A poem on Iraq

[richardf8]

Sometimes I wonder
If George W. Bush wasn't told the whole truth:
That there were no WMD's in Iraq
That our accusations were a little game we played
By gentlemen's agreement
That our occasional bombings and strafings
Were a price he was willing to pay
To let his neighbors believe
Or wonder at least if
He was too dangerous to attack.

Sometimes I wonder
If he was told
And he just didn't give a damn
Eager perhaps, to rain fire and brimstone
Shock and awe
Upon Saddam and his Saddamists
To end the Saddamy there
Once and for all.

Sometimes I wonder
If, squirreled away in Syria
There aren't missiles
Avec au France
From Chinese parts
That could have flown far
Crossed Jordan
Remaining to be found
Hidden away
in a compact between tyrants
with a common goal.

We were rash, we were brash
We tipped our hand far too early
We did not draw
Our house was not full
When we called the bluff
And when we won
The pot was empty
Because no one else had raised
And now we'll never know
What the stakes were or might have been
or if there were any at all.

Comments

[locakitty.livejournal.com]

I thought that this post (http://www.livejournal.com/community/ohnotheydidnt/4552363.html) was kind of interesting and thought you would like to have a look at it and offer your thoughts. We are all kind of wondering. :)

[richardf8]

Eh.
Attention Whore. Never outgrew being the Class Clown.

[locakitty.livejournal.com]

oops. I meant this post (http://www.livejournal.com/users/heresiarchaz/242416.html).

I'm such a doof. :)

[richardf8]

I'm not going to wade into the mess over there, unless it gets really bad.

I should preface this by saying that my only acquaintance with X-Men is the first movie (but that's HeresiarchAZ's starting point, so we're OK) and I am not much interested in Superhero comics and therefore not terribly familiar with Stan Lee's ouevre.

However, I think HeresiarchAZ is grasping at straws. Lee needed an origin story for Magneto, so he reached out for the greatest horror of his generation for the necessary trauma, and, I think, threw in a bit of Stockholm Syndrome in imparting to Magneto that mutant-as-ubermann philosophy.

I would also be very cautious about deriving a political philosophy from a fictional work. Unless Lee has commented on the matter, and I have not turned up any evidence that he has, I would hesitate to ascribe an opinion to him one way or the other.

[level-head.livejournal.com]

I read your poem with interest.
To me it does occur:
Attention's worthwhile to invest
In what you mean by "were".

When -- quote "there were no WMDs"
You mean in '91?
In '98? 2002?
Or when the bluffs were done?

I think you're right to speculate
On Syria and so forth
We watched a thousand trucks of freight
With Russian drivers go north.

The move, it seems, began about
December '98
He thought we'd follow right away
The missiles at his gate

We didn't -- as you say, we're "brash"
But then too slow to follow
And thus our boldness, talking trash,
Was busted as just hollow.

The major shipping in 03
Occurred in January
And then we moved, and now we see
Just how Saddam was wary

When France and Baghdad cut a deal
To have Hans Blix inserted:
A "politician" while the real
Sharp scientist was diverted ...

In all events, it still bore out
Hussein's gross violations
Each Blix report condemned the man
Despite spun alterations.

The missiles, VX, sarin, shells
For chemicals and bio
Were quite enough to bring bad spells
To New York or Ohio

Delivered by the terrorists
Long time supported by him
Yes, all the evidence still fits
It's quite enough to fry him.

Just think, if someone else had pressed
The same (as they had threatened)
The news of findings would suggest
We'd staved off Armageddon:

Two dozen hidden bio labs
Illegal, undeclared
With vials of germs, and ricin fabs
Would make the US scared

The billion plus in WMDs
Expenditures located
Binary shells, the UAVs
Were as anticipated.

Each dual-use item that we found
That was, for him, illicit
The terrorists he had around
Were clearly quite complicit

The man he had at UbL's
Malaysian secret shindig
Would be in every print that sells
And TV news would play big.

But as it is, we look at all
He shipped, and what's remaining
And lives saved... We made that good call,
And, somehow, we're complaining.

The jihad threat Iraqis face,
We, too, face just as surely
Let's fight it in that far off place
More safely, more securely.

For all the world, it now is clear
They seek to make their Caliphate
Let's join and stop it, now, and here
Too soon, it will be too late.

Your writing seems to intimate
That we were slow to action
What change of Iran and Syria's fate
Would meet your satisfaction?

===|==============/ Level Head

[richardf8]

Indeed, Hussein gave terrorists support,
But they were of the Intifadish sort.

But would the UN ever really
Look out for interests Israeli?

France's motives are less white than black;
They gave Saddam Osirak.

And what does Russia, with no love of Jew,
Help shi'a Iran to do?

On the thought Atta used Iraqi clout,
<http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/robertnovak/2002/05/13/163204.html>Rumsfeld leaves much room to doubt.

The question of the Connection Czech
Is thus conspiracy theorist dreck.

And that WE went to fight for Israel's sake,
Is an allegation I regard as fake.

For Bush too loves the Saudi Crown
To do too much to make it frown,

When arms against Israel Egypt downward laid
The Saudis cut Egyptian aid.

A move which Carter overrode
To set them on a peaceful road.

This is, of course, quite old news,
Read The Secret War Against The Jews.

It relies a bit on the Anonymous Source
But still remains a tour de force.

I see the actions of the Caliphate,
But also of a rising Christian state.

Fundamentalists all the same,
They feed upon each other's flame.

And when they clash, those who ALWAYS lose
Are the Hindus, Sikhs, Atheists and Jews.

There are economic changes that must be made
The heart of Terror to dissuade

In periods of Economic discrepancy
Fundamentalism most enjoys ascendancy.

[level-head.livejournal.com]

Almost every single statement in the Novak article you quoted has been shown to be wrong.

And what makes you think that "terrorists" are driven by economics? Many are quite well-off, and most Saudi terrorists are young folks who are quite content to make a middle class income from the state oil-welfare and play at radical politics. They're certainly not poor, nor desperate, and they hire "guest workers" to do their manual labor for them.

You seem to equate the occasional "Christian terrorist" -- who number few indeed -- with the hundreds of thousands of radical jihadists bent on eliminating the West starting with Israel, and treat them as equal. That seems vastly disproportionate.

Pointing to "a rising Christian state" amid the current decline of any Christian references in the US is ... weird. The references to God that have been part of our traditions for 230 years are nearly gone. The Falwell-type organizations are dwindling. Atheism is accepted. Extreme, exaggerated sensitivity is the norm. And deaths due to Christian terrorism in the US are ... not even enough to keep track of. Do you know of any from this year, for example?

I will agree that Russia, Iran, and France are no friends of ours -- until convenient. After 9/11 was convenient -- both Russia and Iran gave us some infrastructure support for Afghanistan. Neither (especially Iran) wanted to be very public about it.

===|==============/ Level Head

[richardf8]

And what makes you think that "terrorists" are driven by economics? Many are quite well-off, and most Saudi terrorists are young folks who are quite content to make a middle class income from the state oil-welfare and play at radical politics.

So, really, when you stop and think about, the same sort of people that fueled the Communist revolution in Russia. Young, well to do idealists are very good at this sort of thing. They can also help drive public opinion and create a base. But with economic parity in the equation, they have a more difficult case to make, and are less likely to be tolerated by a comfortable people.

You seem to equate the occasional "Christian terrorist" -- who number few indeed -- with the hundreds of thousands of radical jihadists bent on eliminating the West starting with Israel, and treat them as equal.

Where did I mention Christian terrorists? Nations with predominantly Christian cultures tend to use regular armies these days. But when you're in the crossfire, it makes little difference who's uniform and who's not. Subscribe to the Dark Christian community. There's stuff you need to pay attention to there. Radical Islam and Radical Christianity have been playing off each other in ways that warrant watching.

Pointing to "a rising Christian state" amid the current decline of any Christian references in the US is ... weird. The references to God that have been part of our traditions for 230 years are nearly gone. The Falwell-type organizations are dwindling. Atheism is accepted. Extreme, exaggerated sensitivity is the norm.

What color is the sky in your world? If the "Falwell-type organizations" are dwindling, which does not seem to be the case, it is only because the members of those organizations are finding more and more local ways of getting the needs once met by Falwell met. Pentecostal and other charismatic Christian sects have been growing by leaps and bounds, and the liberal Protestant sects have been hemorrhaging membership numbers to these churches. As for "extreme, exaggerated sensitivity" being "the norm," I'll agree with you on that - one need only watch Bill O'Reilly et al fume about this alleged "war on Christmas" to see it in action. Boycotting Target for using the phrase "Happy Holidays?" Oh please! That's no "war on Christmas," but rather a recognition that the more expansive your greeting, the wider a market it encompasses. And as for that idiot Newsom . . . He's a nuisance who will get nowhere. Last time I checked, my currency still said "In God We Trust" (laying aside the old joke about how we must since it is no longer backed by the gold standard), "under God" was still in the pledge, and the theme for the White House seasonal evergreen, "All things bright and beautiful" comes from a Christian hymn. Meanwhile the professor who was going to teach that course entitled "Intelligent Design and other religious mythologies" at a university in Kansas has stood down even as ID creeps into the Kansas Science standards. I'm sorry, I'm not buying the "poor oppressed little Christians" tripe for a minute.

The problem, really, isn't the question of God in the public square. It is of whose God. Ideally, I'd like it to be my own, but barring that, I'd much rather it not be Anthony Perkins'.

And deaths due to Christian terrorism in the US are ... not even enough to keep track of. Do you know of any from this year, for example?

Why do you keep bringing up this straw man? This "Christian Terrorist" thing is something you brought up, not me.

[level-head.livejournal.com]

So, really, when you stop and think about, the same sort of people that fueled the Communist revolution in Russia. Young, well to do idealists are very good at this sort of thing.

Such loose generalizations don't help, and don't seem to me to be very accurate.

The jihadists core are war-hardened religious fanatics who believe that their book's instruction to take over the earth should be literally acted upon. Many of their converts are idealists with time on their hands, and would like to be war hardened but are not, yet.

