« Come for the laughs, stay for the awesomeness at the Humid Haney Rant! | Main | John Brunious RIP »
Less Jobs. More Wars.
February 14, 2008 in Video | Permalink
Comments
Steve Jobs. Morgan Waters.
Posted by: Chubaila Chabazz | Feb 14, 2008 9:38:21 PM
Les Moonvies. Dance Wars.
Posted by: Chubaila Chabazz | Feb 14, 2008 10:00:04 PM
It's so funny how you would find it ridiculous to give your money to help the country and then in the same breath find it ridiculous for the government not to give you money for things like health care, foreclosures, etc. Do you really expect them to be there for you when you aren't there for them?
Posted by: Dietrich | Feb 14, 2008 10:39:04 PM
I'll be the same way with my "national healthcare surcharge." I'm envisioning a world where illegals have even more reasons to sneak in, the population is 460,000,000 and the economy has to support it all without a carbon footprint. Take a video of me when those surcharges come in.
Posted by: Chubaila Chabazz | Feb 14, 2008 10:56:18 PM
Deal! (Because THAT will never happen.) And if it does, it will be because of something as catastrophic as the complete collapse of the dollar and health care becomes unprofitable.
Recycling is for those who have succumb to the unrelenting liberal cabal.
Posted by: David | Feb 15, 2008 8:52:55 AM
That's goooood. And funny. The comments are funny, too (in the same kind of scary way).
Posted by: Vicky | Feb 15, 2008 9:15:08 AM
You know what I'm saying. I'm just trying to save myself some typing. Republicans don't like paying for policies they don't support any more than Democrats like paying for policies they don't support. There's nothing new here. I just responded with absurdity because that's how I saw the video.
Posted by: Chubaila Chabazz | Feb 15, 2008 9:18:14 AM
Sorry you got scared, Vicky
Posted by: Chubaila Chabazz | Feb 15, 2008 9:18:56 AM
Well it is simple.
I am okay with paying a little extra so poor children have health care. And I am okay with paying less for enormous waste within the Defense Department.
I want money spent on things that help people, you guys want to buy guns.
Band-Aids and Bullets.
We disagree on points like that. Which is fine.
Posted by: humidhaney | Feb 15, 2008 9:38:44 AM
But our bullets and band-aids are helping people. Just not the people you are willing to help.
Posted by: Dietrich | Feb 15, 2008 9:49:41 AM
You are right.
We should help Americans.
If we are going to justify the Iraq War as our way of helping people, then what is the next quest for ending human suffering?
When can we attack North Korea? They have it pretty bad over there.
Posted by: humidhaney | Feb 15, 2008 11:20:50 AM
Don't mind the naysayers, Haney. They're out in force because this video hits a little too close to home for them.
They have to support this enormous black hole of a war because admitting it's a costly failure requires them to admit changing their mind, which only weak people ever do. And Republicans are not weak, don't you understand?
Hence, the attacks on the micro-fraction of the budget allocated toward helping the poor, while the 50 percent going into vile war pursuits should not be questioned.
McCain's "100 years" comment is right up there with Mondale's "Reagan will raise taxes, and so will I" in terms of costing him the election. At least, if people are smart.
Posted by: Ian McGibboney | Feb 15, 2008 12:04:25 PM
No, McGibboney.
It's a matter of partisan politics, nothing more.
It really is that simple.
Spend what you want on what you want, complain when people spend money on what you don't.
It's so boring and tired I wouldn't have even commented except for the fact that I have little respect for emotionally delivered arguments.
Posted by: Chubaila Chabazz | Feb 15, 2008 12:25:40 PM
"They have to support this enormous black hole of a war because admitting it's a costly failure requires them to admit changing their mind, which only weak people ever do. And Republicans are not weak, don't you understand?"
Now we all know that I can just as easily turn that right around and rephrase it to prove my point.
"They won't support this war because admitting that terror is a legitimate threat, liberating an oppressed nation is good for the world and the safety we have enjoyed for the past seven years is worth the expense because it would require them to admit changing their mind, which only weak people do. And Democrats are not weak, don't you understand?
Say something worth saying.
Posted by: Dietrich | Feb 15, 2008 1:32:08 PM
If liberating an oppressed nation is good for the world and is the reason for the safety we have enjoyed in the past seven years, then how come we aren't in oppressed countries in Africa doing the same? Why aren't we doing anything to stop the human rights violations in China?
Answer that. And try to remember that Iraq, although originally an oppressed country run by a crazy dictator, was not overrun with terrorists when we got into this war. No weapons of mass destruction were ever found. Now our war in Iraq has influenced radicals to hate us even more. Now we can't leave until the region is stable.
Posted by: Susan | Feb 15, 2008 1:52:31 PM
How many undertakings would you like to commit to at once? The immediate threat to our own security is more important than anything else. You are ignoring 9/11 again.
I do commend you for acknowledging that we can not leave until the region is stable. That is a very important aspect for all of us to remember. I also agree that we should try to do things for Africa, China, etc. If I remember correctly, we have been to several African nations. (I personally have been to a few) The difference ther is that they did not desire our help. Iraqi civilians desire our help.
As far as Iraq not being full of terrorist before the war..... I know this will sound crazy but you have to make an attempt to think as a military leader would. Having the ability to channelize your enemy into a centralized location is one of the most important aspects to achieving victory. Think about where Iraq lies geographically, it is right in the middle. Also, we haven't made the extremist hate us more.... they hate us the same. They always have and always will. The only reason there are so many in Iraq is that we have been successful in drawing them to a centralized location. That was completely intentional. I know that sounds crazy to you but that is how military strategy works. Fight on as few fronts as possible, a sure fire way to ensure victory.
As far as WMD's..... well no matter how you look at it that is an aspect you and I will always agree on. Personally, I think there were WMD's and I also believe there to be more still in country. I would like for you to come to my house, on my one acre of land and find an object that I do not want you to find before I can remove it. Now multiply that times thousands and thousands..... None the less, it wasn't worth taking a chance on - not after 9/11.
But wars change and the reason for wars changes. As I said above, read "The Theory of War." It is written by military generals. It is actually a course study book and references wars from all countries from all time periods. It details the phases, reasons, intentions, and suspected outcome of different styles of war. Everything from oppression to wars of economy are covered. It illustrates how wars constantly change and how we must remain flexible. It also shows how the outcome may be different than what you thought.
This is not a political book. It is an actual course study book written to teach military officials all over the world how to fight and win wars.
Posted by: Dietrich | Feb 15, 2008 3:20:10 PM
"You are ignoring 9/11 again."
Lord. The height of douche baggery.
Posted by: humidhaney | Feb 15, 2008 3:46:43 PM
Your right Haney, remembering the thousands of lives that were lost on 9/11 and refusing to become complacent translates into "douche baggery"
Continue to tell yourself that all these conspiracies are behind the war if you want to. Telling yourself things over and over doesn't make them true.
You apparently have ideas about the present day war that you have convinced yourself to believe. Unfortunately for you, and many Americans like you, you have decided upon these ideas with out considering the history of this nations previous wars, the facts regarding this war or any strategic plans by those who just may know a bit more than you about war.
Let's review the history of American wars;
American Wars
The American Revolution
1775-1783
The Indian Wars
1775-1890
Shay's Rebellion
1786-1787
Rebellion
Anti-(state)Government Rebels vs. Massachusetts
The Whiskey Rebellion
1794
Rebellion
Anti-Tax Rebels in Western Pennsylvania
Quasi-War With France
1798-1800
Inter-State (Naval) War
France
Fries's Rebellion "The Hot Water War"
1799
Rebellion
Anti-Tax Rebels in Pennsylvania
The Barbary Wars
1800-1815
Inter-State War
The Barbary States
(Tripoli, Algiers & Morocco)
The War of 1812
1812-1815
Inter-State War
Great Britain
The Growing & Troubled Republic
Primary Name of Conflict Dates of Conflict
(U.S. Involvement Only)
Type of Conflict Primary Opponent(s)
of the United States
Mexican-American War
1846-1848
Inter-State War
Mexico
U.S. Slave Rebellions
1800-1865
Slave Rebellions
Various Slave groups
"Bleeding Kansas"
1855-1860
Civil War (state of Kansas)
Pro-Slavery vs. Anti-Slavery Kansans
Brown's Raid on Harper's Ferry
1859
Rebellion
Anti-Slavery Rebels (Led by John Brown)
United States Civil War
1861-1865
Civil War
United States (The North)
vs.
The Confederate States (The South)
U.S. Intervention in Hawaiian Revolution
1893
Internal Rebellion & Foreign Intervention
The Spanish-American War
1898
Inter-State War
U.S. Intervention in Samoan Civil War
1898-1899
Civil War & Foreign Intervention
U.S.-Philippine War
1899-1902
Colonial War, War of Imperialism
Boxer Rebellion
1900
Internal Rebellion & Foreign Intervention
Chinese Government & "Boxer" Rebels
The Moro Wars
1901-1913
Colonial Wars
Philippine Muslim Rebels
U.S. Intervention in Panamanian Revolution
1903
Secessionist Revolution & Foreign Intervention
Colombia
The Banana Wars
1909-1933
Civil Wars & Foreign Intervention
Various Rebel Groups In Central America
U.S. Occupation of Vera Cruz
1914
Inter-State War
Mexico
Pershing's Raid Into Mexico
1916-1917
Inter-State, Border War
Mexican Government & Mexican Rebels ("Bandits")
World War I
1917-1918 (American involvement only)
Inter-State War
Germany
Allied Intervention in Russian Civil War
1919-1921
Civil War & Foreign Intervention
Russian Bolshevik (Soviet) Government
World War II
1941-1945 (American involvement only)
Inter-State War
Germany, Japan & Italy
The Cold War
1945-1991
Global Inter-State Cold War
The Soviet Union & Communist China
The Korean War
1950-1953
Inter-State War
North Korea & China
The Second Indochina War "Vietnam War"
1956-1975
Civil War, Inter-State War
North Vietnam & South Vietnamese "Viet Cong" Rebels
U.S. Intervention in Lebanon
1958
Civil War & Foreign Intervention
No real foe for U.S. Troops landed to support Lebanon Gov.
Dominican Intervention
1965
Civil War & Foreign Intervention
Rebels in the Dominican Republic
The Mayaguez Rescue Operation
News Story 1975 (May 15)
Hostage Rescue & Inter-State Conflict
Khmer Rouge Guerrillas (the new government of Cambodia)
Iranian Hostage Rescue "Desert One" or "Operation Eagle Claw"
1980 (April 25)
Hostage Rescue & Inter-State Conflict
Iran
U.S. Libya Conflict
1981, 1986
Inter-State War
Libya
U.S. Intervention in Lebanon
1982-1984
Civil War,Foreign Intervention & Inter-State War
Syria & Various Muslim and Leftist Lebanese Militias
U.S. Invasion of Grenada
1983
Inter-State War
Marxist Grenadian Faction & Cuba
The Tanker War
"Operation Earnest Will"
1987-1988
Inter-State War
Iran
U.S. Invasion of Panama
1989
Inter-State War
Panama
Second Persian Gulf War "Operation Desert Storm"
1991
Inter-State War
Iraq
"No-Fly Zone" War
1991-2003
Inter-State War
Iraq
U.S. Intervention in Somalia
1992-1994
Civil War & Foreign Intervention
Various Somali Militias
NATO Intervention in Bosnia (Operation Deliberate Force) Summary
1994-1995
Civil War,Foreign Intervention & Inter-State War
Bosnian Serb Rebels
U.S. Occupation of Haiti
1994
Foreign Intervention
Haitian Government
U.S. Embassy bombings and strikes on Afghanistan and Sudan (The bin Laden War)
August, 1998
Terrorist Conflict
"Desert Fox" Campaign (part of U.S./Iraq Conflict)
December, 1998
Inter-State War
Iraq
Kosovo War
1999
Civil War, Foreign Intervention & Inter-State War
Yugoslavia/Serbia
Attack on the USS Cole
October 12, 2000
Terrorist Conflict
Terrorists associated with Osama bin Laden
Attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon
September 11, 2001
Terrorist Conflict
Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida organization
Afghanistan War (Operation Enduring Freedom)
October 7, 2001-Present
War against Terrorism
The Taliban and Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaida organization
Third Persian Gulf War "Operation Iraqi Freedom"
March 19, 2003-Present
Inter-State War
Iraq
Now, take a close look at how many of these wars were either an intervention of allied troops and the US in foreign civil wars AND/OR a result of the United States being attacked AND/OR the US and allied troops preventing other countries from falling under unwanted oppressive rule. All American wars fall under these three justifications. So unless you plan to tell me that every war America has ever been involved in was unjustified, your argument that Iraq is unjustified has absolutely no merit. The war in Iraq involves all 3 of the above criteria that every American war has been fought for. Not only that but we have been at war in Iraq since 1991 and at war with Muslim extremist since 1980. Operation Iraqi Freedom is merely a new phase (or extension) of a war that has been going on for 28 years. But I guess that until you understand that wars even have various phases (different levels of intensity, different objectives, different levels of troop involvement) you will never grasp why we are in Iraq. I guess that you are just set in your ways and that the history of our country and the facts in black and white aren't worth taking into consideration.
