Quote: Originally Posted by MikeyDB
And does anyone believe for a moment that the people of America will acknowledge their culpability and hold their government accountable?
The American majority will lay blame, but they will probably blame the wrong people and not bother voting in the next election.
President George Bush Jr. will soon be irrelevant. Punishing someone for not knowing more than his telepromter told him would be pointless and diversionary.
Canadians shouldn't be smug. That this can happen in an "elected" Presidential Republic, proves it can happen in an "elected" Constitutional Monarchy.
Can anyone remember when the decision to invade Iraq was made?
11/19/2001 USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Defense Department strategists are building a case for a massive bombing of Iraq as a new phase of President Bush's war against terrorism, congressional and Pentagon sources say. Proponents of attacking Iraq, spearheaded by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, are now arguing privately that still-elusive evidence linking Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's regime to the terrorist attacks Sept. 11 is not necessary to trigger a military strike...
Americans were manipulated. Canadians can be manipulated just as easily.
Americans should accept ultimate responsibility for their elected leaders. But its more likely a majority of Americans won't even vote in the next election.
Of those who do actually vote most may elect Pro-Iraq-war-hawk McCain.
Or almost as bad, Hillary Clinton:
Hillary Clinton: No regret on Iraq vote
April 21, 2004
'How could they have been so poorly prepared for the aftermath?'
...To the disappointment of some antiwar liberals in her Democratic base, Clinton, the former first lady, voted in favor of the Iraq war resolution in October 2002.
"Obviously, I've thought about that a lot in the months since," she said. "No, I don't regret giving the president authority because at the time it was in the context of weapons of mass destruction, grave threats to the United States, and clearly, Saddam Hussein had been a real problem for the international community for more than a decade."
But she said the Bush administration's short-circuiting of the U.N. weapons inspection process didn't permit "the inspectors to finish whatever task they could have accomplished to demonstrate one way or the other what was there."....
Of the three potential 2008 Presidents, only Barrack Obama voted against the Iraq war:
...Obama was an early opponent of Bush administration policies on Iraq. On October 2, 2002, the day Bush and Congress agreed on the joint resolution authorizing the Iraq War, Obama addressed the first high-profile Chicago anti-Iraq War rally in Federal Plaza, saying:
I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars....
Hopefully Obama will win 2008. But that's not certain.
Also this isn't just about the money or the corrupt political system. Its also about the people dying in this war:
...On Friday, September 14, 2007, ORB (Opinion Research Business), an independent polling agency located in London, published estimates of the total war casualties in Iraq since the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. At over 1.2 million deaths (1,220,580), this estimate is the highest number published so far, outnumbering even the death toll of the recent Rwandan genocide. From the poll margin of error of +/-2.5% ORB calculated a range of 733,158 to 1,446,063 deaths. The ORB estimate was performed by a random survey of 1,720 adults aged 18+, out of which 1,499 responded, in fifteen of the eighteen governorates within Iraq, between August 12 and August 19, 2007. In comparison, the 2006 Lancet survey suggested almost half this number (654,965 deaths) through the end of June 2006. The Lancet authors calculated a range of 392,979 to 942,636 deaths...
...ORB reported that "48% died from a gunshot wound, 20% from the impact of a car bomb, 9% from aerial bombardment, 6% as a result of an accident and 6% from another blast/ordnance."...
But those are just cold statistics. Hardly newsworthy since few news services carried pictures of the awful reality.
More than one western reporter risked their life to communicate the carnage to the outside world:
March / April 2003
GRAPHIC IMAGES OF IRAQ CIVILIAN CASULTIES
Instead of those disturbing images, we saw "filtered and sanitized of death and destruction" images of guided smart bombs with cameras hitting their targets.
Even though they've stopped showing even those images, not much has changed...
Quote: Originally Posted by dancing-loon
More shock and wonder!!!
Nope, no bodies under here either...
Sorry for the humor in poor taste. But that's one way of dealing with it.
Last edited by earth_as_one; Mar 22nd, 2008 at 02:46 PM..