April 3, 2003
-
How to get many comments: Post a controversial statement about war…or any controversial statement!!! But just to clarify, you must understand that I love the United States…I think there’s no place else like it on earth…I still well up sometimes when i hear the national anthem or any other patriotic song. Everyone always wants to go travel internationally…i don’t really have a desire to do so (well, except Spain…but that’s because I’m part hispanic, so I want to discover my roots!!!)…I think anything you can find overseas, you can find in the US…great beaches…great parks..great cultural arts…great national monuments and sights…great nightlife…great looking girls..tee hee. I guess i’ve always had this slightly unrealistic, over-idealized view of the US…and it just kind of shocked me that the US would engage in a more or less, pre-emptive strike against a country that surely can not beat us without outside help. And for reason that are partially noble, partially selfish.
Comments (14)
go US!
well said
One last thing to show you guys to counter the bad things happening to civilians because of bombings (of which I am sure of…no doubt). But good things can be found too!
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/03/sprj.irq.hydar/index.html
hey mamacita .. just wanted to tell ya that there are 2 cunnigham’s in brooklyn .. one that teaches undergrad english (who i had, and is not that great of a teacher), and one who only teaches in the MFA program at BC … the MFA guy was the one who wrote the book … my plan is to read the book over the summer .. and if it’s good, buy it and get him to sign it
…he’s coming out with another book-based movie with Colin Farrell and Sisy Spasik (sp?) ..so maybe this is just the beginning? .. i think that if they have another movie showing, u should pay a visit to ol BC to see it 
that being said .. i find all this discussion very interesting .. and after much deliberation of the ongoing debates in the past few weeks, i’ve come to realize that 1. Saddam is bad and must be stopped and 2. i dunno if the US should be the one to do it …
i think that i’ve always been pro-war .. and just having Tony Blair backing up the US has got to tell you something about the kind of regime that’s in iraq rite now .. i was reading an interview with the guy and he was saying that he knows a lot of ppl in his country don’t support him, but he says he did it b/c he felt it was the right thing to do …
but one thing that made me think twice about cheering for the US for entering Iraq is what i read about what happened last time they did this .. i dun remember the exact date of the article, but i can find it if u want me to .. it’s was in the NY times and it talked about how the US had once collaborated with Saddam to overthrow another totalitarian regime … and how they had sat idlely by as Saddam used the names that US intelligence gave him of suspected rebels and basically slaughtered them all …
and as much as i might be against saddam, the US hasn’t exactly had a crystal clean record of swooping down and really rescuing the Iraqi people from anything … i mean .. the people in Iraq haven’t been welcoming the troops with open arms and parades to celebrate their liberation b/c they dunno what’s gonna happen after the war is over .. and how much bloodshed will be committed when their “freedom” is realized
and if u look at the muslim religion, it basically is set up to eventually take control the gov’t .. ie the gov’t should be ruled by the laws of the Koran .. and the Christian US plans to go in there and set up what? … to the Iraqis it may seem like an imposition not only of their land, but also of their beliefs and values (not that i’m saying that Saddam is the model of Islamic values, but hey, he’s not Christian) ….
so my conclusion is that the best thing to do is to have the other Islamic nations going in and reprimanding Saddam .. cuz then u have the overthrowing of a tyrant without the stigma attached to a US backed effort … but alas, this will never happen …
so the second best thing is to screw the stigma and just overthrow the guy .. which is, hopefully, what the US will do .. and prove everyone wrong by going in there and actually setting up something that actually works to the benefit of the Iraqi ppl ….
so, i guess in the end, i’m just an idealist too .. in that i hope that Bush delivers what he says and isn’t just using the freedom rhetoric as a cover
Mr. Bush and Mr. Hussein should have a “Who’s Weiner is Bigger?” contest to settle this. Whoever has the BIGGER WEINER, WINS!! So whip’em out BIG BOYS!! =) I promise not to look, hehe.
Hmmm…the Prof. Cunningham I see all the time is the one that is part of the Honors Academy….is that THE michael Cunningham?
And of course I will respond
Tony Blair has guts. I respect him more than Bush (who’s administration I don’t actually support…but Bush has guts too…or he might be just too dumb to understand what he got himself into).
The US certainly has made its mistakes in the past. There is no doubt about that. But do past mistakes make you unable to make a moral judgment on the present?
Does a man who was a thief in the past mean he is unable to make a moral judgment on the actions of a murderer, even if the thief will steal again in the future? The action of the murderer is still wrong, regardless of the action of the thief.
Other Muslim nations will not do anything to interfere with each other’s governments. Look what’s happening now. Despite Iraq’s repeated offenses, Iraq’s invasion of Iran and Kuwait, the populace of the Arab nations are still strongly in favor of the US getting out. You see cheers for Saddam Hussein everywhere. Left to their own designs, nothing would ever happen.
The only possible way that the Middle East can have peace is if an external force comes in to assist. The US has taken this role in a half-assed way for the past 50 years. Britain and France can’t do it certainly; they have a history there (they were the imperialistic rulers of the area back in the day) as well as lacking the military strength to enforce anything. Israel can’t do anything as it’s part of the problem. So who? Naturally, the big player on the block who has always gotten involved in situations like these, because it is the world leader. The US.
I just hope the current administration doesn’t mess up things and do something blatantly idiotic and undiplomatic that will cause the Iraqi people to rise up against us. We should not be there to colonize/directly imperialize the country. An extended occupation will definitely cause bloodshed in the future.
The freedom rhetoric is a cover tho, in my opinion. Freedom for the Iraqis is *a* reason that we are in there, but it’s not one of the main reasons.
We should at least call it Operation Iraqi Disarmament if our point in going there was to disarm him. When did we care about freeing others?
And don’t worry, the current administration will mess things up. We have civilian war hawks in the administration. Those are the worst.
Again, there are MANY reasons we are going in there. These are (in no order of significance) oil contracts, military positioning, disarmament, and getting rid of Hussein.
Now if you had fight a war where you wanted public support, which one would you focus on?
The administration certainly is arrogant, but definitely not stupid. Bush might be (I won’t presume hehe) but the people he surrounds himself with are not. I’d say labelling it Operation Iraqi Freedom is pretty smart spindoctoring.
The way me and keithmagic argue, it’s pretty scary to know that we’re good friends huh?
ok .. GEORGE cunningham is black … MICHAEL cunningham is white … there we go .. so did u see a black guy or a white guy?
Operation Iraqi Disarmament!!!!
They almost messed up on their publicity stunt
Operation Iraqi Liberation was the initial name
They forgot that it spelled…
-OIL-
Had to change it to Operation Iraqi Freedom.
i agree with keithmagic. Operation IRAQI Disarmament!!