Tuesday, November 01, 2005

New York Times Messup

Doug Tennapel got an email from a guy out near San Fran.
First Batallion Fifth Regiment Cpl. Jeffrey B. Starr would not be dead, nor the other 2009 and we would not have this ongoing debacle had Bush & Co not lied and decided long before 9/11 to invade Iraq.T

( It is one thing to not like war, but it seems like war is sometimes "the answer". I am not going to flesh this out right now unless someone wishes to discuss. Derrick)

If only Bush didn't fight the war on terror, Cpl. Jeffrey Starr would indeed be alive, but if Cindy Sheehan didn't have Casey, he wouldn't have been killed in Iraq! This is fun AND stupid! Let's keep playing:
If we didn't decide to end slavery, we wouldn't have lost 620,000 of "our boys" in the Civil War.If we didn't go and do something stupid as defeat Hitler (He didn't bomb us after all, the Japanese did...when Truman lies, people die) we wouldn't have lost 405,000.

The point of my blog is that 2,009 died in Iraq as heroes and the New York Times had an agenda to obscure their heroism. Even IF this war was unjust and the soldiers went for a lie, their heroism is present.

2 comments:

Kwame said...

Du, you should start listening to Dave Emory's radio broadcasts. Emory's not a sophomoric idiot like a number of “progressives” and “conspiracy theorists” but a mature and even-handed kind of political researcher. With respect to the 2003 invasion of Iraq the man probably is right to suspect or suppose that the engineer intends to wreck the train, the engineer being perhaps not Bush the Younger but rather the sum of members of the Bush milleu. Things begin to make more sense (Pres. Bush’s rationale for invading Iraq was weak even in 2002) when you consider Emory’s theory and also the vast amount of information on which it is built, if you can manage to wrap your brain around it all and the question of what degree of feasibility it all has.

(In a nutshell, the patience and intrigue that we see, for example, in the chronologically first three Star Wars flicks is a very real thing and the use of a diversity of means and proxy instruments is quite necessary to carry out the more ambitious designs that a man have have for the world around him; moreover, ideology is a strong force in the world in which we live as evidenced, for example, in racial and gender politics. On one level, the Second World War probably did NOT end in 1945 any more than the Second Gulf War ended in April 2003. On another level, there are those, as an example, who do not believe in the existence of political freedoms of the masses, and names of such groups of unbelievers can be given.)

In any case, if you were to posit that people use the word “lie” too easily nowadays, I would probably agree. That is one thing that bugs me about today’s anti-war protesters, their mentality being one that I understand even though I do not agree with them.

Cheers.

Derrick Bright said...

I haven't seen all three of the chronological Star Wars, but I can probably agree with your last paragraph. I do not like what happens during war, but to say people "lied" I think I agree that it is used too easily.

I also want the troops home, but to try and get them back by protesting seems kind of ridiculus(sp). I highly doubt Bush is gonna look out his front window, see the people protesting, and say to himself, "you know, they're right, everybody out of Iraq!!"

We are there, like it or don't, and I think it best to support the troops in finishing what has been started. Pulling out now could be worse, it would seem, than waiting till stability and control is fully in the hands of the Iraqi people.

I am thankful we have young people willing to fight for the country, and serve in the military. I am thankful that we have a reletively low American body count. Things could be a lot worse.