Like every intelligent being on the planet, I have serious concerns about the war in Iraq. Or, as, my president calls it, "The War on Terror." I would just really like some confirmation that the majority of Iraqi citizens want us there.
Have no doubt. I adore our troops and they have my undying appreciation and respect. This was just sent to me. Actually, I've received it three times today. Polly loves a man in uniform. Especially this one. (Look closely at the badges under the American flag.)
19 comments:
Couldn't. Agree. More.
hmmm - If this photo is real and not "photo-shopped" then some soldier and his immediate superiors are in deep shit. Did you know that the French are currently flying air support in Afghanistan and have off and on had contingents of special forces there? Did you know that the Germans have contributed many troops in Afghanistan and in fact ran ISAF there for a period of several months? As for Russia, I don't think they would be particularly welcome in Afghanistan given the history of the place but very early in Operation Enduring Freedom, Russia did provide assistance in opening a highway tunnel in the north of the country.
According to Snopes, it's photoshopped:
http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/patch.asp
But he's still a fine looking young man. Eye candy indeed!
I don't care if its photoshopped or not. The man is fine. Gentle Anon, thank you for pointing out the roles Germany, France, and Russia played in Afghanistan... although my post was referring to Iraq. I wonder if we had more help and support kicking Saddam's sadistic ass and putting the sadistic asswipes from Saddam's regime in their proper place, that being HELL, if Iraq wouldn't be a peaceful place by now, well on its way to a democratic recovery.
Yes, Polly, without a doubt, if the Germans had a brigade in Baghdad and the French were providing air support, by this time the Sunni, Shia, and Kurds woould be engaged in one big group hug. Our President would be parading as a hero down whatever passes for Main Street in Baghdad. All those tons of WMD's would be well on there way to destruction in the desert. And our troops, including the handsome one you are so fond of, would be coming home.
Gentle Anonymous,
I don't know if having the German, French, and Russia providing military support would lead to one great Iraqi group hug... although it might be worth a shot. However, if Saddam's leftover sadistic asswipes knew the entire world was sick of their sh*t and simply wasn't going to put up with it anymore, don't you think there is a decent chance they would admit defeat?
I don't care if Bush ever gets a parade. He isn't my favorite president by a long shot. The way in which he got us into this mess was idiotic - claims of WMDs - I will readily concede as much.
Can you concede that Saddam was a vicious dictatorand his klan terrorized, tortured and killed their own countrymen for decades? Do you think that Saddam should have been allowed to continue for another few decades?
The U.S. and much of the oil dependent world has TWO interests in Iraq. One is oil (aka: a stable economy), the other is humanitarian. Why Bush and everyone else can't admit to both is beyond me. Although I'd wager you're going to try to put the answer in reach of my little brain.
The mistake was not going after Saddam or attempting to liberate Iraq. The mistake was not getting more support first and overstating the WMD risk.
Vonster.. if you follow the snopes link, there is an explanation for why the flag is backward... it symbolically represents the way the flag flies when the soldier is charging.
It's always backwards on military uniforms
Polly, there are a couple of things we agree upon. Saddam was a brutal dictator. Yes, he murdered thousands of his own people in order to keep himself and his Sunni brethren in power and to hold Iraq together.
I think we also agree that the preparation for and execution of the war (other than the short battle with the conventional Iraqi army) were incredibly incompetent.
Where we disagree is the need to go to war with Iraq given the circumstances at the time. Before our invasion Saddam was contained, in a box so to speak, due to the no fly zones and the admittedly imperfect sanctions. The oil was flowing in ways both legitimate and not but it was flowing. Production even now is only 80% or so of what it was before we attacked. Iraq was stable even though there was a ruthless bastard running things. Even if one assumes that Iraq might have had some chemical weapons remaining, Iraq posed little threat to its neighbors and virtually no threat to the United States other than to our planes flying overhead. Saddam was limited in what he could do to the Shia in the south and the Kurds in the north by the no-fly zones. There was a known Al Qaeda affiliated group in a remote area of northwestern Iraq, untouchable by Saddam and left alone by the Kurds. There has been no evidence of collusion between Saddam and Al Qaeda. In fact Saddam and his kin were natural enemies of Al Qaeda. Saddam, while putting on the trappings of Islam, ran a secular government, quite a contrast to a Taliban style theocracy. Our government was warned of the consequences of an invasion by everyone in the region with the possible exception of Israel.
