Tuesday, August 09, 2005

More on Iraq and One Mother's Opposition

The U.S. is really pinning its hopes on a Constitution being drafted, and accepted in the next several months. Even though there are deep divisions between the rival factions on important issues in the draft Iraqi Constitution (one example being women's rights, and others discussed here), the U.S. wants the process to stick to the deadline of being finished by August 15. Elections will follow in the fall. The Bush administration seems to reason that this is the only way out for U.S. troops.
In the meantime, this will mean more troops in the short run. See the article in the Seattle Times.

While Bush is taking the longest vacation in presidential history (okay, it is a working vacation, but excuse my Michael Moore-ish description) one woman who lost her 24 year-old son in Iraq has camped outside his Crawford Ranch and demanded a meeting with the President. She says she won't leave until he meets with her. She is proving quite the embarassment for the President as she is intelligent, articulate, and full of righteous anger. Read her writings here about her protest:

George Bush said speaking about the dreadful loss of life in Iraq in August:
(08/03/05): "We have to honor the sacrifices of the fallen by completing the
mission." "The families of the fallen can be assured that they died for a noble
cause."
In reaction to these two assinine and hurtful statements, members of
Gold Star Families for Peace (GSFP) are going to George's vacation home in
Crawford, Tx this Saturday, August 6th at 11:00 am to confront him on these two
statements.
1) We want our loved ones sacrifices to be honored by bringing
our nation's sons and daughters home from the travesty that is Iraq IMMEDIATELY, since this war is based on horrendous lies and deceptions. Just because our children are dead, why would we want any more families to suffer the same pain and devastation.
2) We would like for him to explain this "noble cause" to us and, if the cause is so noble, ask him why Jenna and Barbara are not in harm's way.
3) If George is not ready to send the twins, then he should bring our troops home immediately. We will demand a speedy withdrawal.

Read the rest of her statement at BuzzFlash.com.

More trouble between the west and the remaining members of the "axis of evil"
Iran's new President has renewed his determination to enrich uranium that could be used for nuclear weapons, and is forging an anti-American alliance with Syria. URL: Iran resumes uranium work, ignores warnings

The New York Times has some very complete coverage.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Ms. Sheehan is such a courageous person. I wish her luck. This is exactly the sort of thing that needs to happen more often. It's such an inspiration to see a regular person, a citizen of the United States demanding accountability and honesty from the administration.

Mr. C said...

I agree. TThis is the true power of democracy at work - she SHOULD be an inspiration to us all!

Good to hear from you Keith!

Anonymous said...

I read an article about other countries possessing nuclear weapons on the Al Jazeera web site. While the article was alright I found people's comments and debating to be more interesting. I saved a snippet of the arguments:

"All nations should be able to wipe each other out, maybe it is the only sure way to secure peace on Earth, as the West and Soviet Union kept a cold peace between each other for 4 decades. Would the U.S. have invaded Iraq if the results would have painful to them?

-Arab from Arabia"

In which another person refuted with:

"Arab, not a good idea. Simple question... is there a solution to crime by giving everyone, criminal and decent law abiding citizens included weapons that could off each other? Who do you think would be more likely to use the weapon first? Crime everywhere around the world shows that the ability to punish is just not enough of a deterrent, so how can you suggest letting all countries have the capability to wipe anyone else off the face of the Earth. There has to be some logic applied to what you are asking and then you will see how it applies to the family of nations. Some nations just can't be expected to act with civility and those scare the rest.

-Omri from Canada"

I believe it is impossible for the U.S. to fully trust another country when it comes to nuclear programs or anything else for that matter. It is a character flaw of the U.S. The government has accentuated their hegemony so much that they believe that "simple" countries cannot govern themselves, as was the thought process of the British and French in the Middle East for eighty or so years.

When Bush is flapping his tongue about "democratization" in the Middle East, will Iraq ever truly become a democracy? If Iraq were to truly have their own opinion they would have the ability to act outside of the interests of the U.S. Would the U.S. find that favorable? No.

Iran cannot be trusted because they have anti-American sentiment. Iraq would not be trusted if they are given full democracy because they too may develop into something the administration does not find favorable.

America has trust issues and needs counseling.

Anonymous said...

Coraggio.. they didnt put me in We the People! Those dastardly schedule-planning wenches didnt give me a history class at all, and we the people is during my IB science class! Why are they such horrible planners for seniors and IB students?