Tell me if you get this.
Everyone knows the disasters of the Iraq War. The massive loss of human life. The endless end. The corrupt ambitions of the wagers. The unjustifiable injustices. Its all known. Its all out there. But despite this obviousness, the Secretary of Defense stood up in a Baghdad airport and uttered these words: "not in vain."
I don't think he knows the meaning of the word vain. It doesn't matter if there is any sort of bullshit "advantage," which there certainly isn't. Say he meant that the Iraq War wasn't all in vain. Then, the question is of weight. Does the good outweigh the bad? No.
Let's understand, right of the bat, democratic assistance - even if it leads to the most successfully democracy - IS NOT worth more than human life. There is a hierarchy of rights and, I don't know about you, but for me the right to life ranks lower than any sort of civil right or liberty guaranteed by a democracy. It makes no sense to me to lose life over civil rights. What is the whole purpose, even if the civil right or liberty is mandated, if there is a loss in life? It makes no sense.
So in that case, it is obvious that Panetta's assessment - which is based on a horrible ideology - is deranged. How can you possibly say that millions of lost lives didn't go in vain because of a still-failing democracy. Oh, Panetta, don't you dare go into saying western "democratic" culture can possibly be transplanted in the east. Fuck you and your propaganda.
LA Times' David Cloud and David Zucchino wrote a piece discussing this unbelievably disgusting faux pas. Fortunately they took the right stance. I understand ignorance but NOT representing 300 million and a whole lot more...
Everyone knows the disasters of the Iraq War. The massive loss of human life. The endless end. The corrupt ambitions of the wagers. The unjustifiable injustices. Its all known. Its all out there. But despite this obviousness, the Secretary of Defense stood up in a Baghdad airport and uttered these words: "not in vain."
I don't think he knows the meaning of the word vain. It doesn't matter if there is any sort of bullshit "advantage," which there certainly isn't. Say he meant that the Iraq War wasn't all in vain. Then, the question is of weight. Does the good outweigh the bad? No.
Let's understand, right of the bat, democratic assistance - even if it leads to the most successfully democracy - IS NOT worth more than human life. There is a hierarchy of rights and, I don't know about you, but for me the right to life ranks lower than any sort of civil right or liberty guaranteed by a democracy. It makes no sense to me to lose life over civil rights. What is the whole purpose, even if the civil right or liberty is mandated, if there is a loss in life? It makes no sense.
So in that case, it is obvious that Panetta's assessment - which is based on a horrible ideology - is deranged. How can you possibly say that millions of lost lives didn't go in vain because of a still-failing democracy. Oh, Panetta, don't you dare go into saying western "democratic" culture can possibly be transplanted in the east. Fuck you and your propaganda.
LA Times' David Cloud and David Zucchino wrote a piece discussing this unbelievably disgusting faux pas. Fortunately they took the right stance. I understand ignorance but NOT representing 300 million and a whole lot more...
Reporting from Baghdad—But violence continues to roil the Mideast nation, and its political destiny is far from certain.
Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and other top U.S. officials conducted a low-key ceremony on a military base at theBaghdad airport Thursday, furling the flag to signal the official conclusion of one of the most divisive wars in American history.
PHOTOS: U.S. military formally ends mission in Iraq
Panetta did not address the controversial origins of the conflict or Iraq's continuing troubles. Instead, he paid tribute to the sacrifices of U.S. troops, nearly 4,500 of whom were killed and 32,200 wounded since President George W. Bushordered the March 2003 invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein. Read More>
No comments:
Post a Comment