We're going the wrong way...

Republican politicians and their beltway spinners are intent on showing you that they are a strong bunch. If there's a problem in the house, they'll take care of it. Who wouldn't want a strong father figure around to watch out for them?

Most of us would fight to defend our homes and our families. If someone attacked your child, you would defend him, right? Of course you would. There's little question about that.

On 9/11 our house was attacked. A small group of madmen crashed through our welcoming front door and murdered members of our family. They violated us. Americans felt the touch of terror on their shoulders and they didn't like it.

A response had to be made, justice served.

Our home and the entire neighborhood needed to be made safe again. We looked to our president to lead us. Democrats and Republicans, Independents and Greens, Christians and atheists, all showed they would support the president, if only he would truthfully and honestly lead us.

We started out on the right path.

We went into Afghanistan with a mission. We were going to find those behind the attacks and bring them to justice. Brave men went into the hostile territory and sought out the madmen that attacked us, our values and our way of life. Some of these advocates of terror were found and justice was swift. And, although the key figures remained alive and untouched, we were getting closer to them every day. Our soldiers courageously vowed to risk their lives to bring us justice and safety.

Instead of staying true to our goals and remaining committed to making our home and neighborhood safe again, we were led astray by the Bush administration.

While cooler heads moved closer to punishing those responsible for hurting our country, the Bush administration chose to squander lives and resources to get back at anyone they didn't like.

Instead of finding the murderers who attacked us, this administration thought it more important to get the guy who shook his fist at them when they drove by his house.

Their first claim was that he had a stockpile of bad things that he was going to use to attack our house again.

Trusting the word of the president, many Americans believed what he said. Democrats and Republicans stood behind him when he choose to ignore our neighbors' calls for reason. We were lied to and we found that out when we burst into the Iraqi home and found no weapons.

The administration declared the neighborhood a better place, a safer place - but the murderers of 9/11 are still roaming the streets.

While rational voices pointed back to our original path, Republicans and the Bush administration wasted time and resources seeking ways to dole out billions of dollars in corporate welfare checks. And even that wasn't enough. They wasted more resources and time pushing large government handouts to the elite few and millions in small handouts to the rest of us.

And still the murderers of 9/11 stalk us.

What has been accomplished in the last half a decade?

Instead of bringing sure and firm justice, we've chased around the world, diverting troops from their true mission. We've sent brave men and women into a conflict with poor equipment and no plan for their return. Instead of strategy, we've allowed this administration to ignore the need for setting a goal and left our troops to take fire and face death because of weak leadership.

Despite having the strongest military in the world and the most well-trained troops, this administration's lack of planning and disregard for voices other than their own has allowed our sons and daughters in uniform to be killed and maimed by insurgents armed with bombs made from nail polish remover and detonators made from garage door openers.

And still the murderers of 9/11 are roaming the streets.

The Bush regime has set us on a course of spying on each other and distrusting our neighbors. It has become more important to check library records, make lists of who calls who, and find out if Hester Prynne is still dancing in the woods than it is to return to tracking the killers who planned the attacks on our country, our home.

Republicans have doled out billions to cronies and pals and left real Americans to foot the bill. Oil companies are reaping record returns and the rest of us are looking at record gas prices at the pump.

Our ports are still wide open. Our government has been distracted with the need to keep nail clippers off of airplanes and has neglected to find a way to ensure that the billions of tons of cargo entering our country every year is safe.

We've managed to alienate our neighbors and create an environment where many in the world fear the instability caused by the United States more than they fear terrorists. Our unfettered spending of money we don't have has most of the world afraid of what might happen to the world economy and our unilateral uses of military force have many afraid of the terrorist breeding grounds we've created.

Too much time has been wasted with petting bickering over who should get the bigger room and the keys to the Lexus. Most of us don't care, we just want our home to be secure, our family safe, and our future secure. And since the Republican elitists with the reins of the House, Senate and the White House can't be bothered to balance the check book, secure our home and improve the neighborhood, it's time to remove them from office.

The right path is over there... Let's elect people who can see it, stick to it and lead us along it. We can't afford to wander aimless anymore. It's time to show real strength. It's time for real leaders.

< To Cenk: Answer To Why Hit The Pentagon? | I KNOW this is stupid, but I HAD to tell SOMEBODY!! >
 Display:
You have presented a well thought out, cogent post. I tend to couch my comments in sarcasm, but please do not take anything I say as personal attack, I do not mean them as such. I am addressing basic assumptions to your points which I believe make the rest an argument based on false logic, even though some end results remain the same. I am in no way invalidating your post as it is worthy of consideration by anyone who reads it.

I veer off your track early, with:

"We started out on the right path...We went into Afghanistan with a mission."  