With the Communists, it was much the reverse. The core founders were philosophers and idealists, and their cause was taken up by hardened revolutionaries and put into practice.

But the point was, simply, that poor economic conditions are not the cause of this terrorism. In fact, were the US to match China's expanding nuclear power development, the reduction of money flow to the Saudis might cut off its funding.

In other words, making the Middle East poor might help Islamist terrorism, just as Middle East oil money funded it.

You fear the rise of the "Christian state". The currency slogan, the words in the Pledge, each of the issues you described as evidence of its health are, in fact, battlefields. Perhaps you noted the number of trees that were changed from "Christmas trees" to "Holiday trees" this year.

A systematic expunging of the country's Christian heritage is underway, exemplified in the ACLU's media-approved activities. Newdow, who has had many successes (including the fact that you've heard of him) is not the only campaigner for this cause; he is simply a lightning rod drawing attention. The larger issues are the lawsuits across the country forcing the removal of any Christian references in city seals and public properties.

Traditions in place for centuries are being dismantled on the bench of political correctness. At no prior point in this country's history had it ever been considered offensive to have Christmas songs in the December school play.

I don't think of Christians in the US as being oppressed, and I've never said that. But the attacks are real enough, and many seem to conflate being opposed to Christianity to being opposed to the US.

Your comment that "nations with predominately Christian cultures tend to use armies" (in response to my comment about terrorists) seems to be an example. Nations tend to use armies, period. However, it appears that you are insinuating that the military of the United States are Christian terrorists.

Would you agree that the jihadist threat is the largest one facing mankind at this moment?

===|==============/ Level Head

[richardf8]

But the point was, simply, that poor economic conditions are not the cause of this terrorism. In fact, were the US to match China's expanding nuclear power development, the reduction of money flow to the Saudis might cut off its funding.

Concentration of most of a nation's wealth in the hands of a relatively few people at the top does not mean that the economic conditions in that country are not poor. And indeed, most of the wealth in Saudi Arabia is concentrated near the top. And there it gets used, as you suggest, to fund terrorism. I agree with you about the solution too. Nuclear Energy has a host of risks, and problems, when they arise, are quite severe. But that is offset by the rarity of such incidents, and by the human cost of our oil dependency. But given the luddites of the left and the oil infrastructure investors on the right, chances of increasing nuclear power is slim. I wish it weren't so but it is.

As for your last question . . . I think a clash of fundamentalisms, Christian and Muslim, is the largest threat. I see them playing off each other, goading each other and prodding each other along. I think it is theocracy that is the largest threat facing mankind at this moment - doesn't matter whose. The biggest thing that keeps me from moving to Israel is that the Orthodox Rabbinate has too much say in civil life.

Nations tend to use armies, period.
The predominantly muslim countries have not been using armies for about 30 years now, despite being nations. Funding terrorism is what they have been doing instead. I call an equivalency here because these are each strategies for waging war. But if I'm in the crossfire between the terrorist and the regular soldier, I'm just as dead regardless of who fires the lethal shot.

[level-head.livejournal.com]

Concentration of most of a nation's wealth in the hands of a relatively few people at the top does not mean that the economic conditions in that country are not poor.

Of course not. Such concentration of wealth is a mark of all human society for all recorded history.

Now, back to Saudi Arabia, where economic conditions in the country are not poor. Saudi Arabia distributes money from oil to its citizens, resulting in a large number of young Saudis who have no inclination to work at anything less than professional positions.

While the unemployment rate of young Saudis is described as 30% to 50%, depending (apparently) on region and age cutoffs, those same "poor" Saudis are very often the employers of the African guest workers doing the menial work.

The Wahhabi and similar madrassa schools, now spread from the Middle East across much of Europe and Africa, teach hatred, the deaths of all non-converts, and the re-establishment of the Caliphate and its expansion across the world.

I am aware of nothing even remotely a counterpart to this among the Christian faiths.

The Chinese are battling Islamic terrorism within their borders -- you'd have a hard time asserting China as a "predominately Christian nation".

And you seem to have discounted the armies of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Libya, Sudan and so on. Hussein's army alone had more ammunition than the United States, acquired almost entirely from Russia and France.

Where do you see this "Christian fundamentalism" operating in the world?

Do you think that the jihadists are killing Iraqi citizens because they are Christian fundamentalists? Do you think that this is the reason for the jihadists' attacks on Russia, on England, on France, on China and so on?

===|==============/ Level Head

[http://users.livejournal.com/_wastrel/]

To end the Saddamy there
Once and for all
A grim poem on a grim topic, I'm aware, there I couldn't help but snicker still. u_u

[deckardcanine.livejournal.com]

Your poem and Level Head's both are quite humbling,
But I'm left to wonder who's doing the bumbling.
Some show a photo and say that it's proof,
While others contend it's a lie or a goof.

Whatever the truth, I'm opposing the war
For death tolls, expenses, bad image, and more.
When Bush's approval topped 90 percent,
I stuck with the rest, and I'll never repent.