[edible_eye]

i knew i'd seen this post somewhere but for the life of me, i thought it was in POLITICS and had been deleted. couldn't figure it the fuck out. found it though, obviously. and so, without further ado...

Originally Posted by Junk Bond Trader

Edible... I'm going to respectfully disagree.

excellent. debate is good. make edible happy.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

You mentioned you want the troops out because no more should die for the Iraqi's cause. To echo Colin Powell: you break it you buy it. We've broken it, and so we own it.

iraq was broken through saddam's reign, not because of this war. america declared war because we believed our country was in imminent danger. as a bonus, we found and removed saddam and his boys - read that as a clear slate for iraq to do for themselves. since when did an entire nation of people become absolutely determined to NOT be able to take care of themselves? if they want their country back, it's theirs now - once our military declared that no weapons were to be found in iraq, our reason for being there ended. everything we do there now is in direct violation of our power as a sovereign nation acting within the borders of another supposedly sovereign nation, according to the constitution

americans dying for iraqi sovereignty and calling that legitimate, calling that OUR responsibility? asinine.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

The PNACers have been planning this for years. They tried to get Clinton to do it. (before you call me a lock-step Democrat, I state for the record that I'm no huge fan of Clinton as he, like many of "The People's Party" are actually Republican-lite--Clinton was simply a corporatist that I could stomach.

citing the goals and objectives of some obscure political group doesn't interest me. i just don't see the benefit of screaming "conspiracy" whenever a piece or two of some outside puzzles might somehow fit into the main picture.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

My personal view is that we actually have one party here in America: the party of the corporation, by the corporation and for the corporation, and that it has a right wing, the Dems, and a far right wing, the Reps., but that's a whole other story.) Now that they have their puppet in power, they used the tragedy of 9/11 to further the foreign policy they wrote about in the 90s and dreamed about even before that.

as ricky once said to lucy... well as he said many, many times - you got some s'plainin' to do.

i can understand and consider the "of the corporation, by the corporation and for the corporation" analogy. after all, this country was built on the genesis and perpetuation of jobs, of work, of trade and commerce which ultimately provide tax money to the governmental body. it makes sense, following that logic. i don't agree with it, especially given all the wasted resources the government pisses away on social programs that fail and fail and fail - but i understand what you're getting at.

the other stuff - you've got some sort of self-defined theory rattling around within that head of yours. bring it out if you'd like to discuss it.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

Now that we're in Iraq, it is hard to see what course of action is correct.

it's only hard when your eyes stray from the initial directive, which was to find and remove weapons of mass destruction. stay focused.

the government is like a kid in a candy store with this war - a kid with a credit card. that kid was sent there to get a kit kat, that's it. but when he got there, his eyes got too big, he had the card in hand and his stomach began grumbling. before he knew it, he was throwing all sorts of shit onto the counter, racking up a bill he was never supposed to have. and still, that kid is running through the store, buying more and more shit. someone needs to give him a swat on the bottom to snap him out of his frenzy.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

I think it depends on what the reality of the Iraq situation is. I think there is an insurgency because the Sunnis, who were western in terms of way of life, are seeing the rights they had as a secular society under Sadaam being threatened by a constitution that would turn Iraq into a Theocracy. They, as well as insurgents from outside the country are seeing what is going on and they are fighting against it. They see the corporate take over of Iraqi oil, oil that was supposed to belong to its people, oil that was supposed to, according to the Bush administration, pay for reconstruction.

ok - pay attention to what you just said. all of this, every single word of it is an iraqi problem. what the fuck is a sunni to an american? if iraq wants a constitution, let them work on it. if iraq wants to be free, let them fight for it. if iraq wants to continue living in a bent over position, taking it up the ass because they have no will to fight for their rights - fuckin' a - who are we to say that's wrong or try to change it? that's not our business. that's not the reason our military was sent there.

iraqis never owned their oil. their government owned it. saddam owned it. and that same oil absolutely CAN pay for their reconstruction now that he's gone. let their men and women band together and rebuild their country. they have the money (oil), the manpower, the need for work, whatever. it's iraq's deal now. quite a bit of pride and a sense of ownership and accomplishment comes from working to achieve what one desires. handing them a remade country and government guarantees failure. one can not respect what one has been given for free.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

I will advocate to bring the troops home as soon as possible just as you do, but for the reason that our presence there is the reason there is an insurgency in the first place.

the insurgency is not america's business. iraq will fight and persevere or they will lay down and be overtaken. either way, america's boys and girls should not be killed in order for iraqis to survive.

and you do not support bringing them home as soon as possible - don't twist your words around. you believe they should stay and continue to fight. you believe "We've broken it, and so we own it". you believe what the government tells you - that we should stay there because we have work to do. you pick and choose the pieces you want to protest, but your main contention is that you want us to stay and fight for iraq.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

The administration has no desire to pull out now, because the chaos, both in terms of politics with the infighting over the terms of the constitution and the ground situation with the insurgency, allows for the corporatists to do what they always dreamed of: essentially stealing oil for their own benefit.

and american govenmental thinking is the problem here. they think too much and muddy the water. they want too much and get confused. they should have stuck to the basics. declare war to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction, secure iraq to search, no weapons of mass destruction found, time to come home.

we have no end objective now. we have nothing against which to measure success or failure. we have, for all intents and purposes - nothing, except americans dying for some deluded fantasy that iraq will be free.

iraq. fuck iraq.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

As Bill Mahar has said, maybe down the road, we'll see the PNACers as visionary. Right now they are a (in my view) gang of un-American radicals dragging our country down a dangerous road who have hijacked our country to drive their own corporatist agenda.

fuck bill maher and fuck the pnac also.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

I'm an American, but I guess I have a different view of what it means to be one.

maybe. or maybe you just have a different view, period. i'm curious about your democrat / republican theory contrasted against the view of american government as being for the corporation.