Democratic Underground  

Rummy Has 15,000 Reasons Why Iraq is Not in the Midst of Anarchy
May 16, 2003
By Jeremy B. Cairns

I'm sure by now all of you have come to the same conclusion as me: Donald Rumsfeld is certifiably insane.

As everyone in my beautiful home town of Seattle cheered the 5000 sailors floating back from "The Big Lie" on the Abe Lincoln (scene of Top Bum) the sailors have just sat down in their La-Z-Boys to soak up a good back patting from Faux news. Until, that is, they find out that Donny is sending 15,000 more of their patriot brothers and sisters to Iraq because Baghdad is so - I'd say "excuse my French", but since French is banned - "freedomed" up.

Now, in a rare slip of the truth the White House has said "WE HAVE (not) FOUND WMD IN IRAQ AND WE WILL (never) FIND WMD IN IRAQ!" This means they are now turning to domestic issues. Unfortunately those domestic issues happen to be in Iraq... again.

"The characterization of anarchy is not accurate - it's a headline writer's phrase." - Donald Rumsfeld, 5/15/03

One would think that shooting protestors for throwing rocks would be one deterrent to the Iraqis and would snap them into more of an American state of mind. Things like shooting citizens don't happen when the situation is under control and there is a big political 'love in' in Baghdad like we are led to believe. Instead the whole situation has just made a few million Iraqi citizens bitter. And we all know very well what a few bitter Middle Eastern people can achieve.

"We've had people shot, wounded and killed in the last 48 hours in Baghdad." - Donald Rumsfeld, 5/15/03

Of course, if I were Republican and Rummy were a Dem I would leave that quote as is, but since I am a Democrat and Donald is a megalomaniacal nut job, I will tell you that the quote is not referring to the Americans doing the murdering this time. It's being done by those horrible looters and terrorists, aka, starving citizens struggling to survive who choose not to accept Jesus as their personal savior in order to feed their families.

So, I ask, what will 15,000 more troops do to keep the order in Iraq? It will turn the bomb lobbing and bullet spitting liberators into what they have always said they weren't; an occupation force. What do occupation forces do other than start softball teams and shoot lizards from their speeding Hummers, all to a Toby Keith soundtrack? They build military bases. Military bases that house all kinds of things like troops, trucks, missiles, bigger missiles, and lots of equipment to build oil refineries and more military bases. Why does the United States need military bases in Saudi Arabia where they hate Americans, when the U.S. can build military bases in Iraq where the population can be forced to like Americans? It's pretty obvious that if you protest against the U.S. over there you have a good chance of dying or becoming an "enemy combatant," where you're promptly imprisoned. Thank goodness Saddam is gone huh?

These 15,000 troops get combat pay - since the war isn't actually over, because under the Geneva Convention that would mean the U.S. would have to free the POWs and stop searching for all of those faces on those idiotic novelty card decks that were handed out. These payments increase the cost of the war substantially, but it is a drop in the bucket compared to how much it will take to end the occupation forty or fifty years from now. (see: Germany, Japan, South Korea, Panama, Philippines, Virgin Islands...)

Iraq in the future (i.e. tomorrow) is worse than yesterday. Donald Rumsfeld has assured his minions (i.e. patriotic Americans) that Baghdad is up to between two-thirds and three-fourhts contained. This means that when all of the ne'er-do-wells and miscreants (i.e. future terrorists) are pushed out, Baghdad (i.e. Bushipotamia) will be 100% contained only leaving 99% of Iraq to still be contained beyond the urban areas. Luckily, urban areas aren't contaminated with depleted uranium. Who needs night vision goggles when the "enemy combatants" glow in the dark?

In the future Iraq will be a staging point for a war. Maybe on Iran, or Syria, or Lebanon, or even Pakistan. Since Operation (insert country) Freedom has been used, the next war could be called Operation Kitties and Lollipops, because that's about as close to "Iraqi freedom" as the last operation got with thousands of POWs still in captivity and hundreds of thousands of citizens penniless, unemployed, sick, or homeless. Now that's freedom!

The future of Iraq is much brighter than the future of Afghanistan. The future of Iraq is a new beginning since they have now been stripped and looted of their past. The future of Iraq includes less oil in the ground, more English-speaking people in the streets, and lots of short-stringed Iraqi politicians. How can we surmise these revelations? Because so far almost everything the current administration has told us has turned out the exact opposite of what they have said. Not an occupation force? That means you pull people out, not send more in. Out in 3 years? Don't count on it, it's been almost two years in Afghaistan and the Taliban have taken back sections of the country with the help of the warlords who cropped up during the "writer's phrase-anarchy" that happened after the U.S. flattened that country. Free elections? Well, most of the local politicians have been placed by the U.S. government so far and a large number of them were Ba'ath party members. Too bad there are only 52 cards in a deck so that they couldn't include all of the Saddam supporters. WMDs? No. A clear connection to Al Qaeda? No. A sincere desire to help the Iraqi people? Not with Halliburton and Bechtel stripping them of their only tool of global survival.

There are 15,000 more Americans going to Iraq to keep the peace because it is anarchy beyond what the small occupation force is containing in sections of the urban areas. They're doing it under an iron fist full of wheat-flavored bibles. 15,000 more reasons for the Iraqis to hate the U.S. 15,000 more expensive peace makers, but not for freedom or liberation from tyranny, but for containment and submission.

And that's what you get when you let the insane run things. I would like to say, "Donald Rumsfeld, go to hell!" but I know the chances of him setting foot in Iraq again are slim.

Except, of course, to sell them more WMDs.

Jeremy B. Cairns is a freelance comedy writer who has written for Comedy Central, ESPN, CNN and numerous television commercials for various other networks. He has published numerous political cartoons in newspapers around the country and is now dedicating all of his time to making sure the current administration stops destroying the United States and selling it off piece by piece to corporations by working for various campaigns and the Democratic Party.

Printer-friendly version
Tell a friend about this article Tell a friend about this article
Discuss this article
Democratic Underground Homepage