This blogger has previously dealt with the absolute absurdity of the unchallengeable supposition that American troops engaged in overseas wars are "defending our freedoms". By my estimation, such a claim could not reasonably be made regarding any of this country's overseas wars.
But you know who might be "defending our freedoms", even while our fat asses sit on the sofa and imbibe in the likes of Janet Jackson and American Idol? How about the Iraqi resistance?
The resistance has stopped the Empire cold in its tracks. What was expected to be the easiest of routs has instead turned, with head-spinning rapidity, into the stickiest of quagmires.
One year ago, the only talk on the lips of the chicken-hawk elite was, "Who's next?" Should we go after Syria first, then Iran -- or the other way around? Should we pick off Castro before the election, or after? Another try at toppling the democratically elected government of Venezuela?
Now, of course, the only talk is of how well and truly fucked is the occupation of Iraq.
Had the Iraqis lain down in the face of the overwhelming onslaught of the Empire, allowing the United States to then attempt to tighten and extend its grip upon the Middle East, one can assume the Bush Administration would have been emboldened to try the same on the home front following the simple formality of the November '04 plebiscite. Even more eviscerations of civil liberties, even more tax cuts, even more environmental depredations, even more niggers locked up in prison, even more insipid triumphalism.
The Administration instead finds itself embroiled in a seemingly endless series of scandals, and sees its attempts at socio-cultural engineering blocked at many turns while it fights for its very political life.
This is not to say that it won't be able to tighten its grip over the "homeland". The power of the state is still pretty enormous, and if nothing else, the Bush-ites do still control the voting machines.
But one sure couldn't blame members of the Iraqi resistance for replying to this argument by belting out some good old-fashioned Minor Threat:
At least I'm fucking trying
What the fuck have you done?
I have found it interesting that there is no discussion of Iraq as a historical war, one started in 1991 by Bush I, held fast in the seige mentality by Clinton and the UN and then completed, complete with staged photos of Iraqi's waving American flags, by Bush II. This is classic attack, surround, seige and deplete the least of the population and then overrun.
What is missing also is any discussion, especially regarding recent events, that begin to point at Bush II for handing America one of the greatest military defeats in world history. That was a retreat from Fallujah. The greatest war machine the world has seen was just thrown back by a 'rag-tag band of miscreants'.
If there were any honor in the Bush family, as clearly there is not, it might be time for a little Samurai style quitting of a failed venture.
Posted by: Bubba Brazille on May 4, 2004 05:55 PMAnd so here we are.
Posted by: Mooser on May 4, 2004 07:53 PMVery good point eddie. Shame on Bush. He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation. These people (Iraqi resistance) are fighting for their freedom, defending their country from a ruthless invader (us). This fight is bogging down the Empire, and preventing further invasions abroad and rights curtailing at home.
However, the Empire behavior will not change just by kicking out the bushites. The same War Party will stay in power no matter who is chosen in November. Kerry has been clear about this point. The war will go on. We will support Israel.
The only hope is that the Empire goes bankrupt soon and becomes unable to keep invading other countries. The less they can get from Iraq, the fastest they will be forced out.
Thanks again to the courageous Iraq resistance.