An Interesting Take on Bush Presidency

I'm guessing a giving-comfort-to-the-enemy liberal wrote those lyrics, too.

Too bad we didn't have lockstepping tunes like "Iraq and Roll" then.

 

Here's to the land, you tore out the heart of
Richard Nixon, find yourself another country to be part of.

 

Who knew Zag was a Woody Guthrie wannabe?

6

 

The most underreported fact regarding the current debacle:

This war has been Wolfy and Rummy and the gang's wet dream since Clinton was in office.

Now that they're all disgraced and gone, our soldiers are still there.

 

Boom, why won't you tell us who wrote that "interesting take"?

The comparison between WWII and this completely unnecessary Iraq war (both in terms of casualty count and reason for entering) is about the most absurdly apples-to-oranges comparison I've seen. And I hope the author has informed the average Iraqi family (or at least the surviving members) who now live cowering in permanent fear with their communities ripped into pieces the last 3 years, that they should be grateful to Bush for having "liberated" them. And, as I recall, North Korea and Iran did not yet have nuclear weaponry when Bush was elected, but NOW they do.

 

According to Snopes, Boom's beautiful little ditty comes from an anonymous email forward:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/glenn.asp

 

Oh. So, Boom is now posting email spam on message boards.

I guess this really isn't much of a departure from his usual posts. Well, aside from the proper spelling.

 

And he is liberal and conservative,
He's humble and he's proud,
He's more than just a candidate
He's a whole crowd!

 

OK, Boom, here goes.

In Korea, The US pledged to defend the South Koreans against the Communists from the North. the North Koreans invaded South Korea, so they certainly did attack just like Iraq invaded Kuwait. Also, the United Nations voted to protect South Korea after the Soviet Union walked out instead of vetoing the resolutions. The Soviets cast nearly 100 vetos in the United Nations before the US ever did that. The US total was not over 50,000 - without looking it up I would say it was something like 35,000. I don't mean to minimize Korean War deaths, but lets get the facts right if we are presenting a factual scenario.

Kennedy did not start the Viet Nam war in 1962. Eisenhower committed US troops after the French imperialist forces (and this was imperialism, make no mistake about it). Kennedy continued the policy. We were fighting the bad guy Communists - I remember when they were the bad guys who started wars, tortured peoples, and screwed up the economies and freedom of other countries. Maybe Kennedy would have pulled out of Viet Nam in 1963 as people suggested, maybe he wouldn't have - we'll never know.

 

We sent over 2-million people to Viet Nam during the years the US had troops there, officially from 1959 to 1975 although there were actually troops there before 1959. At one point, there were more than 500,000 solider there. The argument was always we needed more troops, we needed to bomb them back to the Stone Age, we needed a nuclear bomb, etc. etc. People growing long hair and beards and protesting the war was the reason we lost if we listen to the National Review and right-wing talk radio revisionists. Nixon and Kissinger could have had the same deal in 1969 with 20,000 fewer deaths that they got in 1973 to end massive US troop involvement.

The lesson of Viet Nam was that military power can't always accomplish political objectives. The Soviet Union didn't learn the lesson in Afghanistan.

This brings us around to the current president, who was most likely a drunk and/or cocaine user during the end of the Viet Nam war. He obviously didn't learn the lesson. Yes, he invaded Afghanistan but pretty much any president would have done that. People in the Middle East aren't loyal to their nation, they are loyal to their tribes, families, and churches. The Kurds don't have loyalty to the government of Iraq. The Kurds were the people who absorbed most of Saddam Hussain's brutality - not that fact stopped Donald Rumsfield from dealing with Saddam during the 1980s.

The United States in 2007 is the strongest force in the history of the world. Nobody presents a serious challenge. And the situation in Iraq can't be controlled. One soldier in Iraq, who obviously couldn't give his name, suggested in a half-joking manner but making a serious point, suggested releasing Saddam Hussein and saying, "we're sorry, we didn't realize you were so brutal because you had to be." Now, obviously that wasn't a serious suggestion but there is a point to the story. And hanging Saddam denied the Kurds a chance for a trial where what Saddam did could be put on for the rest of the world.

 

Sad to say, but that is ALL these people seem capable of.

During the summer of 2004 "ridiculous John Kerry quotes" criss-crossed the e-mails and appeared on message board after message board.

Problem was, they were actually Dan Quayle quotes.

Not that any of the knuckledraggers actually bothered to check on this before breathlessly forwarding their "ridiculous John Kerry quotes" to the next 100,000 people.

That's why you get stupid posts like the one Boom quoted about two countries being "liberated" and the Taliban being "crushed". And why you get stupid posts like "Clinton fired all the U.S. attorneys!!!!!!" when the subject of the current Justice Department controversy comes up.