Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

calimary

(90,371 posts)
75. Hey shadowmayor - some of us WILL NOT forget. Many of us here, within DU, for example.
Fri Feb 6, 2015, 01:22 PM
Feb 2015

And many of us ALSO will NOT forget that the list of PNAC signatories is chock-full of panty-waists and pansy-asses who NEVER served.

NEVER served.

NEVER saw combat.

NEVER put themselves in harm's way.

NEVER experienced first-hand what REAL war is.

NEVER put their own asses on the line.

NEVER got their hands dirty.

Starting with richard bruce cheney and his five deferments. Because he always had "other priorities."

The only one on the PNAC signatory list who did, to my limited knowledge - was general barry mccaffrey. I should also, for accuracy's sake, point out that rumsfeld, ironically, actually did wear his country's uniform. But he never got it dirty. He lucked out. Served between wars - I believe it was between Korea and Vietnam. So he never saw combat either. He just got lucky - served his time during peacetime and got his points and earned an honorable discharge - without EVER tasting the bitter taste of real war, and real blood, and real loss, and real carnage, and real genuine honest-to-God threats to your life that could come from anywhere - the top of a nearby building or even hidden under the ground that your humvee was about to drive across. Or if it isn't you facing that direct and constant threat, it's your buddy - who you may have just personally witnessed getting suddenly blown to Mars.

I was once begged, by a woman I knew who was gung-ho for the Iraq War because everyone she knew was a Pox Noise afficionado, to PLEEEEEZE hang out my American flag by my front door "to support our trooooooooooooops" on the day the war started. I told her the only way to "support our troops," FOR REAL, is NOT to feed them into some stupid useless wasteful Middle East meat-grinder for the sake of lies and fraud ill-gotten gains for our war machine and all its greedy corporate suppliers - a war that should NEVER have been undertaken in the first place.

It was just awful during that time. Seemed like everybody around me was so pro-bush/cheney, so gung-ho for war ("okay, if it's so damn fabulous, why don't YOU go suit up and go over there and get some!&quot and a precious few spoke up. There were a few individuals who agreed with me but only when they knew we were alone going for coffee or there was nobody else around to hear what we were grumbling about. It was really awful. Seemed like so many around me were buying and swallowing, whole, what the media was force-feeding us while banging the drum so loudly for war. It was awful. Everybody believed contradicta and wolfie and dickie and rummy and all the rest of those lying, scheming BEASTS. You could NOT talk sense into them. You could NOT open their eyes. And if you tried, it was YOU who became the enemy, the sniveling "libtard" or "Saddam-lover" or "al Qaeda sympathizer" or "anti-American" or you were just stupid and naive with your dreaded liberal kumbaya ideas and it was YOU who didn't understand. And YOU who were the traitor and disloyal and on the side of the enemy. That whole "you're either with us or agin' us" thing applied directly to YOU for "NOT supporting our troooooooooooooops."

It was awful. I don't see many of those folks anymore. Our kids all grew up and went off to college and otherwise scattered to the four winds. We weren't close anyway, so there wouldn't be much reason or opportunity to hang out together. My husband and I don't do the country club thing. But sometimes I think back on that whole bunch and wonder what they think now, and wonder - if they ever saw me and it ever came up in conversation - that they'd ever admit they were wrong. And that they'd been royally HAD by the very "heroes" they worshipped and put their faith in and stood by, so firmly, in the bush/cheney cabal. HAD - at the end of a fork. I wonder if they still think they were "right." Sadly enough, there are still too many of our fellow Americans across the country who do.

