Support the troops? Do tell, Mr. President, do tell.

Congress votes to place a limit on the time that we occupy the quagmire known as IraqNam. The Senate votes to place a limit on the time that we occupy the quagmire known as IraqNam. Both bills provide $100 BILLION in new money to feed, house, arm, train, replace, treat, armor, protect, and destroy the troops throughout 2007.

In response, the President threatened to veto the bill. According to the today’s White House Website, he said, “Congress’s failure to fund our troops on the front lines will mean that some of our military families could wait longer for their loved ones to return from the front lines. And others could see their loved ones headed back to the war sooner than they need to.”

So, according to Bush, by passing legislation that funds the troops, we are actually causing the occupation to last longer BECAUSE WE PUT A LIMIT ON THE length OF THEIR OCCUPATION OF A FOREIGN COUNTRY?

Wrap your head around that one for a bit. Only within the delusional world inside the Bloatway would anyone even consider making such an illogical, nonsensical argument. But enough about the president. By Congress demanding that the troops must leave Iraq, they end up staying longer?

OK, Let’s step back, even half a step. What are we doing there?

Every day, troops put on clothing, socks, boots, armor, more armor, get briefed, add ammo to their weapons. Every day they hope to find a vehicle that still runs, scrounge around for extra armor for the vehicle, then head out to their assigned hot spot, only to be shot at, attacked by IEDs, or have mortars fall around their vehicle. The good news is, on some occasions, they get to rub shoulders with delusional GOP presidential candidates like John McCain, who believes that his pre-visit swarm, and his small delegation of choppers, mercenaries and 100 heavily armed US troops is just the ticket for a shopping trip. How proud they must feel about shopping/PR trips.

Next day, same bat time, same bat station. Same blat situation. (for our Russian friends)

This is not a war on terra. This is a civil war we helped stoke and arm. According to a BBC report, 30-65% of the weapons we gave to the IraqNami army has been sold, stolen, given, or lent to religious based elements intent on getting back at an another Iraqi sect that offended them earlier. Oh, and the US soldiers in the middle are worth a triple score, plus a bonus.

We are not fighting them over there, to keep them from coming over here. No Iraqi ever intended, expected or planned to attack the US, not until we invaded their country. Hell, they looked at us as their allies. Saddam thought so. The Iraqis have no capacity to attack us. The Atlantic and Pacific ponds are both deep and wide. The only missile or air capacity the Iraqis have is what we given them. Come to think of it, that applied to Saddam, too. We repeatedly supplied him in his war against Iran. At the same time that we armed the Iranians (Iran-Contra)

A true war on terra would involve creating an intelligent approach aimed at finding the cause/effect of our current situation. It would involve an active debate and historical research into the events that caused a small group of Saudi ultra-religious zealots (think of Dobson, Falwell, or Roberts with a Koran) to get tired enough of our corporate, pro-Israel, policies that kept those countries downtrodden. A true war on terra would not protect oil, chemical or food processing companies from having to increase their own security, not to mention testing, protection and pro-active efforts to prevent adulteration, attacks and other possible attacks. A true war on terra would pose a threat to every interest that Bush and Cheney have tried so hard to protect.

Ergo, we are left with a faux war. Faux reporting. Faux enemies. Faux threats. (not to mention Faux news) It involves the president claiming that demanding that we leave forces us to stay longer.

In a nutshell, the president will say anything to prevent a lost of his war powers. He will accuse those of trying to save lives, of causing their deaths. He will point fingers at those thoughtful, concerned folks who really care of being in bed with the enemy.

His wild accusations worked for four years, almost six. But we caught on. Mr President, fuel me once, shame on you. fuel me twice . . . .

6 Responses to "Support the troops? Do tell, Mr. President, do tell."

  1. SEAL  April 9, 2007 at 1:34 am

    What follows is a list of the mistakes Bushco made that created the damn mess from the Iraqi insiders. It is exactly what myself and every other military person/expert both in and out of Iraq that I respect and have talked to has said. BTW, I would never claim to be an expert but I damn sure know how to fight a war and occupy a country.

    • The Americans disbanded Iraq’s army, which could have helped quell a rising insurgency in 2003. Instead, hundreds of thousands of demobilized, angry men became a recruiting pool for the resistance.

    • Purging tens of thousands of members of toppled President Saddam Hussein’s Baath party — from government, school faculties and elsewhere — left Iraq short on experienced hands at a crucial time.

    • An order consolidating decentralized bank accounts at the Finance Ministry bogged down operations of Iraq’s many state-owned enterprises.

    • The CPA’s focus on private enterprise allowed the “commercial gangs” of Saddam’s day to monopolize business.

    • Its free-trade policy allowed looted Iraqi capital equipment to be spirited away across borders.

    • The CPA perpetuated Saddam’s fuel subsidies, selling gasoline at giveaway prices and draining the budget.

    By removing all the personnel that ran the infastructure of Iraq (that includes the policing agencies) they created chaos. Saddam had an excellent system set up to prevent theft of government money and property.

    By failing to secure the armorys all over the country, they armed the population.

    What most people don’t know is the powerful rebel cleric Sadar has now declared war on America. He has ordered his militia and asked everyone else in Iraq to stop killing each other and kill americans. So, now, Bush will not be lying when he calls this a “war.”

    This what happens when you have a wartime deserter for a commaner in chief. The official military term is a complete CLUSTER F**K.

  2. Herbert Davis  April 10, 2007 at 10:07 am

    It would help if more people pointed out that the war is about profit, not winning, not democracy and certainly not about defeating terrorism!

  3. Chris  April 10, 2007 at 11:40 am

    It is refreshing to be reminded of the motive for this war. At this point, Bush does not care if the war is won or not.
    The concern for him and his now is simply ‘how much can we get away with before the next election?

    When you think of the huge amounts of money involved at every level of this ‘war’ just the money voted through by the houses , never mind the extra tax and other payments and all the dishonesty on top of that, even without that, the rich are making billions from it.

    This war is about cash. Cash and oil. Oil and cash. Power and cash. Cash.

  4. upChukker  April 10, 2007 at 11:18 am

    “What most people don’t know is the powerful rebel cleric Sadar has now declared war on America. He has ordered his militia and asked everyone else in Iraq to stop killing each other and kill americans. So, now, Bush will not be lying when he calls this a “war.””

    I found it interesting that Sadar has “discovered” who the enemy really is.. American occupiers. And besides it accomplishes one of “the deciders” goals…getting Iraq (both Shiites and Sunnis) off there butts and standing for “their” country.

    “This what happens when you have a wartime deserter for a commaner in chief. The official military term is a complete CLUSTER F**K.”

    Aahh…us civilians called it a circle jerk and involves all the dipshits in this administration!

  5. Hal Brown  April 10, 2007 at 5:47 pm

    Whether or not the warring factions whose hatred for each other goes back centuries can temporarily stop keep killing each other and unite in a common cause is open for debate.

    But consider the following as a result that could, if it happens, as historic an example of the Law of Unintended Consequenses as what has already happened as a result of Bush phoneying up a case for war.

    The Shia and Sunni factions join togther and defeat the United States, i.e., inflict so many casualties that even the most loyal Bushies say “enough is enough”. The president realizes that Congress will override any veto, so he pulls out.

    The truce plan was to go back to settle old scores with each other once the American are gone, but in the process of fighting together they discover that their hatred for each other has disappeared and they are all better off if they just agree to disagree peacefully on their differences.

  6. John Hanks  April 10, 2007 at 11:24 am

    Even my tax money doesn’t go to support the troops, who are basically victims of a huge traffic accident.
    It is hard to be patriotic in a nation full of the dumbest of the dumb.

Comments are closed.