Robert Scheer At It Again
In another ridiculous diatribe, Scheer has again shown a lack of vision. This time it's about what is happening in Iraq, and the reasons the US went there, and a complete lack of knowledge about Ancient Rome.
I'm going to start calling Robert Scheer "Bobby". That way his initials become BS. Quite appropriate, I think.
Anyway, let's start with Bobby's first main point. He ridicules the "hidden" reason that Iraq was invaded. He says that oil was the reason, not WMD's. He makes fun of the price of oil, even though oil would probably be even higher than it is now, as Saddam Hussein was gouging the world with the "Oil for food" program. Oil has gone up in price because demand has increased dramatically. China's demand has increased 16% in ONE YEAR!
Additionally, the US has always kept a watchful eye on the Middle East, at least since the 1940's when it became known to the world that massive amounts of oil were hidden under the sand there. At the end of WW2, the US and Great Britain confronted the Soviets, forcing them out of Iran. Like it or not, our economy runs on oil. Until the Dems get it through their skulls, other types of unlimited energy will be blocked. It isn't the GOP that supports the wacko environmentalists. Nuclear energy will eventually have to become the main power source. As oil supplies dwindle, the country will be forced to pull back from nuclear power restrictions.
Next, as far as "no solid links to Al Qaeda", what more proof is needed? Al Qaeda has openly stated they are in Iraq to kill Americans. Zarqawi is there, as an official representative of the murderous bunch. He met with Iraqi officials, and was given sanctuary in Iraq, prior to the invasion. What else is needed? Maybe Bobby needs a signed confession.
Next, the idea that Iraqi oil sales would fund the war was reasonable when Paul Wolfowitz came up with the statement. Relatively soon is in the eye of the beholder. Soon to me would be five years. Soon to Bobby? Probably no time frame would make him happy.
The money spent on the war will be recovered, at least in part by the fact that the entire Middle East is now on the road towards democracy.
Talking about Medicaid in the framework of world policy is ignorant. We could have forgone WW2, and funded all sorts of domestic programs. Of course, the way the war ended would have been with Germany and Japan in charge, instead of us. I like the way things ended. (We won.)
Bobby doesn't get it. This is WW3. I won't be happy if we lose this time. Screw Medicaid, at least for now.
And using the lawsuit by several states along with the NEA against the "no child left behind " initiative as some sort weapon to justify the vilification of what is happening is absurd. The last time I checked, the reason the schools are failing is the exact reason the president had demanded improvement in our schools. That failure can be laid squarely on the backs of the teacher's unions. Once a teacher gains tenure, performance is no longer required. What a crock. Screw the NEA.
The last point Bobby makes is historically false. Rome was AT ITS HEIGHT, when it was militaristic and expansionistic. Before the rise of militarism, Rome was ripe for the plucking by Carthage, and others. When the Romans decided that the only way to be safe was to kick the crap out of its opponents, suddenly everything was rosy.
The reason Rome collapsed was because of civil war and other subterfuge FROM WITHIN. The Bobby Scheer's of the Roman Empire got their way. The government was weakened by insurrection and lack of internal support. The intellectuals decried all that was bad about Rome, and the people believed it. So they rose up against their leaders, in civil strife. That gave the outside invaders the opportunity to take Rome down. Anyone who knows world history knows that Rome was conquered from within. By those who wanted to force the government to be more caring about the people. The only problem was, that's what the leadership of Rome was doing, by stomping the crap out of Rome's neighbors. That's the way it works. The big dog gets the food.
Anybody out there disagree?
I'll be back
CC
PS If the link to the piece by Scheer is cut off by the LA Times, I have it as a MS Word document. Email me if needed and I will send it to you.
cwcsquaredcwc@netscape.net
I'm going to start calling Robert Scheer "Bobby". That way his initials become BS. Quite appropriate, I think.
Anyway, let's start with Bobby's first main point. He ridicules the "hidden" reason that Iraq was invaded. He says that oil was the reason, not WMD's. He makes fun of the price of oil, even though oil would probably be even higher than it is now, as Saddam Hussein was gouging the world with the "Oil for food" program. Oil has gone up in price because demand has increased dramatically. China's demand has increased 16% in ONE YEAR!
Additionally, the US has always kept a watchful eye on the Middle East, at least since the 1940's when it became known to the world that massive amounts of oil were hidden under the sand there. At the end of WW2, the US and Great Britain confronted the Soviets, forcing them out of Iran. Like it or not, our economy runs on oil. Until the Dems get it through their skulls, other types of unlimited energy will be blocked. It isn't the GOP that supports the wacko environmentalists. Nuclear energy will eventually have to become the main power source. As oil supplies dwindle, the country will be forced to pull back from nuclear power restrictions.
Next, as far as "no solid links to Al Qaeda", what more proof is needed? Al Qaeda has openly stated they are in Iraq to kill Americans. Zarqawi is there, as an official representative of the murderous bunch. He met with Iraqi officials, and was given sanctuary in Iraq, prior to the invasion. What else is needed? Maybe Bobby needs a signed confession.
Next, the idea that Iraqi oil sales would fund the war was reasonable when Paul Wolfowitz came up with the statement. Relatively soon is in the eye of the beholder. Soon to me would be five years. Soon to Bobby? Probably no time frame would make him happy.
The money spent on the war will be recovered, at least in part by the fact that the entire Middle East is now on the road towards democracy.
Talking about Medicaid in the framework of world policy is ignorant. We could have forgone WW2, and funded all sorts of domestic programs. Of course, the way the war ended would have been with Germany and Japan in charge, instead of us. I like the way things ended. (We won.)
Bobby doesn't get it. This is WW3. I won't be happy if we lose this time. Screw Medicaid, at least for now.
And using the lawsuit by several states along with the NEA against the "no child left behind " initiative as some sort weapon to justify the vilification of what is happening is absurd. The last time I checked, the reason the schools are failing is the exact reason the president had demanded improvement in our schools. That failure can be laid squarely on the backs of the teacher's unions. Once a teacher gains tenure, performance is no longer required. What a crock. Screw the NEA.
The last point Bobby makes is historically false. Rome was AT ITS HEIGHT, when it was militaristic and expansionistic. Before the rise of militarism, Rome was ripe for the plucking by Carthage, and others. When the Romans decided that the only way to be safe was to kick the crap out of its opponents, suddenly everything was rosy.
The reason Rome collapsed was because of civil war and other subterfuge FROM WITHIN. The Bobby Scheer's of the Roman Empire got their way. The government was weakened by insurrection and lack of internal support. The intellectuals decried all that was bad about Rome, and the people believed it. So they rose up against their leaders, in civil strife. That gave the outside invaders the opportunity to take Rome down. Anyone who knows world history knows that Rome was conquered from within. By those who wanted to force the government to be more caring about the people. The only problem was, that's what the leadership of Rome was doing, by stomping the crap out of Rome's neighbors. That's the way it works. The big dog gets the food.
Anybody out there disagree?
I'll be back
CC
PS If the link to the piece by Scheer is cut off by the LA Times, I have it as a MS Word document. Email me if needed and I will send it to you.
cwcsquaredcwc@netscape.net
posted by Craig C | 6:49 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home