posted on January 9, 2007 06:06:36 PM
This rather long but interesting Op_Ed piece offer some insight as to why we are in this mess and will probably stay in it for awhile---IMO, of course.
By Richard Cohen, syndicated columnist for the Washington Post:
Bush myopia spurs
Iraq fantasyland
George W. Bush has executed 153 people in his lifetime, 152 of them in Texas and one so far in Iraq. The Iraqi, of course, is Saddam Hussein, who went to his burlesque of a death with more dignity than an Iraqi government that so hurried him to the gallows that in much of the world, the hanging looked a lot like a lynching. The President, we are told, did not bother to view the spectacle on tape. Maybe he feared he would learn something.
I bring up Bush's appalling record of executions not because I have once again mounted my anti-capital punishment hobbyhorse, but because it offers an insight into why the United States will stay in Iraq and with even more troops than before.
Let me explain. During the 2000 presidential campaign, Bush answered a question about why he so ardently supported capital punishment. He offered a number of reasons, but one - deterrence - prompted me to raise my hand and ask a followup: But, Sir, there is absolutely no evidence that capital punishment is a deterrent. To my absolute astonishment, Bush conceded my point: "You're right. I can't prove it. But neither can the other side prove it's not."
Ponder that answer for a while. What it means is not just that Bush embraced a famously irrational way of thinking - the logical fallacy often called "proving a negative" - but in this case he used it to overwhelm all evidence to the contrary. Once you know this, you can appreciate what Bush means when he calls himself the "decider." It means that evidence, arguments, proof and logic cannot be conclusive when, as is often the case, the President proceeds on what can be called a matter of faith. I am not referring here just to religion - although surely that is paramount to Bush - but to supremely secular matters of state: when to go to war, why go to war and when to remain at war. In Bush's mind, the bad guys will lose and the good guys will win and Iraq will become a democracy. This will happen not because Bush can prove it will, but because nobody can prove it won't.
This is why we are in Iraq today and why we are going to stay there. All this time, it did not matter that Iraq was going to hell, or that the terrorists were never there, or weapons of mass destruction were never present, or Saddam had no role in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, or that democracy for Iraq was never really in the cards - none of that mattered because nobody could prove otherwise.
Up against this kind of mentality, the rational man seeks comfort in fantasy. It was our fantasy that a new Iraqi government, formulated months ago, would so turn things around that Bush would begin a staged withdrawal. It was our fantasy that the November congressional elections would make a difference - and Bush would be forced, when he saw the clear sentiment of the American people, to reverse himself. It was our fantasy that the report of the Iraq Study Group (the Baker-Hamilton commission) would compel the President to rethink everything. In fact, their effort was wasted. They were the mullers. Bush was the decider. And so those who have decided otherwise - a couple of four-stars, maybe the chief spook and all those smart people throughout government and academia - are ignored. Bush listened to them when he agreed with them and refused to listen when he did not.
The execution of Saddam Hussein was Iraq in a nutshell. Aside from the dead man at the end of the rope, nothing went the way the Americans wanted. It was sloppy, putrid with the stench of sectarian hatred and, as always, totally unnecessary. George Bush saw it differently by not, as is his custom, seeing it at all.
posted on January 9, 2007 08:32:16 PM
Good summary... that kind of thinking by Bush along with an avoidance of a time line makes for staying the course as long as he is the decider.
posted on January 9, 2007 08:58:53 PM
Opinions of majority of Americans, Generals, the Study Group and now even fellow Republicans will not deter him. Wonder how the troops feel being in Iraq because of the "decider?"
posted on January 9, 2007 11:50:37 PM
Thanks for the post, coincoach!
""Wonder how the troops feel being in Iraq because of the "decider?"""
I often wonder how veterans of Iraq who will never walk again or be able to feed themselves or see again, how parents, husbands, wives, children of dead soldiers ...how thses people feel about the horrible deception of the "need " for a war in Iraq. How all the terrible things that happened to them were for a LIE....a fantasy.......
The author of this article is too lenient on Bush in my opionon.
Nowhere in this article does he mention the Lies that led this nation to war or hold George Bush responsible for those lies. Richard Cohen has a history of coming to Bush's defense from people who in his estimation are being "rude to the president". He also supported the administration's Lie that Iraq had WMD before the war calling those who did not either fools or Frenchmen. Recently he had a beam me up moment when he wrote, "Israel is itself a mistake"
This article is just his weak and pitiful effort to get back on track with his realization finally that his original assessment of Bush and the war was totally bogus. He has waffled all over the place in an effort to explain Bush. He has painted him as a "useful idiot" and then as an "amiable" dunce just repeating the lies of others and now as a decider who fails to listen to good advice. The American public now knows that Bush is more culpable than that.
