myDigitalLife Blogs

A short description about your blog

The Republican approach to problem solving

Posted by: bubblzey

Tagged in: Palin , Obama , Gulf War

bubblzey

Call me cynical, but does it seem like whenever an issue arrises in a presidency, the republicans start suggesting war. Sarah Palin (yes, my all-time favourite person in the world</sarcasm>) has suggested that Obama will not be re-elected if he doesn't go to war with Iran. She uses phrases like 'play the war card' (and I consider playing the race card offensive. Honestly, how can she be so very cavalier about who her country invades?).  This past vac, I spent ages watching war documentaries on the History Channel (in my defense, I was in Zimbabwe, and the internet didn't work. Still, History Channel rocks my socks), and noticed how very many wars America had been involved in, and how very badly they behaved. I remember weeping like a baby when I saw an interview with a Japanese woman who was telling the story of how she lost her son in Hiroshima (and had to identify his remains).  Here is an interesting link detailing every international American military incident.

 

Let's just review how well the war option works for America. I'm counting only official conflicts, not the wars that have been fought by US-trained and US-funded troops in their own countries. Still, we march onwards:

WW2: Not such a disaster, probably because everyone was fighting, and the Americans spent most of their time being shielded by British troops. If we include Japan in the mix, it was a catastrophic failure that has left many Japanese people with a bad taste in their mouth (okay, that's probably understating the anti-American sentiment after a pair of nuclear weapons were detonated in civillian areas, but I understating is the only way I can go with that one, short of pulling out all the profanity I know). Initiating President's political persuasion: Democrat

Korea: Hmm...now here's a tricky one. South Korea's economy has benefitted from a free market system; the GDP of North Korea is 3% of South Korea's, according to the CIA World Factbook. The United States still went in with an agenda (an anti-communist one, shock horror) that ultimately benefitted South Korea. However, thousands of people, Chinese, Korean and American (among others), died, and enormous sums of money were spent on a war that was, effectively pointless. Initiating President's political persuasion: Democrat

Vietnam: Yet another war about communism. A vastly destructive war, fought guerilla-style in the jungle. In order to clear the forests, they sprayed vast amounts of defoliants (aka Agent Orange) over the plants. This caused acute disease, death, and congenital disorders/disabilities) in the inhabitants of the forests that were sprayed. Go Team America! </sarcasm> 10% of Vietnamese were casualties of war, either killed or injured, and the country became communist (despite America's best efforts to the contrary). Initiating President's political persuasion: Republican

First Gulf War: Intervening after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, America got their first taste of invading Iraq. This was the first of the oil wars, teaching George Bush Jr. and important lesson: if your economy is flagging and your oil supplies are running low, invade Iraq. It was a lesson he obviously took to heart. The exact number of casualties is uncertain, with each participating government having altered the figures to suit their agenda, but stands between 10,000 and 35,000 Iraqis. A relatively small figure, but, considering that Americans bombed cultural targets (among them, the ancient city of Babylon), I still find the war offensive.

Second Gulf War: The Second War for Oil. Supposedly, this was the culmination of decades of slapping Hussein over the wrist. It turns out, after all, it was simply about securing oil reserves for America, pepping up the US economy (wars are good for economies, according to my economist father), and topping up The Bush Family Oil Profits Fund. Casualties: thousands and counting. injured, and the country became communist (despite America's best efforts to the contrary). Initiating President's political persuasion: Republican

 

So, Ms Palin, why the rush to go into war? Sure, Iran are being badly behaved about nuclear weapons at the moment (or are they? Surely a country has the right to arm itself? Fair enough, I don't think nuclear weapons are a good idea, but if I was facing America, I would probably also stock up. They do, after all, have a habit of dropping nuclear bombs on cities; we must remember this), but are we really going to use "They have WMDs" as an excuse for (yet) another war that's really about oil reserves? For the record, I side with Obama on this. He may not be doing the most fantastic job on the American economy (he's a liberal, the economy always takes a hit when liberals are in power, as well as when morons like George W are at the helm), but he's trying to reduce America's reputation as the most hated nation on earth.

Comments (4)Add Comment
Dissol
...
written by Dissol, February 08, 2010
To be fair, Obama took over a country that was on its knees in the middle of a horrific credit crunch, and a HUGE number of problems that Shrub had left him with. Palin is one of the scariest politicians in the world...I was so terrified that she got so close to being in charge of the button... She would press it without a moment's hesitation, as it is all a religious crusade (and I use that term correctly) to her. She is incredibly stupid, and has no understanding of the real world outside of Alaska.
Dissol
...
written by Dissol, February 08, 2010
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/upload/2010/02/ms_palin_you_fail/cheater_palin.jpeg
bubblzey
...
written by bubblzey, February 09, 2010
Look, I'm fully behind Obama (wihch is probably pretty obvious from my posts), but the sceptics are all too keen to take him down a peg. I just can't get over Palin and her "war card" comment. What horrifies me more, though, is that she's wanting to run for presidential office in 2012. We can't have a religious fruit-cake in charge of the most powerful and diverse weapons arsenal in the world! It will be the start of World War Three (if the current Gulf War isn't already the dawn of that era).

Kick-ass photo, BTW.
tallulah
...
written by tallulah, February 09, 2010
Great post! Afraid I have to move it out of digital though and into lifestyle until we have our new "newsy" section up and running.

Add your 2Cents
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy

Member Login