Been awhile since I've commented on politics so here's my quasi-bi-annual foray into the realm...
One of my friends told me she had been involved in the protests that had happened this weekend in Washington. Now I told her that I thought the protest was stupid. Which got me to thinking, why do I think it's stupid. Is it just me disliking the endless anti-war, anti-Bush protests? Is it me hating protests in general or do I have a logical reason for saying this.
This is what I came up with.
Overall I think I dislike it because they blame Bush for everything. No matter what happens it's his fault and they tie the war into it irrationally. Take the current situation, the belief seems to be out there that if our troops weren't in Iraq that the situation in New Orleans would be a lot less (the whole "Make levees, not war"). Now this ignores the common fact that most of these troops never do any response to natural disasters when they're here. National Gaurd responds and they currently are responding to New Orleans. This anger may be rightly centered at President Bush, although in the past state governors have been saddled with handling natural disasters, for not preparing a national response but claiming that 100,000 troops would make the difference is ludicris. Even the military would have to withdraw in the wake of that storm and even they would have operating with a completely destroyed infratstructure.
Another related arguement is that money for the war has kept money getting to Katrina victims. Again, where do they figure? Congress acted immediately (in the Congressional sense of the word) to appropriate funds. Seperate areas of funding so the two don't relate.
Now what probably bothers me more. The arguement to pull out. This generally stems from the wish not to have anymore of our soldiers die. I think everyone can agree we don't want to see our friends and loved ones over there one second longer then they need to be. At the same time if we pull out to save several thousand of our troops lives when we started this mess and several million people are killed or injured because we bailed. Along with that well the entire Middle East would hate us some more, no gaurantee they will like us much if we stayed but at least we tried to fix our mess up, and most of the world would we think even lower of us. In the end I think it's a matter of honor as well. Do we stay even when it's tough, even when our leaders got us in the for the wrong reason, because we think it's right to help out and promote a better way of life? I guess people's opinions may differ but I know that it's not fair to sacrifice people I don't know just because I don't know them. That was done in Rwanda 50 years after we promised never to let it happen again.
Ok last thing: Bush lied to us. Can't say for sure he did but more then likely he did. So why not ask why that happened and find out how it happened? Obviously something disrupted our checks and balances and certainly we need those checks and balances. Instead of demanding an impossible change (pulling out) why not demand some explanations? This just seems like a better use of time. If all else come up with an exit strategy that allows us to get out soon. Right now we can't but I'd bet a large sum of money the the Bush White House wants out of Iraq right now more then anyone else.
Well that's it, this may be a bit disjointed but sort of lays out my thoughts (heh my thoughts might just be disjointed too).
2 comments:
The anti-war movement is not about peace or justice, and anyone who thinks so is completely blind. It's about ideologues trying to get their way, their way traditionally (and verified by memos and documents obtained by reporters over the years) being socialist, funded by socialist regimes and causes. This isn't about democracy or republicanism and it never was. I'm no fan of war, and I wish that we weren't in a wartime period, but the anti-war movement's crusade is scarier than perceived imperialism or terror combined.
If Bush lied, everyone else lied too. Everyone on both sides of the aisle was convinced Iraq had WMDs at the time. Everyone. No more obvious strawman argument than this.
Finally, it is unconstitutional for the federal government to appropriate funds on a whim for emergencies. Go ahead, check the old parchment. First they complain about the lack of immediate aid, then they complain that the money was squandered and that war funds kept us from being there for the Gulf coast. In reality, it should have never been dispersed in the first place. There was overwhelming support coming from the private sector, and we all know that the government spends like drunken sailors, which is an insult to sailors. Here's a bright idea, why don't these whiny types hold out on their daily hummus fix and some rare Phish bootleg cassette they found on eBay and throw some extra cash down toward people who need a meal? There is no such thing as faceless compassion.
OK, OK, I'm a little snippy, but all I ask is for some fair consideration on matters. Man and woman cannot live on bumper stickers alone.
Mike I agree with you for what its worth, I don't exactly appreciate the protests because Sid believes that he is doing what is needed to be done. No i'm not happy that our soliders are there, but something had to be done and there is no use pointing fingers at people. I can't believe i'm going to say this but Bush isn't the worst thing in the whole world. Anyway i would just like to see a little more support for our "boys" who are doing their duty.
Well that was my rant on the whole thing. I like the way you state things Mike.
Allison
Post a Comment