On the Rhetoric of Defeat (moral, America, pagan, moral)

[!Fluffy!]

I read a poster elsewhere who says we (the U.S.) did what we set out to do in Iraq and defeated Hussein:

"We won the war in Iraq. We toppled Saddam's regime and the task is finished.
We benefit now in controlling the turbulance that Saddam once kept in order. This was the Bush White house folly, in thinking that Iraqi's wanted freedom and peace.

By thier violent actions towards each other they most assuredly did not want peace, just a piece of the action, to carry on a racial war that Saddam would not allow and kept in check. Now we inherit these atrocities and act like we lost a war. The war was with Saddam, his people were against him, we were against him, and now he and his regime are done. We played into the hands of the Iraqi's who want to continue thier ancient civil war, so be it. Have at it. Bring the forces home in a victory cry and quit succumbing to the retirick(sic) of defeat when thier never was or is one. I can not actually beleive how many people feed the fire of decadence in our own media."

Source

What do you think?

[kai]

I think hes right but i also think it should be seen through to the end, the problem will be recognising when it is the end,

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by Moon Woman

We played into the hands of the Iraqi's who want to continue thier ancient civil war, so be it. Have at it. Bring the forces home in a victory cry and quit succumbing to the retirick(sic) of defeat when thier never was or is one. I can not actually beleive how many people feed the fire of decadence in our own media."

Source

What do you think?

We can't declare victory if we leave a nation in anarchy with the promise of continued violence and oppression.

[!Fluffy!]

Originally Posted by kai

I think hes right but i also think it should be seen through to the end, the problem will be recognising when it is the end,

This is the problem I have with our version of military intervention. I get the feeling the end will be whenever "we" (the TV pundits and celebs who drive public opinion, that is) decide it will be. And will have nothing to do with what's right for the Iraqi people.

I just got done watching "The Fall of Saigon" again, and it made me sick enough to want to denounce my citizenship and leave. (Don't ask me where I'll go -- maybe I'll post a poll laterha ha.

We (the U.S.) can no longer walk into a conflict like this without acknowledging how the political vagaries of this country override any previous commitments made.

We the People can't be trusted to follow through on anything.

As far as I'm concerned, no President with a conscience should commit troops anywhere without knowing for a certainty the conflict will be resolved, finalized and troops withdrawn within his four year term.

If we insist on Americanizing a place (like we did Saigon) how could we in good conscience pick up our skirts one day and waltz off, leaving the people we have affected to their fate? It's pitilessly cruel, and the same as mass murder in my view.

I can't stomach the idea of another "pullout" - scenes of Saigon - with mothers begging American soldiers to take their babies, thousands of people streaming out of the cities into the countryside hoping to hide from the coming genocide, people frantically painting over or burning every bit of evidence tying them to their affiliation with the U.S.

During the fall of Vietnam, the (south) Vietnamese Army used their weapons to shoot their way onto rescue planes meant for getting women and children out of harm's way. One plane took off out of Saigon with a woman still clinging to the door; she didn't fall until they reached 3000 ft.

No, if our country doesn't have the conscience or the guts to insure the continued safety and well-being of the people we rescue we have forfeited our right to intervention.

[egroen]

Great points.

This is one of the few areas I agree with Bush -- to leave now would be disastrous. I don't even want to think about what would happen if we pulled up stakes and just left, as all the protestors seem to want. Do they [the protestors] even think of the consequences of what they are asking for? The loss of human life would be staggering.

-Erin

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by Moon Woman

As far as I'm concerned, no President with a conscience should commit troops anywhere without knowing for a certainty the conflict will be resolved, finalized and troops withdrawn within his four year term.

This is both impossible and impractical.

[kai]

the greatest chink in the armour of a democracy involved in military action is the moral fortitude to see it through, the death of one, just one UK soldier is a tragedy carried on our news the day it happens, it immediately raises calls to leave Iraq. compare that to the fact that our enemies are willing to blow to smithereens dozens of Iraqi citizens every day with little or no conscience and you see the problem. Life to us is precious and life to them is a cheap throwaway commodity. they even have the propaganda machine thats powerful enough to make the world and people in our own countries to feel that its somehow our fault that they bomb innocent people.

[!Fluffy!]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

This is both impossible and impractical.

Yes, that is my point.


I am now officially a vehement isolationist.