Page Summary
rainswolf.livejournal.com - (no subject)
pinkroo.livejournal.com - (no subject)
cynicgal.livejournal.com - (no subject)
tempter.livejournal.com - (no subject)
cynicgal.livejournal.com - (no subject)
tempter.livejournal.com - (no subject)
drownedinink.livejournal.com - (no subject)
fortifiedi.livejournal.com - (no subject)
cynicgal.livejournal.com - (no subject)
drownedinink.livejournal.com - (no subject)
theoneinblue.livejournal.com - (no subject)
ellie717.livejournal.com - Um, yeah.....- (Anonymous) - (no subject)
Style Credit
- Base style: Modular by
- Theme: Starry Night by
- Resources: skylark_photos
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2007-02-05 03:37 am (UTC)Why is he so freakin' obsessed with Iraq??? !!!!!
no subject
Date: 2007-02-05 03:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-02-05 05:10 am (UTC)I mean, hell, who can be suprised in a country that subsidized particular kinds of immigration through particular kinds of genocide? Ain't nothing changed, folks.
Pardon the cynicism, Julie, I know it disturbs your motif.
no subject
Date: 2007-02-05 05:21 am (UTC)(That might just be because I don't give Bush enough credit to be able to pull off the former option, though.)
no subject
Date: 2007-02-05 05:26 am (UTC)I just don't see it.
no subject
Date: 2007-02-05 08:06 am (UTC)I just don't think it's accurate to pin it all on Bush. I don't think he's that clever. I wouldn't be surprised if he honestly believes the baseless Saddam/al-Qaeda connection, because I think in his mind, they're all "The Bad Guys". That doesn't excuse his actions and that doesn't mean there isn't corruption and conspiracy among the rest of his administration -- I just don't think he, personally, is smart enough for it.
no subject
Date: 2007-02-05 02:03 pm (UTC)As to how deep in his own ideology Bush is, that's a really fascinating question. I wouldn't argue that Bush did believe in the Saddam/Al Qaeda connection, but he probably did and does believe that invading Iraq was a good thing for its people and that seizing Iraq's oil resources was both a necessary and a profitable thing. As for turning the reconstruction into a free-for-all for international corporations, well, it's just business, right?
Regardless, the histories that will be written twenty or so years from now are going to make for excellent reading, I suspect. Here's hoping we'll have an American Suetonius or Tacitus.
no subject
Date: 2007-02-05 05:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-02-05 07:07 pm (UTC)I could really care less about the motives, but the end result remains the same for the colonized.
no subject
Date: 2007-02-05 07:11 pm (UTC)Agreed, and certainly even understanding Bush's motives won't probably do much to change US policy, as you can argue that Bush is in the overview an extreme manifestation of upper class United States culture and American exceptionalism.
I still find it interesting to think about, though.
no subject
Date: 2007-02-08 12:33 am (UTC)Um, yeah.....
Date: 2007-02-09 09:20 pm (UTC)But the number one thing that comes to my mind when I think of the money and time spent on Iraq? With all those resources used in another direction we probably could have cured cancer or something by now!!!
no subject
Date: 2007-06-29 06:42 pm (UTC)Also the neocon website, new am century, spoke at length on controling world resources to continue US hegemony.
Having carried a draft card for six years of Vietnam, this is just the same old stuff. Iraq makes VN look like a GOOD idea, at least there was a capitalist middle class we were defending there.