March 19, 2003

Almost missed this. George Bush launched  Shock and Awe seven years ago today. About 4500 Americans ago.

16 responses to “March 19, 2003

  1. About 4500 Americans ago.

    7 years has been far FAR too long. However, on the conservative side, more than 168,000 Iraqi’s are alive, a free nation is born and a threat to the stability of the region is gone.

    Like

  2. [more than 168,000 Iraqi’s are alive,]

    Not sure what that means?

    Watching the elections closely and keeping my fingers crossed that Alawi wins. If Maliki is reelected, Iran has won. Alawi at least is secular.

    Like

    • Not sure what that means?

      Under Saddam more than 2000 Iraqis died per month due to his regime.

      Now, we have a free nation with free elections.

      Like

      • Pino
        100 to 200,000 Iraqis died in the war. Millions were made homeless or made to flee their homes because Shia and Sunni, who’d lived side by side for almost a century, divided along religious lines again. Whether or not a ‘free nation etc’ survives for another decade (and we’ll see), millions of Iraqis died or suffered greatly! And this time we did it.

        Like

        • 100 to 200,000 Iraqis died in the war.

          Freedom can be measured by the cost men will pay in order to obtain it.

          Like

          • Freedom can be measured by the cost men will pay in order to obtain it.

            Especially when it is in the realm of imperial interests. But one should not talk about waging wars for freedom when the root causes to join such a campaign are avarice and greed.

            The Iraq invasion and subsequent occupation is about the US’s imperial interests in the region. Democracy, human rights, freedom are mere after thoughts if business can be conducted as usual, and this was the case until Iraq started making nationalistic noises about its energy reserves. It is how we go from this to this.

            Like

          • yeah, but pino, how were 168,o00 lives saved if 200,000 died? Is it okay cuz we did it instead of Sadaam?

            Like

  3. I disagree. While it certainly appears as though we accomplished our goals in Iraq, the price was way to high. And you say that the threat is gone. What threat? Saddam was never much of a threat; and that is precisely the tragedy of it all. The real threat, religious extremism, is alive and well in that region. It is high time for our leaders to start concerning themselves more with the American people, and less with waging war. And people wonder why our standard of living is far behind that of Western Europe…

    Like

  4. Ahh, I love the smell of napalm in the morning. What is more invigorating than nation building? And to think that Dubya is out playing golf or some such mundane thing when he could be proudly taking public responsibility for what he has wrought in his pinhead neo-con religiousy mind. He should be celebrating today in jail, but alas that would be too right to happen

    Like

    • I doubt W even cares enough to know it’s been seven years and people are still dying in his war of choice. I imagine the rest of them – Cheney, Rumsfeld, Perle, Brenner, Franks – all having themselves a fine weekend.

      Like

  5. Don’t blame religious people for the actions of a few. Yeah, Christians and Jews are certainly destructive in pushing their Zionist, Right Wing agenda in the Middle East. But don’t blame ALL Christians and Jews for the actions of people like W. Most Christians don’t follow the harsh teachings of The Old Testament, and most Jews don’t follow the hateful teachings of the Talmud; both books declare that land to belong to the Jews. And don’t blame Muslims for the actions of a few, desperate terrorists; not all follow the teachings of the Koran, which speaks hateful of Christians and Jews. My point is, that Atheists love to lump all religious people into one category and brand them dangerous. That is just as wrong as claiming all black men rapists, or all white men serial killers, for the actions of a few. Religion is a very natural, and beneficial aspect of human nature, and Atheists need to knock it off. After all, Atheists are dangerous. See Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc. See my point? Thank you.

    Like

    • [http://tarheelred.wordpress.com/]

      Hitler was raised Catholic and changed his religious views many times over the years, but stayed mostly within a Christian umbrella. He beleived in an “Aryan Jesus”. And he like Muslims a lot.

      Like

  6. Religion is a very natural, and beneficial aspect of human nature,

    Religion has been a destructive force of oppression and an opponent of modernity and enlightenment since its inception. The less we have of religion, the better.

    Atheists are dangerous. See Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc. See my point? Thank you.

    Hitler was a catholic and had many writings and speeches that supported(fast forward to about 5 min ish, if you just want the Hitler bit) that.

    Stalin and Pol Pot were autocratic megalomaniacs advancing their respective authoritarian ideologies. Their purported atheism (Stalin was trained as priest) was not a fundamental reason for their behaviour.

    So your point, as usual, is erroneous.

    lump all religious people into one category and brand them dangerous.

    Believing in magic books and mythical happenings is dangerous. Basing morality and ethical judgment on archaic delusional writings is even worse.

    Like

    • I believe wars are fought for three reasons:

      1. real estate (I want yours)
      2. resources (oil, opium etc – I want them)
      3. religion (you should practice mine)

      I’m a humanist and as such feel a responsibility and kinship with my fellow man.

      Organized religion has a lot to answer for.

      Like

  7. I most certainly agree with you, Moe. Organized religion has a lot to answer for. Perhaps I should have been more specific, as it is not religion I am defending, but rather faith and spirituality. All religions have their problems, and are dangerous. Of course, I do not see true christians as religious, but then again, if somebody made war I wouldn’t consider them a true christian. With that said, just because someone is against religion, that does not mean religion should be banned. It is our freedom to believe what we want, free from persecution. Calling religious people dangerous is the first step to singling them out and persecuting them. Like Hitler’s Germany, it first started with words, and before you know it innocent jews were being slaughtered. To group any one people and label them negatively, because they’re different than you and you consider them harmful, is terrible bigotry. And before you know it, it keeps progressing. People should be accepting of others. No matter what.

    Like

Leave a Reply to Moe Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s