I do not endorse Richard Cohen or his opinions as a whole, but did think the column was a good illustration of how Bush thinks only(he thinks?) He has told lie after lie to get us to do what he wants because of his terribly flawed character and his inability to listen to any advice except from those who agree with him. It makes me angry that our country is in this mess because of the psychological problems of our President. I don't disagree with your opinion of this writer, but even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally.
posted on January 10, 2007 07:41:38 AM new
I think I've almost become convinced that we should have handled carrying out saddam's death penalty ourselves, rather than leaving it to the Iraqi's.
You dems might have had something to RAGE about had we murdered saddam they way he did HIS victims.
We could have put him in vats of acid and listened to them screaming as it ate at his flesh.
We could have put him in one of his infamous wood chippers....feet first and listened to them scream in unbearable pain.
We could have had him watch as his daughter was raped by many and then her head cut of and put on a stick outside one of his castles.
Yep...so many ways we could have copied his actions.....the hanging by rope was more than he EVER gave his victims.
Yep....we should have treated him just as he treated his citizens....then you'd all have something REAL to bash.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 10, 2007 08:24:17 AM new
Saddam was a murderous monster who tortured and killed thousands of human beings. How does replicating his actions, even to rid ourselves of this monster, help? We would be acting in the same manner as Saddam did. When you want to discipline your child for hitting his brother, you do not spank the child. The child will realize that you are a hypocrite and no lesson will be learned. I am not equating what Saddam did to siblings fighting, but the analogy is there.
posted on January 10, 2007 08:38:08 AM new
LOL....nope.
That's where the liberal mind think and I part.
We, the US, have NEVER done what saddam did. Please 'get a clue'...the clue bank isn't closed yet.
Here's one for you to think about.
"This is not the time to lament the dictator [Saddam], but of course that's what many did. As his appointed hour grew nigh, the humanitarians of the world found a new champion. 'He held the country together!' Well, if President Bush gassed New York and California and outlawed the Democratic Party, he could impose the same sort of remarkable cohesion."
---James Lileks
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 10, 2007 09:35:31 AM new
Speaking of "clues",I think you need to make a withdrawal from the "clue bank." How about reading even the first line of my post. I never said the US did anything remotely like what Saddam has done. The point of my post is that the US should not sink to the level of those who kill and maim. Clear enough?
posted on January 10, 2007 11:09:29 AM new
"clear enough"
LOL LOL LOL
Oh yes, your position is VERY clear. You support this op ed piece by a liberal who doesn't know what he's talking about.
AND you agree with him that saddam should NOT have been given the death penalty by HIS OWN PEOPLE....who sought JUSTICE for what he'd done to THEM for 35 years.
Yep...you're another saddam supporter it appears. He was the good guy and the US is the bad guy.
got it.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 10, 2007 12:00:33 PM new
Linda, you really are an idiot! As I said in 2 posts, Saddam was a monster, torturer, killer. How do you twist that into my being his supporter? The column I posted had more to do with why we are in Iraq,(which is why I posted it) but did talk about the way in which Saddam was executed. Of course he deserved punishment. Even if I were pro capital punishment, that was still a disgusting spectacle. I understand why you are such an avid Bush supporter--you both have brains which cannot be penetrated.
posted on January 10, 2007 12:06:59 PM new
I already stated that the author of your article doesn't know what he's talking about. And I'm not just saying that to be saying it. RECORDED history proves him wrong.
But hey...I'm aware that liberals/dems don't need FACTS to form their opinions....they just believe whatever someone writes.
As I understand your position....the US should have stepped in and PREVENTED saddam's hanging?
IF that is correct...then you ARE supporting saddam NOT being punished for all the atrocities HE committed.
Imo, that IS siding with his side....against what American POLICY has been since the 1991 war....and which THREE administrations agreed with. Yes, even clintons administration wrote policy on saddam.
I also supported clinton when he said saddam HAD a womd program. And when he BOMBED Iraq to supposedly get rid of some of that SAME WOMD.
That's what I see the saddam supporters in denial about....while blaming this administration for what the UN, the US and Iraq agreed upon to end the 1991 war.
But we're bad/terrible...but the liberals NEVER want to see the truly EVIL ones pay for their actions against humanity.
Just like the other saddam supporters here have said Iraq was better off UNDER the continuing RULE of saddam.
That's pretty SICK to me.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 10, 2007 12:12 PM ]
posted on January 10, 2007 12:29:25 PM new
I don't know if you are being deliberately obtuse, or you really are. In a previous post in this thread, I stated that I am not a particular fan of that writer. However, I can appreciate a good thought from anyone who, IMO, makes sense. I do not believe in capital punishment for anyone. However, that does not mean I wanted Saddam to go free and be treated as a god. Cannot speak for anyone else on this board, but IMO he should have been locked away, never to be seen again.
Keep posting your hyperbole and your leaps of fantasy regarding "liberal" opinions. Keep giving derogatory labels to people you know nothing about How can anyone take you seriously?
posted on January 10, 2007 12:46:48 PM new
LOL....I don't think liberals take the FACTS of most situations seriously....that's why I play here.
