group... nudge nudge). Sweet deal for them, if you ask me.
Sorry, it just bothers me that the stupidest President in our history could pull the wool over everyones eyes so damned easily. I can see him giving the rest of us that patented *wink* of his as we speak.
Summary: I think Dubya took us to war to fix our economy (the easy way).
He's also gonna lower our gas prices. He couldn't say that this was our reason for going to war; that would not be acceptable in the eyes of anyone. So we went for security, then because we want to liberate people, and now we get to reap the benefits. Sleazy.
ps: Number of weapons of mass destruction found and/or used against us during the war: 0
pps: I support our troops 100%. May they all return home safely. I disagree with the Bush administration's idealogy 100%. That's all.
ppps: I am not "unpatriotic," as so many "hook-line-&-sinker" conservatives like to call those of us that do not support the war. I am very patriotic. This is the best country in the world, in my opinion, and I thank the men and women who fought for my rights with all of my heart. It was their courage that has allowed me to have this very opportunity to air out my feelings.
|Sunday, April 13th, 2003|
More War Shite....
I think the earlier policy of the previous Bush was to uphold the UN treaties that he was in a war about. Now, we don't care about the UN (some say for better, some for worse) because some European countries don't agree with us.
Our policy now is preemptive war. For better or for worse? Are we really allowed to occupy another country that has not attacked us and set up our own government? I mean, according to the treaties we signed after World War Two. We are the biggest and strongest superpower right now, and no country is going to attack nation with as many WMDs as we have.
Maybe our current policies are better, maybe not. Time will tell. At least we've abandoned to some degree the Cold War policy of supporting an out-group more friendly to the U.S. with weapons, supplies, and such (which ends up with Osama bin Laden getting a free ride and Lumumba being assassinated by the CIA). The political disillusionment and international balkanization due to our headstrong arrogance in getting into this war made me angry, and our obvious need for oil (we're at horrific prices, right?) calls for some rightful cynicism--I don't think oil companies will necessarily take over the oil wells, but someone has to ship it, and I doubt Iraq has any ships worth talking about and a larger supply means lowered prices, which means the importing companies can charge more, unless they are regulated, and Bush is a happy deregulator--but Iraq will probably end up up better for this war. I can't say America will. The fact is we really are paying for a war and businesses really will profit off it (unless someone imposes the taxes on them, which is counterproductive to the campaign promise of supporting small businesses). If that's fine with you, if you think this is worth it economically and internationally, okay. But I personally don't subscribe to the trickle-down theory too much, and I don't like breaking promises.
One thing can be certain: the American government may turn the country over to domestic control, but our hegemony will last until the next age of history...
Interesting fact...the estimated cost of the war alone (not including controlling and reconstructing, the latter being quite noble) is enough to pay the salary of 200,000 police officers for 10 years.