Posted by: Dietrich | Feb 16, 2008 12:56:52 AM
http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2007/10/footprint200710
Posted by: douchebag | Feb 16, 2008 11:39:23 AM
Dietrich.
Listing the history of American conflict does what for the argument that we needed to go to War and take over the country of Iraq?
What is your argument again?
Posted by: humidhaney | Feb 16, 2008 12:29:18 PM
Keep up Haney!
America was founded on the principle of democracy and the right to live free of oppression. The early settlers left Britain for that very reason. The Revolutionary War, our first war as a free nation, was about nothing but those concepts. With the exception of our own Civil War, every American war since that time was also geared toward those concepts. Fighting wars for the idea that all people groups have the right to democracy and freedom from of oppression is what we do. That is America. If you don't want to admit that or are unwilling to believe that, you live in the wrong country and should go live somewhere like Switzerland. For you to claim Iraq as an unjust war would require you to claim every war America has fought as unjust as well. If you truly believe that every war America has fought was unjust...... then you certainly have no concept of what this country affords you. Get the ideas of conspiracies and "Bad Bush" out of your head and look at the facts. The reality is that regardless of any sacrifices, any hardships, any other economical problems you view as reasons for us no to be in Iraq - if we weren't there we wouldn't be living up to the standards that America represents in the first place.
Try reading through who the conflicts were between and the reason we were involved Haney. You are either intelectually lazy or so stubborn that you refuse to see things that are not a matter of opinion but of fact. Oh, that's right, any fact that doesn't fit your criteria is dismissed and a diversion is created to keep people from remembering.
Posted by: Dietrich | Feb 16, 2008 1:08:46 PM
Yes, why were we involved in those conflicts?
It couldn't be money, influence, globalization/power. It must have been Democracy!
Intellectually lazy? .....psssssst...... miiiiiiiiiirrooooooooooooor...
Posted by: AshWilliams | Feb 16, 2008 6:29:04 PM
Oh and dang, you must have gotten a good price on all that crap, because you bought ALL of it!
Posted by: AshWilliams | Feb 16, 2008 6:30:12 PM
your right, the history of our country is a load of crap. where could you possibly get off thinking that is a rational statement and still claim to be "for" America?
Posted by: Dietrich | Feb 16, 2008 9:21:56 PM
I didn't really mean to comment on the history as much as the motivation. The point that I was attempting to make was that in many cases the "spreading Democracy" meme holds absolutely no water. We got involved to serve our own interest, whether it be money, influence in a new, allied power, whatever. Serving our interests isn't wrong, except when it overrides the interests of the native people. That's why there's so much anti-Americanism abounding in the world (not because "they hate us for our freedom!").
I was also trying to say that if you hang on every word of the government, you're bound to fall. No, I'm not the kind of person that sees a lie behind every word, but I know the government has an agenda of its own and I keep that in mind.
And I love America.
Posted by: AshWilliams | Feb 17, 2008 5:14:47 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