Pointing out their obvious lies, mis-truths they stated....and give them an occasional FACT or two to try and force them the see the realities of life.
I've long ago come to the conclusion that dems vote the way they do because they're SO misinformed. Then they base their positions on that same misinformation.
Then, of course, we have to accept that they have all sorts of double standards they adhere to .
But such is the game of politics.
But when one sides against American policy, put in place by BOTH republicans and dems....then yes, I call that not being pro-America.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 10, 2007 01:09:13 PM newLinda, you really are an idiot! As I said in 2 posts, Saddam was a monster, torturer, killer. How do you twist that into my being his supporter?
It is because of all that bible belt dope that the Republicans keep pumping into her. Linda is living in her alternate reality.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on January 10, 2007 01:24:57 PM new
logansdad She definitely is circling Mars. Her last post addressed not one point in my post. She just wants to preach and dis others so that she can feel superior in her own mind.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on January 10, 2007 01:32:33 PM newPointing out their obvious lies, mis-truths they stated..
Where are "they" that lindak continues to address here daily? "They" aren't posting here on the RT so are they invisible lurkers she's talking to and hearing all the time? She seems to be talking to them a lot more than usual anyways.
posted on January 10, 2007 01:33:38 PM new
you two are just sooooo funny.
coincoach...had you just stated that you were against the death penalty...I wouldn't have responded.
It's when you agree with all that other crap in your op-ed and blame this administration for doing EXACTLY what the clinton administration said too....
...then I call you a saddam supporter.
How can you believe/support American policy under a dem president who made it our national policy to remove saddam from power....AND also stated saddam HAD a womd program....to then turning right around and blaming this administration for 'things being so messed up'?
Makes no sense to me....so I see you and your ilk the same way you see me.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 10, 2007 01:46:40 PM newHer last post addressed not one point in my post. She just wants to preach and dis others so that she can feel superior in her own mind.
What else does an old retired wing bag have to do all day but sit in front of a computer screen and post her rants. She claims liberals have flawed reasoning but she continues along her lines of liberals against bush, liberals against the war = liberals dont support the troops. Now she is using the same reasoning with those that speak out against what was done to Saddam = liberals approving of him killing thousands of people and supporting his regiem.
Now if we can get mingo and bigpeepa to ignore her, Linda would be left to talk to herself.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on January 10, 2007 01:56:13 PM new
Liar_K said, "coincoach...had you just stated that you were against the death penalty...I wouldn't have responded" LOL
You wouldn't have responded LOL. My best laugh so far today.
posted on January 10, 2007 02:15:38 PM new
laughter is good for you "waco".
"Why Bush Will Keep Us In Iraq"
Because he is an intelligent man who knows what his position requires of him....to protect our Nation.
AND he has the ability to recognize the threats we now face since 9-11. And he's actually DOING something about them...rather than the 'we want to understand them' liberals.
He has a backbone...and doesn't change his decisions based on the 'current political climate'...like the dems do
We're lucky to have this man serving our Nation....doing what needs to be done. While the rest HIDE their heads in the ground...pretending that if we just bring our troops home....everything will return to normal.
You'll NEVER see 'normal' again. The world has changed as the terrorists become MORE and MORE aggressive....all over the world.
Get used to it.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 10, 2007 02:24:53 PM new
There is a big difference between someone with a backbone who has the courage of his convictions and someone who has dug in and will not change his mind despite an increasisngly bloody war, increasing numbers of Americans who are disgusted with the war and advice from experts in the Armed forces and even in his own party. What Bush is doing has more to do with covering his azz than what's good for America.
posted on January 10, 2007 02:37:21 PM new
I see you're like most liberals here, coincoach, and don't answer questions put to you. Must be a 'party' thing.
And I disagree. The threat that was there is STILL there. Do you not believe what the terrorists state as their goals? The destruction of Israel and the US?
How can you ignore those threats? You just don't believe them? Or if you ignore them, they'll just fade away???
He's sticking with supporting the Iraqi people UNTIL they can defend themselves.
I think by his listening to ALL the advice he's been given...and the fact that he's changing the way we go forward....PROVES he's willing to try something different.
He HAS listened to his military commanders....but just like in ALL of life, they too have different opinions on what will/won't work the best.
You, like most liberals give him NO credit for all those terrorists he has protected our nation from....heck I don't even think you're AWARE of those terrorists arrested in the US....with plans to do major damage.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 10, 2007 05:58:02 PM new
Back on topic....
Think Progress is keeping track of how every member of Congress stands on the Bush escalation plan. The list is not complete but interesting. Each member explains their reasoning on the issue.
posted on January 10, 2007 06:09:47 PM new
Unofficial poll taken on Fox News with 40,000 viewers voting....
....70% support increased troops
....30% don't.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 10, 2007 07:00:28 PM new
Now all of a sudden someone believes in polls once again.
I thought Liar_k did not believe in polls.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
