Reply
Mon 5 Apr, 2004 09:04 pm
This evening while I was watching the news, they cut to Bush, speaking somewhere, publicly.
His words were something like this,
"We WILL turn over power to the Iraqi people on schedule. We refuse to be led astray by a bunch of thugs!" "We will not be run out of Iraq."
Please realize this is NOT a 'direct' quote, but this is exactly what he said in whatever words.
Then, the newsman came back after the cut, and stated that Vice President Cheney was "somewhere" (can't remember that speech site either)
and that he had used precisely the same words as the President- calling the attackers in Sadr city "killers and thugs".
I sat here pondering... 'how can the Iraqi people truly take over the country's government and establish peace and mutual trust in such a short a time as June, this year?'
Then, it came to me all at once. He SAYS it!
Actually, I think all he has to do is SAY a thing, and his followers just feel it is the GOSPEL.
I can hear him, can't you? Something like, "Well, all we have to do is say to the Iraqis... it's all yours." (Or whatever high sounding words inaugaration of government entails.)
There!! The words are in place. Then we go on with business.
Does it matter who does what business? They can iron that out later, and make sure the people understand that what is done, is Iraqi leadership... whoever says or does it.
That is the way Bush "ended" the conflict in Iraq. "Mission Accomplished"
Use the words! War is over, we won!!
Doesn't matter if we're being attacked, attacking back, people dying...
This is the "cleaning up" and changing government phase. War's over.
(Let's us try to remember that when we have to get into another war--
Damn... " the getting out of war" is a lot more painful than getting in)
And to lots of Mamas and Dads in the US... painful forever.
They too, have to hear the RIGHT words..
"Dear Family of this decorated soldier... How we thank you---"
A great deal of this seems to be due to Bush's fundamentalist Chritianity, and the similar beliefs of his followers. They are rather adept at self delusion, and other sort of ridiculous ideology.
That has been the way it works for a long time. They say all the right words (written by others most times), and the sheep fall in line and believe every turd that falls out of their lying mouths. That is why I try to keep an eye on what they are doing, instead of the bullshit that they all say.
Of course, there are a lot of people who will believe this bullshit, and that is exactly what these guys count on and use to their advantage.
But those who disagree with the holy man are treated as heretics. Pclitically, this has manifested with the charges of treason, and being "un-American," or "un-patriotic." Personally, I am honoured to bear those titles if it implies I disagree with Bush.
True.
Even posters in this forum have accused many 'disbelievers' of WH policy., of not being 'objective'.
(give me an 'object' to focus upon, that I can TRUST- I will be objective)
I'm not sure I see the problem here. He said we were going to turn over power to the Iraqi government. What's wrong with that statement?
jackie:
Meone thinks Bush believes God is speaking to him.
He's really that whack.
Tarantulas wrote:I'm not sure I see the problem here. He said we were going to turn over power to the Iraqi government. What's wrong with that statement?
It can't happen. There is no Iraqi government.
Yet. But there will be when it's time to turn over power.
Tarantulas wrote:Yet. But there will be when it's time to turn over power.
Just what power is it that you foresee being turned over?
Well, it seems likley Chalabi will become the next dictator. He did an interesting interview in the winter/spring issue of The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, but I doubt its online. Again, this is a journal, and should be available at a library.
I am, however, also curious whom Tarantella thinks power will be turned over to.
Probably Chalabi, as you said. It won't be a dictatorship though.
i really am trying to understand who you think will be in power in June and how they will be able to keep order if we do pull out..our will our hands be "clean" come june? :-)
Tarantulas wrote:Probably Chalabi, as you said. It won't be a dictatorship though.
Just out of curiosity, taking into consideration what is known of Chalabi, and of the US's track record of installing and supporting dictators, what reason have you to think that it will be anything other than a dictatorship?
The problem, Tarantulas, is that it seems rather unlikely that we will be able to hand everything over into Iraqi hands any time soon. In case you haven't noticed, reconstruction plans haven't been going as planned.
Its become clear in recent months that religious leaders, like al-Sistani and Moqtada, wield a tremendous deal of power over the general populace and the puppet government we've set up. Nevermind the fact that government services, such as the farcical Iraqi police, are woefully inadequate for the job at hand, etc, etc, etc.
The point of the thread starter, if I'm not mistaken, was that although Bush will likey have to publicly "hand over power" in June, it is almost certain that America will still be pulling the strings on some level. Kind of like the disingenuity between the fact that Bush has declared the war over and the fact that more Americans are dying now than they were during the so-called war.
Its the gap between rhetoric and reality that Jackie was trying to draw attention to.
Tarantulas wrote:Probably Chalabi, as you said. It won't be a dictatorship though.
There is no reason to assume that Chalabi would win if elections were held - in fact, all evidence indicates otherwise - leading us to believe that no elections are likely to be held, at least not in the forseeable future. Thus, he is similar to a dictator in the sense that he wields power without the support of the public.
Tarantulas wrote:It won't be a dictatorship though.
Right. It will be a theocracy.
And I thought Rumsfeld said that wasn't going to happen.
Certainly, I agree ILZ,
Whomever is "appointed" will be the 'government' on paper,
and it is unlikely to think Chalabi would be elected with an honest vote.
Iraq MAY settle down enough to get serious before June 30, but it is hard to believe they can establish any "authoritative" heads of state who will willingly co-
operate with the Coalition occupation; whom I believe will have the last word in decisions on the country's direction.
(They may Never co-operate, unless the United States kills off ALL the opposition that they haven't jailed, and no one is left but the terrorized, trembling and broken families who long for normal life.)
sorry to be such a pessimist, Tarantulas, I cannot have your kind of optimism. I think it is just rhetoric, with no substance.
I'm also pretty sure that "handing over" doesn't mean "pulling out".
We'll have troops there for years. Decades possibly, as with Germany and South Korea.
Or at least until the oil runs out...
I would agree with that. The first two sentences, anyway. We will never satisfy everyone, either. Some Iraqis want us to leave now and others want us to stay and do more to keep them safe.
As for what kind of government they will have, I thought it was supposed to be a democracy.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace