http://www.salon.com/politics/feature/2002/10/10/stark/index.html This is Rep. Pete Stark's statement about the upcoming war. Very, very, very hardhitting.
Hmm, a democrat with some cojones and at least half a spine (I'll grant he has the other half when I hear him mention the potential for thousands of senseless Iraqi deaths from this impending war). So there are still some out there. Too bad there weren't enough of them to send this Gulf-of-Tonkin-Resolution-without-a-Gulf-of-Tonkin back to where it came from.
Re: Re: "The bottom line is I don't trust this president and his advisors." It will matter to all the guys who will die for oil. Truth is always important.
Re: Re: Re: "The bottom line is I don't trust this president and his advisors." But oil gets me to work on time.
Stark pulled no punches on this one -- at least he understands the idea that someone in the bicameral system of government is supposed to act like the opposition party/point of view and not just go along with those currently running the show. I give props to him, Barbara Lee, Dennis Kucinich (sp?) and Paul Wellstone, all of whom put their seats at risk in the upcoming elections by voting for what is clearly an unpopular minority position in both the House and Senate and the country as a whole.
Re: Re: Re: Re: "The bottom line is I don't trust this president and his advisors." As long as you know there is blood in it. Then fine.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "The bottom line is I don't trust this president and his advisors." There's blood in oil? Learn something new every day.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "The bottom line is I don't trust this president and his advisors." Read some Melville then you'll get it.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "The bottom line is I don't trust this president and his advisors.& Read some Webster's. It's called sarcasm.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "The bottom line is I don't trust this president and his adviso Really! I never could have guessed.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "The bottom line is I don't trust this president and his ad I know, that's why I had to spell it out for you.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "The bottom line is I don't trust this president and his advisors." You know, just once I wish someone would provide me with a rational explanation of this "oil war" thing. I mean, it sounds all righteous and stuff, but about the only thing a war will do that I can see is jack up the price some more. The US is not going to end up owning Iraq'a oilfields out of this. It's simply a fantasy, an attempt to demonize the administration as lusting for wealth through war. The thing that you don't get, and apparently don't plan on TRYING to get, is that the American people just aren't buying the "Bush is Evil" "Bush is a bloodthirsty killer" routine. Because, frankly, that ain't him. He's a lot of things, good and bad, like all men. But nobody except hopelesss fanatics see him as some sort of Nazi. It's just not working for you.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "The bottom line is I don't trust this president and his advisors." I totally agree. And didn't we hear this crap last time we were in the persian gulf? "No Blood for Oil, blah blah blah" As for Kuwait, I could understand how someone could think it was over oil, because Kuwait was an OPEC ally we lost with the 'annexing' of the country to Iraq. This time? It's like they just recycled the anti-war crap from last time without even thinking about the issue. Sadly, this viewpoint is shared by way too many people where I live. :/ Maybe it's one of the reasons I feel the need to vent here...the 'Osama Bush Laden' posters and the 'Not My President' T-Shirts get to me after awhile... Also, let me make my political stand clear... I didn't vote for *either* Bush or Gore last time, and I'm not registered for either party. My political views are very heavily pragmatic, however, and that means that something like the invasion of Iraq - while not necesarilly an easy or cut and dry issue for me - becomes very easy to me when I think of the long term benefits of it. And I guarantee you, the Iraqi people's lives will be much better after we get rid of Saddam. Just like they are better now in Afghanistan, no matter what people tell you. And I think that's one of the *best* reasons to go through with the war. -Adam
Who said that Bush is a Nazi? Who said Bush is evil? The bottom line is that the Middle East has been a strategic place of interest for the world powers since the 1920s? Why? OIL. Why does Saddam Hussein have the resources to acquire weapons of mass destruction? OIL. Why are American soldiers still in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait? OIL. Do you think our leaders give a crap about the people of Iraq? Did we take military action against Iraq when they gassed the Kurds in 1988? The only military action that we took was to continue to support Saddam against Iran. As for the argument for owning the oil. We are not going to own oil but we will continue to have cheap access to it. The New York Times yesterday reported plans for a possible long term occupation of Iraq. Our military will be there for a long time. Do you actually believe that they will be there to ensure no WMD are developed? They will be there to ensure cheap oil is pumped to American consumers. It's not about good or evil. This is what great powers do. So Bush can spare me the BS. Just be honest and tell everyone what this war will really be all about. Now if someone convince me that American lives will be worth our continued access to cheap oil then I will support this war. But then tell that fact to the family members who will lose their loved ones in the war and the occupation that will follow.
Exactly. That, plus alot of Texans are going to be employed in Iraq. That's the argument, anyway. It's reasonable and coherent. I personally don't believe it, or at least, I think it's at best #4 on Bush's list of reasons in his head. But you guys ought to have enough respect for those on the other side to understand their arguments on their terms.
Indeed, I'd share that sentiment with my dad's cousin, if we weren't blown to bits over there in 1971.