licentious radio

Wednesday, May 28, 2003
[8:29:53 PM]

So is it a tax cut every year, and a war every year? Are they *really* after Iran? Why not? The Iranian army couldn't hurt us much more than the Iraqi army.

We'd like to think, of course, that El Stupido's personal dysfunctions were the clincher on the Iraq conquest. Unfortunately, maybe Rove thinks terrorism might not be enough to come within stealing distance of the election.

Certainly war -- and unexplained equipment failure in the small planes carrying two Democratic senators -- helped Republicans get more seats in Congress. (Not to mention inexplicable deviations in voting behavior in precincts with electronic voting sans paper trail, made more questionable by the sudden spiking of the exit polls by GE, Murdoch, et. al.)

So why not use our new conquest as the base to launch a new war on Iran?

*Surely* they can't get away with that.....

[12:46:46 PM]
Shiites in Iraq would be insane to give up their weapons. Already they are victims of US-sponsored ethnic cleansing by Kurds. The US conned them to rebel against Saddam, conceivably to have Saddam attack them. At least we stood by while they were slaughtered. Heroic Stormin' Norman Schwarzkopf personally gave Saddam the green light to use helicopter gunships for faster, more cost-effective Shiite-slaughter.

This time around, the simplest explanation for the looting and pillaging is that it was part of the plan. Except for US sanctions, bombing, and conquest, Iraq has a large, capable population and significant natural resources. I say the plan was to destroy the nation by standing by and letting it be looted. There were also numerous reports of US soldiers encouraging the looting. There was also evidence of well-organized groups systematically pillaging major facilities. Someone sponsored these groups. Who? The most obvious answer would be Rumsfeld, and/or some Bushian black-ops group.

(Conspiracy theory? It's the simplest explanation for what we've observed. Is it plausible that Bushists would do nasty things to a foreign country? Ha ha ha.)

Finally, suppose Shiites dis-arm... who will protect them from the new gangs wreaking havoc every night? No one. Maybe the US will eventually, but we haven't up until now. How can US soldiers engage in police work when they know anyone who approaches them could be a suicide bomber?

I don't know about you, but I'm already tired of having five or ten American soldiers die every week in Iraq. George "Mission Accomplished" Bush may not mind, but pretty soon most Americans are going to get tired of it, too.

The only way out of this mess is to give the lead role to the UN, with a substantial US army presence for security. Someone with credibility has to be leading the political situation in Iraq. No spooks-r-us Kissinger crony (Bremer) will be taken for anything but a wrecker.

[12:20:47 PM]
Secret deportation hearings for anyone the government claims might have a connection to terrorism?

This is setting an example for 'democracy'?

Let's be clear: they are totalitarian, and crony-capitalists -- better known as fascists.

Bringing democracy to the middle east is a sick joke, like the claim that wrecking the economy will produce a million jobs, or aborting the legally defined election process in Florida 2000 for 'equal protection' -- by which they meant that counting all votes would reduce the relative value of rich white's votes.