LGB is a Poet!
My brother had to write a poem as homework for his Gr. 11 English class. He was disgusted at the thought, because like me, he generally thinks poetry is emo and not "real writing". So to inspire him, I told him to write a poem as if it was a freestyle rap. I am going to share the first draft of what he came up with, because misspaprika thinks ninja_sheep and foodsthatcan will
( Read more... )
Except this one with a man at the helm
WTF?! Seriously?! That better be a really lame, insensitive joke or there's more craziness in Scarlem than I thought. Seriously, no one else has ever been brutally attacked by terrorists or fought in a controversial war or been flooded? Oh my God. And besides that, since I can't think of another 9/11-level terrorist attack, is he like, BLAMING Bush for what happened? SERIOUSLY. Is that what I'm actually seeing? I really don't know what to say to that, if I am, other than just to shake my head sadly at the youth of today.
a dictator... Couple of votes the other way...
I was going to say he won the election (as much as I don't like him) but then it looks like your GLB already knows that, so... what gives?
Unleashing terror in places
That didn't need him to meddle
Yeah, Iraq was sunshine and daisies under Saddam Hussein. *ROLLS EYES!!!* I seriously don't even know what to say. Was there a proper revolution going on in Iraq prior to the war that I don't know about? Was anyone taking control of the situation? It's like people think there was nothing wrong until Bush stepped in. And I know (generally; I'm not claiming to be a political scientist or historian) about the previous goings-on in the Middle East where past presidents did some shitty things but I don't see how that's a reason not to step in. It's like, because a bunch of mistakes were made, the proper thing to do is step back and let the people there suffer with a monster.
I'm not saying I think this war was/is properly managed - it's obviously not - but I am resentful of the "It's not your business!" mentality. It's always supposed to be the western world's responsibility when there's some other kind of crisis (AIDS in Africa, world hunger, a natural disaster, etc.) and I don't see why this is so different.
I'm kind of rambling but I guess the main thing I don't get is what the anti-war folks would have wanted to happen. Were you/they seriously content with Saddam Hussein's rule?
Reply
I've decided I'm just going to laff at anyone who comments to this poem, unless they approve of it, since it's not mine and I can't respond for LGB. I will say, though, that I totally believe that it wasn't the U.S.'s business to meddle in Iraqi affairs and that 9/11 was partly caused by the disgusting nature of American foreign policy. I'm not going to say anything else about that because my views on 9/11 aren't exactly the type of thing that'll win me popularity contests even in left-wing circles.
Also, I think LGB was trying to say that no country had ever witnessed all three of those things in such a small time period, but like I said, I'm not him. I also laff muchly at you "shaking your head at the youth of today", since you're all of, what, a year and three months older than LGB.
Reply
I'm not going to get into 9/11 specifically either because in my mind it isn't all that connected with the reasons I personally support the war on Iraq. I don't see how it's not the US (and our) business to meddle in Iraqi affairs when those affairs concern people dying from their evil government but it is when they concern people dying from pandemics, poverty, etc. If I'm going to care about other countries enough to help them fight disease and such, I'm going to care enough to help them fight other killers.
Pfft! It's still lame. And pfft again! I'm old enough to know better, that's how old I am.
Reply
I ain't got nothing much to say except that Iraq only had something to do with 9/11 if you were delusional, and the Bushies tried real hard, what with mentioning "9/11" and "Iraq" in the same sentence as much as possible in the run up.
And I love how if you disapprove of the war it automatically = Saddam LUV. You don't have to like Saddam to see that the war in Iraq has accomplished exactly nothing, and you don't have to go to Baghdad to hear Iraqis saying that Saddam sucked, but at least you could go to the store for food and not worry about getting blown up on the street. Al Qaeda t'weren't anywhere near Iraq until we opened up the borders and let 'em in.
Reply
Yeah, Iraq was sunshine and daisies under Saddam Hussein. *ROLLS EYES!!!* I seriously don't even know what to say. Was there a proper revolution going on in Iraq prior to the war that I don't know about? Was anyone taking control of the situation? It's like people think there was nothing wrong until Bush stepped in. And I know (generally; I'm not claiming to be a political scientist or historian) about the previous goings-on in the Middle East where past presidents did some shitty things but I don't see how that's a reason not to step in. It's like, because a bunch of mistakes were made, the proper thing to do is step back and let the people there suffer with a monster. (if the code doesn't work, pretend that that's in italics. :-P
It's not about approving of the situation. It's about knowing your limits before you start something. CLEARLY overthrowing Saddam and instituting InstaDemocracy was outside what the U.S. could realistically achieve in Iraq. Now, maybe that's not even what the Admin was thinking, but that's sure as hell how they sold it, and it was completely false, and it didn't take a scholar to know that. It only took a reasonable reading of the volatility of the region and the willingness of the U.S. to commit enough military power to Iraq to really control it. This does not demand an Einstein-level of intellect.
Projects to help with the AIDS epidemic and such are so far removed from military occupation that I can't see how it's anywhere near a valid comparison. Those things are in separate universes from each other.
Reply
Exactly. EXACTLY. I was going to say that, but I thought if I took the time to respond to all the things in Shelster's argument that I disagreed with, it would be anti-Ramadan-like and possibly rage-inducing, which is also anti-Ramadan-like, so I left it alone. But YES. EXACTLY.
You can do tons to help cure AIDS and help rebuild a country after a tsunami hits by sending money, which the western world has an abundance of, and peaceful aid. The money part is the big reason why we're often looked to for help in these types of situations and why it's considered our responsibility to a certain extent. The distribution of wealth in the world is clearly unbalanced (for reasons both valid and not), so IMHO, looking to the developed nations of the world to solve problems that can be solved or helped by redistributing some of the wealth of the world is both fair and natural.
On the other hand, you can't create democracy in a volatile country with money. It takes a lot of bloodshed and a lot of time and a lot of effort, and most western countries are not willing to put in the kind of thought, time, money, and follow-up effort that is needed to make something like that work. Sure, they can go in with guns and kill a lot of people and terrorize the dictators out of there, but then what happens when they leave? There's a country left behind full of people who have no idea how to run an efficient democracy. They don't have the structures in place or the money to put the structures into place that are necessary to make any of it work. And once the war is "won", the developed countries who were all into fighting for democracy for the people don't care anymore, because it wasn't their battle to fight in the first place and they're not there to face the consequences of the fallout. They don't have to deal with the chaos and the every day problems that the fallout creates.
It's all well and good to say, "OMG! The people were suffering under horrible Saddam!", but the thing is, the people are still suffering even though he's gone and the great U.S. has "freed" them.
Reply
WURRRD x 309483904830943. *GANG SINEZ*
I will tell you my views on 9/11 before we get married, but after Ramadan, or at least when I'm not fasting and am free to be as non-peace and love like as I want. Heh.
Reply
*gang sinez*
Reply
Leave a comment