I was of the same mindset in 2001, I admit. The invasion of Afghanistan felt like it was the right reaction, and everything I was seeing and hearing supported my thinking.

What I didn't know at the time, which would have influenced my thoughts heavily if I had, was the knowledge that we didn't have to invade Afghanistan. Bush and Co. chose all out attack over a diplomatic solution. Here's some primers on the real story, feel free to do more research on your own:

 How Bush Was Offered Bin Laden and Blew It (November 1, 2004)

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over (October 14, 2001)

New offer on Bin Laden (October 17, 2001) 

So, my feeling is that we started off on the wrong foot. Toppling the Taliban was more important than Bin Laden from the get-go, and that was replaced later by the whole Saddam witch hunt. Now, It's the Iranian President and Hugo Chavez.

Osama Who??

I do agree that there was a mission going into Afghanistan, but I believe it was a far different mission than the one the vast majority of Americans believe, which is the scenario you presented.


Ben and Cenk are good examples of this. They both still claim to support the Afghan invasion. How they reconcile it with their stance on Iraq being a mistake and taking the focus off Bin Laden is a question I ask myself often.

Haven't you caught on yet that Bush doesn't want Bin Laden caught or killed? Are we supposed to swallow that we have no idea whatsoever where he is, but maybe in Pakistan? We found Saddam in 6 months, but five years on Bin Laden eludes us? With a $25 million bounty on his head?

The people who run this country need a boogeyman for the people to focus on so the attention is drawn off themselves. Indeed, we are now supposed to believe that al Zarqawi is some sort of "mastermind," when he is little more than a wanna be. He is a little fish elevated to shark status merely because someone wants him to be. (interesting side story here.)

I will leave it to the reader to decide who they think "the people who run this country" are. That's a side issue.

The wise adage, "follow the money," can be applied here, as well as the umbrella question, "who benefits?"


Has Joe Q. Public? Or his equivalent in Iraq? Afghanistan? Have there been overwhelmingly successful programs which have enriched everyones lives in all areas concerned, or have a select few profited at the death, destruction, misery, fear, and untold debt to future generations? 

We were never on "the right path."

We have been led down a Yellow Brick Road only to find disappointment at the end with an admonition to pay no attention to "the man" behind the curtain...

by MedfordTim on 05/20/2006 06:48:40 PM EST

No offense taken and I appreciate your comment. That's kind of the point of all this in my mind - to open conversations. Mostly, I take a pretty moderate view on things, but I have issues that get me really torqued up so I can appreciate it when people get passionate.

 It really becomes a sad commentary on the administration when the arguments from the other side are essentially that we're making the president look like more of a liar than he is.

 Although, the thing that is costing him points from the Republican side isn't the lies, the dead soldiers, or the massive deficit, but the fact that he's appearing ineffectual as a leader. Weakness is a sin in the conservative world view. That's something all progressives should all take note of.

by cheeseismoldymilk on 05/20/2006 09:23:18 PM EST

[ Parent ]
What I didn't know at the time, which would have influenced my thoughts heavily if I had, was the knowledge that we didn't have to invade Afghanistan. Bush and Co. chose all out attack over a diplomatic solution.

Prior to the invasion the Taleban did not make a serious offer to hand over Bin Laden. It was only when the Taleban saw how effective the U.S. military was that they offered to negotiate if the bombing stopped. It was also questioned if the Taleban was capable of handing over Bin Laden. Mullah Omar lived in a house built by Bin Laden. I don't think the Mullah was the one in charge. Instead, Bin Laden outranked the Taleban's leader.

by Twba on 05/21/2006 08:13:52 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Prior to the invasion the Taleban did not make a serious offer to hand over Bin Laden.

Let's look at that a second. What is the source of your belief that "the Taleban did not make a serious offer"? Condi Rice? Dick Cheney?


Click on the first link in my original reply - it might be a learning experience for you.

by MedfordTim on 05/21/2006 11:39:37 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Trust Secret Afghan Envoy Tells All  or Condolisa Rice I would trust Rice if I had to trust one.

by eeyore1954 on 05/21/2006 12:53:52 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Well, then, you're just a moron who can't count the number of lies that Rice has told you because you ran out of fingers and toes.

by MedfordTim on 05/21/2006 02:38:16 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I have been both on this board. But I am sure there are lots of intelligent people who do not believe Rice has been telling many lies ( i may not be one of them). If someone sees things differnetly than you they are a moron or an idiot.
 but what bothers me is your just as quick to accept an article as truth that looks like it belongs in the Weekly World News . I know you don't trust the other media but I am sure some network would be happy to run with it if they thought it was verifyable (sp).

