Resolved: Bush Is Right on Iraq

[Robbien]

The American effort in Iraq is a moral mission, a practical mission, a necessary mission and an achievable mission.

That should be, and is likely to be, the message from House Republicans and conservative Democrats in a debate on Iraq scheduled for the House floor on Thursday.*

Specifically, the debate will be on a resolution declaring, among a number of "whereas" clauses, that the "criminal, Ba'athist regime in Iraq...had supported terrorists constituted a threat against global peace and security," and that the fight in Iraq is the terrorists' self-declared "central front." Its text therefore resolves (among other things) "that the United States is committed to the completion of the mission to create a sovereign, free, secure, and united Iraq" without a premature withdrawal of American troops.

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=9954

This debate on Iraq coming up in the House on Thursday is purely political but this is how it is going to be spun if the resolution is passed. It will be very telling to see how many of our so called Democrats vote for this resolution. Any Democrat voting for it is just handing the GOP a huge club to beat on the entire Democratic party.

[Akoto]

1. You know, even if every word of that were true ...

I still wouldn't give a crap because it DOES NOT justify invading a freakin' country for reasons which were a lie.

If we're attacking a sovereign power because it has nukes, then it had better have nukes when we get there. I don't care if Saddam Hussein was secretly breeding carnivorous attack ostriches, it still ain't nukes.

[idgiehkt]

2. I guess this is the only way they can fuck us in November

we can't talk about the war being such a quagmire if we voted for this resolution. wow.

[Erika]

10. Your post is why history will not be kind to W and his people

and those who voted for him. W "scared" a nation of people based on lies to evade a non-threatening country causing maimings and deaths to thousand upon thousands of their people.

[Canuckistanian]

3. It'll pass

The usual suspects will cave and the brave few will vote against.

Much caterwauling on Fox News about the dissenters. Tongues will cluck.

Life will go on.

[LSK]

4. what a bunch of bullshit

Iraq did not support terrorists nor was it a threat to global security. What a fucking bunch of total recycled BULLSHIT. Why cant these FUCKING LIES ever GO AWAY!?!?!?

:grr: :grr:

:nuke:

[Robbien]

5. They won't go away because "moderate" dems will vote for this

and it will pass. As long as some so called Democrats play along with the GOP, the GOP will have a bi-partisan resolution saying Bush was right to invade Iraq. The corporate media will play along.

[LSK]

8. and DUers will cry about how evil Democrats are

Even thou probably only 10 or so will vote for it out of the 200 something house Dems.

[Robbien]

11. It will be closer to 40, because that is how about how many New Dems

are in the House.

And DU knows better than to brush the entire Democratic party for actions done by the DLC/NewDems pro-war faction.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. And we will be castigated for not supporting DLC/New Democrats

and told that we are being divisive. The war is the defining issue of our time.

[Canuckistanian]

6. But try and find anyone in Congress who will say that

Sure, there's Conyers and Feingold and Kerry and maybe Kennedy.

But they'll focus on Lieberman. And Feinstein. And the whole gang that includes Ben Nelson.

And Hillary.

And much glee from the RWers pointing THAT out.

[coalition_unwilling]

19. Don't forget Jane Harman, who just won the primary, but

only with 61.5% of the vote. In other words, 38.5% of Jane's consitutents (including your humble narrator) cared enough and paid enough attention to vote against her in a primary marked by very low turnout state-wide.

[Erika]

9. History will not be kind to these people as enablers

of an unjust war. Time will pass, histrionics will go down and truth will prevail. Bush was able to scare a nation into believing an evil was attacking them. The evil was a harmless little country.

Then, the Hussein riddance thing will be blown away. There were literally dozens of tinhorn dictators who were as despotic.

Then it will come down to the real reason W invaded; corporatism and oil.

[Erika]

7. We made Iraq into a terrorist battlefield

We, are responsible for horrific deaths to the innocent Iraqi people and their families.

They never harmed us but we are well on our way to see them decimated. W's reason: Better the Iraqi innocents be decimated than our own. That utter selfishness is repulsive.


The pics of those Iraq little ones dead and maimed should produce a sense of shame in those who supported W's invasion of Iraq. Anyone, who buys W's "we did it for them" needs to think about their own little ones and how they would have felt. There was not one valid reason for us to attack the Iraqis.

There is not one reason why we should still be there. The Pew poll shows that. Our presence is only destabilizing the region further.

[necso]

12. Telling people what they want to hear

and want to believe (hold true without any substantial, useful, effective proof), or are otherwise easily induced to believe -- in this case about the "war" in Iraq -- can be a very effective tool for manipulating them. Because a person's perspective influences, when it doesn't entirely drive, his acts. ("Perspective" taken as including its fundaments: beliefs, knowledge, understandings.) And when a person wants to believe something -- or is otherwise easily induced to believe it -- he's more inclined to do so (believe) without seeking any (substantial, useful, effective) proof -- and, indeed, even in the face of (a mountain of) contrary evidence.

Moreover, if this "sold" perspective is an inutile one, then it can be most harmful to those who hold it. And when reality comes back to bite the deluded, it can be expected that those responsible for this (attempt at) misleading will try to cast blame anywhere but on themselves. And it can also be expected that these misleaders will be supported in this (and related deceptions) by (many of) those who believed the bullshit (lies) in the first place. Because these "believers" can be expected to grasp for any straw that lets them see themselves as something other than fools for believing at all -- much less from first to last.

There are far too many people in this country who simply can't separate out lies, bullshit, spin, wishful thinking, etc, from reality (especially, and including, telling feedback from the world at large -- not just more bs from misleaders, fellow travelers, and fellow "true" believers). And there are far too many people who simply don't wish to -- or who are afraid to -- separate out the lies, bullshit, spin, etc, and face reality.

Plus, playing to peoples' weakness (exploiting their vulnerabilities) is a neocon specialty, as is inducing such vulnerabilities in the first place.

It's going to be a long, tough slog.

(This has nothing to do with TO/Rover, BTW. Personally, I could hardly care less. I didn't expect -- and I don't expect -- Rover to go down (he's w's main man -- which should tell you all you need to know about w); and I awaited further confirmation before taking the story to be confidence-compelling. So there was a screwup (apparently) -- it's no big deal in my view.

And if we fight among ourselves, these guys are going to kill us -- even now.)

[Postman]

14. Up is down. Black is white. Invading Iraq was moral. Pass it on...

Is there a point of no return for this country?

[undeterred]

15. Whereas the president's head has been all the way up his ass for 6 years

...

[OzarkDem]

16. And how about the Republicans who vote for it?

Do they get a pass?

[Robbien]

17. The Pubbies who vote for it will be cheered by the rabid right

and the party line loyalists. Don't think the majority of Americans who feel this invasion is a mistake will take to kindly to them though. But this resolution is all about pandering to the unhappy GOP base.

[Nederland]

18. This is a big problem

The problem being that Democrats don't have a consist answer to what should be done in Iraq. If they vote against this resolution not only do they look weak, they will be forced to answer the question: well, what should we do? As a party, there is no consistent answer to that quesiton.