But rest assured, shadowmayor, there are many of us who don't. Many of us who weren't fooled from the very beginning. And many more of us who may have gone along at first but then started realizing they'd been lied to and that the whole sordid mess was a FRAUD. There are many of us who won't be cowed or snowed and won't shut up, either. We're here to remind everyone and anyone of what happened, so that no amount of republi-CON or CONservative attempts to rewrite history after the fact will stick.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I'll admit it. Coventina Feb 2015 #1
Couldn't have said it better forest444 Feb 2015 #18
+ 100 zappaman Feb 2015 #59
And amazingly, Christians under Saddam avebury Feb 2015 #61
Living proof in Tariq Aziz, Saddam's Christian Foreign Minister. Coventina Feb 2015 #66
I agree 99.9999% and have only one minor disagreement with your post. arcane1 Feb 2015 #2
this was my thought. barbtries Feb 2015 #30
100% n/t arcane1 Feb 2015 #37
Well, he was our ally against Iran... Wounded Bear Feb 2015 #3
Yes, very true, he kept Iran under control, Iran would never have gotten Thinkingabout Feb 2015 #14
He was testing the wasters since it was recently overthrown JonLP24 Feb 2015 #74
No doubt... jaysunb Feb 2015 #4
I think we can conclude that stability in the ME isn't the goal. ND-Dem Feb 2015 #6
yep. barbtries Feb 2015 #32
The goal was stability under US control. jeff47 Feb 2015 #51
PNAC toddwv Feb 2015 #28
He was a paper tiger to western interests. MohRokTah Feb 2015 #5
The same Saudi "royals" who are funding ISIS today? Those Saudis? BlueCaliDem Feb 2015 #10
And bankrupt the West in every way. Bandar Bush was a traitor, like Ronny Raygun. freshwest Feb 2015 #46
For the oil. grahamhgreen Feb 2015 #50
I admit it, and said so just yesterday. herding cats Feb 2015 #7
True, but so would Stalin, Hitler, Qadafi, and any number of other despots bhikkhu Feb 2015 #8
Though many ISIS members are former Saddam loyalists. nt geek tragedy Feb 2015 #9
ISIS is made up of many of Saddam's Guys, maybe they learned from Saddam and to avoid JI7 Feb 2015 #11
ISIS is not really religious in the way Muslim Brotherhood or even Al Qaeda is JI7 Feb 2015 #12
Agreed Thinkingabout Feb 2015 #15
"they are more of a criminal gang" So, too, is the M.B. AverageJoe90 Feb 2015 #21
There would be no ISIS if Saddam ruled in Iraq. Agnosticsherbet Feb 2015 #13
I admit it. 840high Feb 2015 #16
I'll admit it. He got on the wrong side of Poppy, and that was that for him. MADem Feb 2015 #17
Doubtful if he would have invaded Kuwait without COLGATE4 Feb 2015 #19
Yes, that mess goes down in history as a boneheaded conversation. MADem Feb 2015 #25
To this day, I suspect that Hussein got on the wrong side of Thatcher, who then helped put the KingCharlemagne Feb 2015 #23
Gotta find someone who was in the room! Otherwise, we'll never know... nt MADem Feb 2015 #27
Ay, there's the rub. A lot of 'unknown unknowns' (to quote RummyDummy KingCharlemagne Feb 2015 #31
I meant "In the room with Maggie and Big George!" MADem Feb 2015 #34
Yeah, my mind is jumping around, but I had taken your original meaning. You are bringing back KingCharlemagne Feb 2015 #35
I think your 'private suspicions' would make a great academic thesis, actually! nt MADem Feb 2015 #38
It's been written about, see here yodermon Feb 2015 #55
Wow! Thanks so much for taking the time to find and copy that extract. While I cannot claim to have KingCharlemagne Feb 2015 #57
Would he, though? AverageJoe90 Feb 2015 #20
What if the sun rose in the West? Bin Laden had declared a 'fatwa' against Hussein, in essence KingCharlemagne Feb 2015 #33
Better the Devil You Know shadowmayor Feb 2015 #22
The old British imperialists always said the Baghdad was just a waystation on the road to KingCharlemagne Feb 2015 #36
Please publish this as an OP. raven mad Feb 2015 #56
I second the motion. Excellent read and credible. libdem4life Feb 2015 #68
Bu$h's 2003 invasion was a criminal act. N/t roamer65 Feb 2015 #24
So we should support and prop up ruthless dictators? former9thward Feb 2015 #26
I remember when Realpolitik was seen as a vice in Progressive circles, and I'm not even 30. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2015 #72
Wel I think one reason that the US went after Saddam Hussein was to de-stabilize that truedelphi Feb 2015 #29
England did NOT help out the South during the American Civil War. The ruling class may have KingCharlemagne Feb 2015 #39
Looking up and down this thread, I am convinced that . . . Jack Rabbit Feb 2015 #40
No doubt about that Jack madokie Feb 2015 #49
I'll admit it. He was a stabilizing presence in the Middle East. calimary Feb 2015 #41
The First Desert Slaughter shadowmayor Feb 2015 #44
Kuwait's slant drilling has gotten lost in the whole following story. pinto Feb 2015 #54
Welcome to DU, shadowmayor! calimary Feb 2015 #63
Thanks for your reply shadowmayor Feb 2015 #65
Hey shadowmayor - some of us WILL NOT forget. Many of us here, within DU, for example. calimary Feb 2015 #75
Thanks again for your thoughts and words shadowmayor Feb 2015 #76
Gaddafi would too. bvar22 Feb 2015 #42
+1000. Gaddafi was influential in all of Africa. polly7 Feb 2015 #67
Don't Drink the Propaganda Kool-Aid . . FairWinds Feb 2015 #43
But the neocons wouldn't have their dreams come true, if they hadn't succeeded in lying this country sabrina 1 Feb 2015 #45
Probably so Turbineguy Feb 2015 #47
The ol' "We have to support dictators to fight the terrorists, communists, etc." is flawed. pampango Feb 2015 #48
So you assert that ISIS would have been the same factor they are now or worse with Hussein in power? TheKentuckian Feb 2015 #52
Probably not. He repressed everyone from terrorists to people who opposed him. pampango Feb 2015 #60
Sure but the thread presented an "if then" question. No endorsement is required to give a straight TheKentuckian Feb 2015 #62
Saddam was not secular and ISIS is not religious AngryAmish Feb 2015 #53
Sure, but some allies are not worth having. n/t Chan790 Feb 2015 #58
yeah, he was a good U.S. dupe puppet bigtree Feb 2015 #64
Wasn't Saddam pulling cords out of incubators? Or do I have the wrong war? n/t libdem4life Feb 2015 #69
Iran is our ally now against ISIS Enrique Feb 2015 #70
Saddam was trying to ethnically cleanse the Kurds, the only ones effectively fighting ISIS. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2015 #71
Violent oppression by the head-of-state is the cause of this JonLP24 Feb 2015 #73
ISIS would not have come into existence cwydro Feb 2015 #77
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Nobody wants to admit thi...»Reply #75