I believe we are probably going the wrong way and should never have gone into Iraq . Afganistan I am not so sure of.

by eeyore1954 on 05/22/2006 10:54:21 AM EST

[ Parent ]
"If someone sees things differnetly than you they are a moron or an idiot."

Many people see many things much differently than I do. That's perfectly fine.

When you start believing Condaleeza Rice, you INSTANTLY turn into a drooling moron, ready to give your bank account number over to a Nigerian Prince, you stop wearing condoms, your TV channel breaks on Fox news, you find yourself muttering things like "Hmm...Intelligent Design...maybe....",&n bsp;your dog doesn't know you anymore, and you mistake your friend of 30 years' face for a quail.

An "idiot" is completely different. Except for the drool...

Anyone want to make a bet on who does more research using a wider variety of sources than anyone else around this site? Anyone? Bueller?

It's not a talent so much as being in front of a computer a few too many hours a day with a compulsive need to find out more than what I'm being told.

Whatcha got against Bat Boy, anyhow?

************

Sincere:
 
"...but I am sure some network would be happy to run with it if they thought it was verifyable."

Why are you sure? What is your basis to think that the networks don't regularly let stories die on the vine when they don't fit a narrow mold? Ever see an in depth report on what could go wrong with nulear power or an investigative piece on the corruption in the Defense Dept's procurement practices on NBC? Any interviews on ABC with disgruntled Disney share holders over the management shakeup that's been going on for a couple of years? Any real news at all on Fox?

Maybe it's time to give "Network" another viewing.  Or "The Insider." Or, if you'd like to watch an extremely informative and entertaining documentary, watch "Orwell Rolls in His Grave" It's not the best vid transfer I've seen, and it's very hard to read the "intercards" with various quotes and statistics. but the audio works fine.

by MedfordTim on 05/22/2006 11:35:21 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Click on the first link in my original reply - it might be a learning experience for you.

I clicked your link and immediately recognized the column. I read it way back when it was new. I have read many other things about Afghanistan.

In The Sewing Circles of Herat, Christina Lamb wrote of her interviews of Khalil Hassani, a former Taleban secret policeman and bodyguard of Mullah Omar.

Khalil said he sometimes saw Osama bin Laden at Mullah Omar's house, arriving in a black Land Cruiser with tinted windows, usually in a convoy of seven or eight cars at a time. 'His bodyguards were all very tall people, Sudanese I think, with curly hair and all with wireless sets and earpieces like those American bodyguards. Sometimes I went to Mullah Omar's house in Uruzgan when they went hunting for birds or deer together or fishing with dynamite.'

The more he saw them together the more he became convinced that the Taliban were not really in control. 'We laughed when we heard the Americans asking Mullah Omar to hand over Osama bin Laden,' he said. 'The Americans are crazy. Afghanistan is not a state sponsoring terrorism but a terrorist-sponsored state. It is only Osama bin Laden that can hand over Mullah Omar not vice versa.'

Khalil said that Mullah Omar presented himself as a man of simple tastes but though he berated his cook every day for serving meat when his soldiers in the field had none, he ate it anyway, and he like listening to war-chants and riding his Arabian horse around his compound. In fact Khalil had quickly come to the conclusion that the great enigmatic mastermind behind the Taliban was just simpleminded. 'Mullah Omar knows only how to write Omar and to sign his name,' he said. 'He's completely illiterate.'

I had been told the same thing a few days earlier by General Ishaq, administrator of the hospital in Kandahar that used to treat Mullah Omar, and a former general in the Afghan army. 'His doctor told me he thought that the rocket had left bits of shrapnel in his brain. He said Omar likes sitting at the wheel of one of his cars making engine noises and that he had days of terrible headaches and moodswings when he would not see anyone and dreams when he thought he was having visions.'

by Twba on 05/21/2006 02:57:23 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Your quotes sent me on a search of Christina Lamb, and it was interesting indeed. Helluva woman, appears at brief glance (and I have NO reason to doubt that full examination would result in the same conclusion, I merely point out the briefness of my OWN search) to actually be interested in Journalism. Much braver than I am, that is easily discerned. Thanks for the introduction. I plan on following up on more of her work. Could you maybe include a link next time?

To the quotes:

Yes, it must be terrible to have a leader of the country who is incompetent, not interested about things outside his limited circle, thnks he's in charge when others are busy controlling events around him, barely literate, enjoys riding something around his compound, repeating the same meaningless phrases over and over, someone who would consider the "most wonderful moment" of his time as a leader the unforgettable experience of catching a fish...

Yup. Horrible. That would suck terribly.

But that wouldn't make it impossible for the other power members of a regime to keep things rolling along, would it? Might even be competing factions in that sort of a situation - maybe even some who aren't all that fond of an Osama trying to usurp their "god given" positions.

