[lit-ideas] Re: Priorities

  • From: Michael Chase <goya@xxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 17:30:39 +0100

Le 1 janv. 05, =E0 03:55, Lawrence Helm a =E9crit :

> You should get out more often and see what's really happening.  I just=20=

> read
> The war?  We=92ve removed Saddam Hussein and his army at the expense =
of a
> casualty rate lower than in any major war in history.

M.C. Wonderful ! Um, except that the "expense" included the destruction=20=

of Iraq's infrastructure and the death of some 100,000 Iraqis, most of=20=

whom were civilians. But hey! They're only Iraqis! You know, they're=20
like the Vietnamese, they don't really feel grief like us Westerners.=20
So it's OK to go kill a few thousand of them, whenever we feel like it.

> We are on schedule
> for elections.  The Shiites (60% of Iraq) are happy with the progress

M.C. ZZat a fact? Which Iraqi shi'ites have you been talking to,=20
Laurence? Are those the same ones who get periodically blown up by car=20=


> as are
> the Kurds (20% of Iraq).

M.C. Well, since you say so, it must be true.

>  A small percentage of the Sunnis (20% of Iraq),
> the Baathists, who have no hope in a Democratic Iraq, continue in an
> insurgency

M.C. Thank goodness for Laurence. The U.S. government has up until now=20=

been unable to identify the resistants=A0: al-Qaida? Islamist =
from around the Muslim world=A0? Common thugs?  Ah, if only they would=20=

come to San Jacinto, Laurence would have told them : it's the=20
Baathists. Case closed.

> but Iraqi troops are being trained to handle them.

M.C. Wonderful. That's just the way we did things in Vietnam, wasn't=20
it=A0: we trained the South Vietnamese to handle the North Vietnamese =
the Vietcong. We all remember how swimmingly that worked, but so far=20
the Iraqi security forces seem to be expert at getting themselves=20
slaughtered, and not much else...

> There is no
> reason to think that elections won=92t be held.

M.C. Either elections, or something that will be made to look like a=20
reasonable facsimile of them on CNN...

> There is no reason to think
> that the Islamists will hammer Iraq any harder after the elections=20
> than they
> hammer any other Middle Eastern nation.

M.C. Well, yes there is=A0one very good reason : because they are=20
hammering Iraq *now* one helluva lot harder than any other Middle=20
Eastern nation. What do you think, Laurence, that al-Zarqawi and his=20
men will just lay down their arms as soon as the "election" results are=20=

in, and to everyone's surprise a pro-US "government" is elected?

> If you watch only the Leftist Media
> you won=92t know this.  If you talked to Marines coming back from Iraq=20=

> you
> might get a hint.  They are amazed and appalled at what they see on =
> Media selection distorts what=92s actually happening.

M.C. Sure it does. Perhaps the Marines Laurence talks to, and who think=20=

everything is hunky-dorey in Iraq, are happy because they're the lucky=20=

ones. They're happy because they survived. But what makes them good=20
judges of whether the Iraqis themselves are happy? Have they all=20
learned Arabic so they can chat with them?

        Enough. Laurence is stll spouting the same B.S. as he did back =
Phil-lit, even though it turns out that there really weren't all that=20
many WMD's in Iraq after all. I guess being a *real* Imperialist means=20=

never haviing to say you're sorry.

        Best, Mike.
Michael Chase
7, rue Guy Moquet
Villejuif 94801

To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: