Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
What I'm pointing out is loq isn't being consistent in applying his philosophy. While it seems like a good example of taking responsibility, the fact he's not clamoring to fix anything else we've broken suggests to me his philosophy is more an excuse than it is something he actually believes in. He's welcome to prove me wrong by demanding the United States fix other things we've broken, but until then his demand rings hollow.
And for the record, the United States isn't rebuilding something we've broken, we're creating a puppet state and we're lining the pockets of contractors and corporations with money that should be either going to balance the budget, social programs, or tax breaks. Every time you hear "the war has cost X", that 'X' isn't money we're spending that's going to the Iraqi people. That money, when it's not inexplicably disappearing by the billions into thin air, is going to no bid contracts, to private security that's above the law, and to corporations doing a really shitty job of doing what they're paid to do. If you have some idea that we're bravely doing the same thing in Iraq we once did in, say, Japan, you've got another thing coming. Japan wasn't sitting on oil and corporations didn't have the power they have now because we were just coming out of the Great Depression.
|
I have sat down several times and tried to compose a response this post, but my mind is being pulled in several different directions right now. I have more important things I need to be (am) doing. Not more important than the issue itself, of course, but more important than debating about it - because, ultimately, what good does that do in the long run? You see things your way, I see them mine and there's not a god damned thing either one of us can do about the micro-issues that motivate us as individuals to form an opinion about how to handle the situation we are in now, here, today, Iraq.
From my point of view, your position is more politically motivated than humanitarian-based like mine and there's nothing wrong with that. Both of them are important. To me, what America is doing, does, was doing, etc. are secondary to the immediate security of the streets in Iraq. And it really is as simple as that. Escalating violence. Religious persecution. Kidnappings. Things that are already scarce becoming even more so: healthcare (as well as less support from NGOs that don't want to put their people in danger), schools, power supply, safe drinking water, a free press, the ability to communicate with the outside world, etc., etc. Admittedly, Iraq is not exactly the model of a healthy, functioning society right now, but if you look around the planet you can see plenty of examples of how much worse it can be. Particularly when you look at Afghanistan. In fact, the way Afghanistan devolved over the course of four decades is a pretty good example.
I've already spent more time on this than I intended. That's how I feel about it. And to spin one thing around on you, if you think the no bid contracts and governmental meddling are going to stop just because we don't have troops there anymore, you've got another thing coming. From what I'm reading we are essentially replacing our troops with mercenaries. Not exactly what Obama promised, is it?