I’m not taking a shot at you Brian. I respect you and what you have to say, plus I couldn’t pass up the chance at alliteration(ha), but lets talk about bellering for a second. George W. Bush II, self proclaimed King and leader of the movement to start a tyranny of the executive branch of government, has decided to seek the approval of congress to spend more than $120 Billion on the war in Iraq. When we take a look at our current situation in Iraq none of us can say that we’re actually fighting a war in the traditional sense (Well, many people say it everyday, but if they weren’t politicking, or bellering, it might be different). Instead, what we are doing is occupying a nation much like our imperialist brothers in Great Britain did to, oh just for the sake of argument I’ll say, India.
Now, I may be a bit old school, but I like to think about the great empires of the past and how they annexed territory and conquered peoples. It kind of makes you proud of your Western European roots‐that is if you ignore the countless evils committed and you actually are of Western European descent. But, right now, what we’re doing is pointless, even in an imperialistic sense. We’re occupying a sovereign nation to introduce them to demos kratos (very loosely, “authority from the people”) and to free them from their former way of life under a despotic leader. We’re real heros. But once we’re done, if that ever happens, we’re supposed to just hand it all back; we’re only half‐ass imperialists. If taking the country isn’t our goal, then what is? Why should we be there any longer?
We freed them from ‘tyranny’ only to allow more and more of it at home in an effort to prevent communists…or terrorists…from striking at our homeland; we’ve given them the wonderful gift of rule by the mob and they’ve elected their leaders, who happen to be calling for a withdrawal of our occupying forces, and some of Iraq’s citizens are unhappy with their representatives. Sounds a lot like the United States.
I no longer see the larger picture in this situation. A year and a half ago, I suported our occupation, but that was before their democratically elected leaders asked us to leave. Now we still have ‘goals’ in Iraq? Somebody explain the situation to me, what haven’t we accomplished that we initally set out to do…other than the WMD thing, that was a major blunder on our part, eh?
Now Bush is petitioning congress for $120 BILLION for the ‘war’. Why, would he do that? The total cost would be pushed towards an astounding half a trillion dollars if congress were to approve. A half a trillion dollars is far too much to spend on a foreign occupation that is no longer needed or warranted.
If it is about stabilization, then we’ve already lost. The British couldn’t stabilize that region, how can we? The only empire to do it with some success was the Ottoman empire; give it back to them. Let the region be; after all, they will either stabilize themselves or destroy themselves (which will ultimately stabilze the region) so nothing we can do will make matters any better, but we certainly are making things worse.
Perhaps I sound a little liberal, but I’m not. I just won’t blindly accept the direction that the Republican party wants to take our country in; they’re moving for an increased centralization of power in the federal government, and I’m not talking about taking power from the states, although I’m sure thats in there, I mean an increase in the duties and powers of the executive branch. I guess they all skipped Government 101, since they were bred for politics, and forgot all about why the founding fathers set our government up with checks and balances. They wanted to get away from the TYRANNY of rule by one, or by the central government. And so did my party. They used to stand for smaller government, but that certainly isn’t evident today with the vast amounts of spending going on.
The leadership and politics in this country are rotten. We need change or else our dominance in world affairs will continue to dwindle, and we’ll be headed down a road that we won’t be able to leave for quite a while.
Note: Originally published Thursday February 02, 2006 on an old defunct project. My views have changed dramatically since then, however, it was and is a legitimate point despite the hyperbole.