European Tribune

I "Get It" M*ther***ers

by DarkSyde
Wed Jun 29th, 2005 at 03:08:18 PM EST

OK I've simply had it with these War Hawk idiots. The following is me throwing in the towel on several wingnuts who still support this shit after that miserable performance last night. I really don't care anymore about alienating them. We're the majority now and we have the mojo, so let's just stop dicking around and start calling these assholes out. Anyone still left supporting this shit deserves nothing less.

Some vulgarity below


Some of you assholes seem to be under the impression that somehow (?), creating democracies in the Middle East will prevent terrorism; Huh? At least that's what you're now reduced to for listening to BushCo. That's your sole basis of justification left for this conflict. The question I have is why the hell would you think that in the first place?

Democracies attack each other you numbskulls. In fact the US, a democracy if there ever was one, openly and privately funded, trained, and equipped insurgencies and coups against democratically elected nations in the last 50 years over and over. Iran, Chile, Nicaragua, to name a few.

Why do you think Saudis wouldn't elect OBL or Egyptians elect Aymen Zawari or someone less visible yet sympathetic to them? Politicians get elected in democratic countries by currying favor with voters. Most Muslims either dislike the US or at the very least don't trust us, why do you think anti-US politicians wouldn't capitalize and win in at least some places on that basis?

Or how about I stipulate purely for your benefit that a fucking miracle occurs: Democracy not only breaks out all over the Middle East, those nations  miraculously elect US friendly democratic governments despite the current image problems the US suffers from in the region. Not one politicians tries to play on widespread anti-US sentiment-that's quite a stipulation and I hope you appreciate it. Now, how and why will that stop the terrorist fundies? It doesn't stop ours. It didn't stop Timothy McViegh or David Koresh, in fact it made it easier for them to operate?

Terrorist operate better in a free country where they can freely travel unrestricted and have rights of due process. It's easier for them to operate in the US than in a dictatorship unless that tyrant directly sponsors them. AQ had no problem pulling off 9-11 in the US or the Madrid bombing in Spain, both democratic governments; both free nations. Why do you think democracies in the Middle East would be any different?

You think those of us opposed to this war are just so damn stupid and short sighted we don't get this grand, sweeping idea of igniting democracy and wiping out terrorism. Wrong, we do get it, we get it better than you do. There is just no logical connections between establishing a fledgling democracy and wiping out years of ethnic and religious hatred which has bred the terrorism.

Democracy is not an automatic road to paradise.  When the stench of communism was lifted in the Balkans and they got a chance to go to the polls as you recall, horrific terrorism broke out all over the place. On the other hand, hunting down OBL and Zawari will definitely end those specific terrorists.

We know where he is and we're not doing anything about it? And you're behind these pricks? Are you totally out of your flippin minds?

Why the fuck are we not in there with everything we've got? You think we give a flying shit about Pakistan's handful of nukes? If they even tried to launch one we'd turn their shitty nation into radioactive glass from border to border while India shot a few thermos in just for kicks.

Goddamn, what the hell is wrong with you people? There is no reason to think we can succeed in forcing US friendly democracies in places where the US is at best distrusted intensely. There is no reason to think that in the unlikely event US friendly leaders are elected in each and every country of interest that the terrorists will be stopped, and every reason to think it will enable them. Meanwhile we are ignoring those folks who are the literal and operational figureheads of the slimes balls that did attack us.

This.

Makes.

No.

Fucking.

Sense.

Period.

We do get 'the plan': It doesn't make a lick of sense, and we can tell using historical precedent out the ying-yang it's as unlikely to produce the desired end result as carpet bombing.

Now, do you get that we get it and that it simply sucks big hairy donkey dicks? Do you get that we get it but 'it' is a bullshit ad hoc excuse offered up after the wheels came off in Iraq? Do you get that BushCo is going down in flames because he can't come clean to a nation which forgave both Reagan and Clinton for breaking the law? Do you get that that motherfucker sat up there on live TV last night and seriously trotted out the exact same bullshit that everyone is pissed off about already?

We do get it. But by your own inability to articulate why it will work, you're tacitly admitting there's no 'there' there. Your plan suffers the Underpants Gnomes fallacy:

Step 1 Invade Iraq

Step 2

Step 3 US safer from Al Qaeda

We get it. If you can't fill in the blank, it doesn't make any goddamn sense and thousands of people are being killed and maimed for no good fucking reason. And you brain dead evil motherfuckers can't seem to get that.

Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password

Display:
 I give it a 9.7

 In other questions, they babble a lot about 'I'd rather fight them here than in America."

 Do they REALLY believe that an attitude of 'Better Iraqis die to car bombs than Americans' is REALLY going to make them like us?

 Idiots.

....because I would rather see us reduce the consumption of imported oil than have to send American boys to fight in the Persian Gulf. - John B. Anderson

by Anderson Republican on Wed Jun 29th, 2005 at 06:00:29 PM EST
Damn, but I love a good rant!

Also, just think of all the positive PR generated by a policy of (essentially) "brown peoples' bodies aren't worth counting"

Another version of the Underpants Gnomes is:

  1.  Invade Iraq

  2. [redacted]

  3. Profit!
by OkieByAccident on Wed Jun 29th, 2005 at 09:28:42 PM EST
My beef is with those who tell me that I should forgive and welcome repentant Bush voters into the struggle. I'm told that we need them now. Well, we needed them on Nov.2 last year. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who voted for Bush is complicit in the murders of thousand and thousands of Iraqi's and the loss of 1744 American troops.

One more thing. That includes any Democrat who backs down in the face of Bush's impending assault on the Supreme Court. I'm so sick of fuckers who back down.

by supersoling on Sat Jul 2nd, 2005 at 07:13:55 AM EST
You're 110% right that transforming the ME to a democratic government - even if it means avoiding the Iran-style "democracy" - would not help us in the War on Terror(tm).  

Sadly that's not a line of reasoning that the public can follow.  It's too easy to counter with, "So you would prefer a dictator!?"  

by rast (deavod (at) hotmail (dot] com) on Sat Jul 2nd, 2005 at 11:04:00 AM EST
The only reason I see for staying is essentially a negative one:  to leave now would leave those who have co-operated with us this far at the mercy of those who would label them "collaborators with the enemy."  (or worse) To leave now would mark us as unreliable allies.  We shouldn't have gone in in the first place, but having done so, I don't see an alternative to providing security for our allies until they can take over the task themselves.
by Dale Read (dale43211-at-hotmail.com) on Sat Jul 2nd, 2005 at 01:51:33 PM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]