By invading Iraq we lost focus and diverted resources from the ongoing struggle against Al Qaeda. By making bogus claims about WMD’s we lost credibility that will take a long time to regain regardless of who is in the White House. After 9/11 most of the world was with us. Iraq seriously degraded that good will and cooperation. Defeating Al Qaeda will take diplomacy and international political cooperation more than American military might. “Flipping-off” France or Germany or any other ally does the cause no good.
The person who posted the previous comment hit everything right on the head. The war in Iraq was not a good idea to begin with and the execution of it has been incompetent, bordering on criminal. And the eye candy? As a hetero woman, I don't see what you see. Sure, he's alright looking, maybe even goog looking, but Best. Eyecandy. Ever? Hardly.
Anon,
I agree and concede your point that Saddam and Al Qaeda were natural enemies. Like most, I never bought the contention that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. Although I'm sure they weren't crying in their beer when it happened and wished they had thought of it first.
However, as concerning,
"Where we disagree is the need to go to war with Iraq given the circumstances at the time. Before our invasion Saddam was contained, in a box so to speak, due to the no fly zones and the admittedly imperfect sanctions."
Saddam was not in a box and he was still brutalizing his countrymen. What oil that was flowing -due to the "imperfect sanctions"- lined Saddam's pockets while Iraqi children suffering from cancer and the like lanquished without treatment in Iraqi hospitals. Extreme, but true, example. There are many other examples of Iraqis going without the basics during the embargo while Saddam hogged all the wealth.
I think Bush did expect to find WMDs. I know, I know, pathetic, but remember how hard they fought to get UN inspectors in before the attack? Moreover, Saddam was making claims to military might -in retrospect, such claims were probably aimed to scare Iran.
Nonetheless, Saddam was going to remain a brutal dictator unless and until someone had the chutzpah to go in and kick his ass out.
We could have done it much, much, better. We could have waited for more support. Regardless, it had to be done.
Vonster-
Checkout the American flag on Airforce One sometime. Backwards on oneside, but not the other. According to the National Geographic Special I was watching it is because if it were a real flag, just ONE, REAL flag, one side would be "correct" while the other side would be reversed. I say, someone WAY over thought it and screwed it up. Kind of a good metaphor for gov't in general. Frankly, regardless of the reasoning I think it looks retarded.
Hetro Anon,
If this guy were coming around the bend to save your ass, you would think him the finest piece of masculinity alive.
Polly – I grant you that Saddam was still abusing his people; that was never going to change. But while we’ve bagged Saddam and in the hopefully not too distant future he will be dispatched on his way to hell, have we not created conditions for the Iraqi people that might actually be worse than under Saddam. We disturbed the soil and the weeds have grown – lots of them. I wonder how many innocents died during and since the invasion and how many are yet to die in the struggle for power.
As for the WMD’s or lack thereof I don’t think we’ll know for sure anytime in the near future what the President really believed. It is obvious that some pieces of information were exaggerated or possibly even fabricated to sell the war.
If our national mission becomes the overthrow of brutal dictators for humanitarian reasons there is no lack of opportunity. I think that our own national security has to always be the first priority.
Polly, I hope that you will always maintain your respect and admiration for our men (and women) in uniform. We’ve lost 2500 so far in Iraq. Many more have been maimed. It didn’t have to happen this way.
Anon,
I was going to let you have the last word, because I really don't think we are too far apart on this issue. Your comment, "It didn't have to happen this way" is the precise point I was trying to make with the post.
Saddam was and would always remain a brutal dictator. Like it or not, the health of our economy and most of the world's economies are oil dependent.
It didn't have to be this way. If the rest of the West was willing to admit that they had humanitarian AND economic interests, gone to bat with us, this whole mess could have been resolved more efficiently with a lot less blood shed.
Yes, I blame Bush -awk!- for the way he went into this war. I still think force (sadly) was the only solution to liberate Iraq. Saddam was never going to respond appropriately to diplomacy or embargos.
The UN Inspectors, the head guy, Blix, said BEFORE the war that there were NO WMD's. None nada.
Even if Blix said so, it doesn't change the fact that Saddam was still lining his pockets while his countrymen suffered horribly. The embargo punish Iraqis and oil consuming countries, not Saddam. He had to be taken down. Of course the UN was going to veto going in... while volunteer for duty when the U.S. will do your dirty work and dying for you?
those same men you adore in uniform are killers, mass murderers and rapists and you want to glorify them?
the military is nothing more than an organization where the worst of society can act out their aggression with imunity.
Anon,
Written like someone who was rejected by the Corp.
Post a Comment