I know it's hard to believe, but there are actually members of governments out there in the world who make underhanded deals with foreign governments or individuals. Doesn't have to be the publicly known Head of State, sometimes there are people in power under the public view who have their own agenda.

Imagine Pat Robertson bombs Carracas, and Hugo Chavez demands the turning over of this religious terrorist. The Public Figure would balk at the mention of turning a U.S. citizen over to the Justice System of another country, but there very well might be some behind the scenes maneuvering by other elements, not as fond of the senile bible-thumper as Public Figure is, to deliver ol' Pat on a silver platter. Now, if that would satisfy Hugo, everything would be hunky-dory.

But Hugo sees this as his opportunity to bring down the corrupt and oppressive regime currently in place and replace it with one of his own choosing. So he does not WANT to get what he is publicly asking for. Therefore, ANY offer to comply is treated as "not a serious offer." So sorry, send in the bombers, we really tried hard.

Zappa comes to mind...
It can't happen here
It can't happen here
I'm telling you, my dear
That it can't happen here

Robert Fisk had some prescient words just before the Afghan offensive started, in Sep 2001. Here's an excerpt:

Or is Mr bin Laden merely chapter one of our new Middle Eastern adventure, to be broadened later to include Iraq, the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, the destruction of the Lebanese Hezbollah, the humbling of Syria, the humiliation of Iran, the reimposition of yet another fraudulent "peace process" between Israel and the Palestinians?

But, as the Americans have made clear, it's their own terrorist enemies they are after, not their terrorist friends or those terrorists who have been slaughtering populations outside American "spheres of interest". Even those terrorists who live comfortably in the US but have not harmed America are safe: take, for example, the pro-Israeli militiaman who murdered two Irish UN soldiers in southern Lebanon in 1980 and who now live in Detroit after flying safely out of Tel Aviv. The Irish have the name and address, if the FBI are interested - but of course they're not.

So we are not really being asked to fight "world terror". We are being asked to fight America's enemies. If that means bagging the murderers behind the atrocities in New York and Washington, few would object. But it does raise the question of why those thousands of innocents are more important - more worthy of our effort and perhaps blood - than all the other thousands of innocents. And it also raises a much more disturbing question: whether or not the crime against humanity committed in the US on 11 September is to be met with justice - or a brutal military assault intended to extend American political power in the Middle East.

Either way, we are being asked to support a war whose aims appear to be as misleading as they are secretive. We are told by the Americans that this war will be different to all others. But one of the differences appears to be that we don't know who we are going to fight and how long we are going to fight for. Certainly, no new political initiative, no real political engagement in the Middle East, no neutral justice is likely to attend this open-ended conflict. The despair and humiliation and suffering of the Middle East peoples do not figure in our war aims - only American and European despair and humiliation and suffering.


Full article, "This is not a war on terror. It's a fight against America's enemies"

by MedfordTim on 05/21/2006 04:48:15 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Yes, it must be terrible to have a leader of the country who is incompetent, not interested about things outside his limited circle, thnks he's in charge when others are busy controlling events around him, barely literate, enjoys riding something around his compound, repeating the same meaningless phrases over and over, someone who would consider the "most wonderful moment" of his time as a leader the unforgettable experience of catching a fish...

I knew you would catch that irony.

But that wouldn't make it impossible for the other power members of a regime to keep things rolling along, would it? Might even be competing factions in that sort of a situation - maybe even some who aren't all that fond of an Osama trying to usurp their "god given" positions.

I know it's hard to believe, but there are actually members of governments out there in the world who make underhanded deals with foreign governments or individuals. Doesn't have to be the publicly known Head of State, sometimes there are people in power under the public view who have their own agenda.

The Taleban is a special circumstance. It is a bunch of illiterate and semiliterate village idiots, I mean mullahs, who were propped up by a jihadist faction of Pakistan's intelligence service with funding provided by Saudi "charities."

Your quotes sent me on a search of Christina Lamb, and it was interesting indeed. Helluva woman, appears at brief glance (and I have NO reason to doubt that full examination would result in the same conclusion, I merely point out the briefness of my OWN search) to actually be interested in Journalism. Much braver than I am, that is easily discerned. Thanks for the introduction. I plan on following up on more of her work. Could you maybe include a link next time?

She does seem to be a badass. The book is excellent and heartbreakingly sad. I provided no link because I did not cut and paste those excerpts. I pulled the book down from a shelf in my home. If you're interested, you can get a used copy or remaindered copy relatively cheap.

by Twba on 05/21/2006 09:20:16 PM EST

[ Parent ]
 Display: