Posted on 06/01/2006 5:34:00 PM PDT by Calif Conservative
Evil in Our Government
Paul Craig Roberts Tuesday, May 30, 2006
Is the Bush regime a state sponsor of terrorism?
A powerful case can be made that it is.
In the past three years, the Bush regime has murdered tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians and an unknown number of Afghan ones.
U.S. Marines, members of our finest and proudest military force, are under criminal investigation for breaking into Iraqi homes and murdering entire families. In an unprecedented event, Gen. Michael Hagee, the Marine Corps commandant, has found it necessary to fly to Iraq to tell our best-trained troops to stop murdering civilians.
Hagee told the U.S. Marines: "We do not employ force just for the sake of employing force. We use lethal force only when justified, proportional and, most importantly, lawful."
The war criminals in the Bush regime have dismissed the murders as "collateral damage," but they are in fact murders. Otherwise, there would be no criminal investigations and the Marine commandant would not be burdened with the embarrassment of having to fly to Iraq to lecture U.S. Marines on the lawful use of force.
The criminal Bush regime has now murdered more Iraqis than Saddam Hussein. The Bush regime is also responsible for 20,000 U.S. casualties (dead, maimed for life and wounded).
Bush damns the "axis of evil." But who has the "axis of evil" attacked? Iran has attacked no one. North Korea has attacked no country for more than a half-century. Iraq attacked Kuwait a decade and a half ago, apparently after securing permission from the U.S. ambassador.
Isn't the real axis of evil Bush-Blair-Olmert? George Bush and Tony Blair have attacked two countries, slaughtering their citizens. Israel's Ehud Olmert is urging them on to attack a third country, Iran.
Where does the danger to the world reside? In Iran, a small religious country where the family is intact and the government is constrained by religious authority and ancient traditions, or in the United States, where propaganda rules and the powerful executive branch has removed itself from accountability by breaking the constitutional restraints on its power?
Why is the U.S. superpower orchestrating fear of puny Iran?
The U.S. government has spent the past half-century interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, overthrowing or assassinating their chosen leaders and imposing its puppets on foreign peoples.
To what country has Iran done this, or Iraq, or North Korea?
Americans think that they are the salt of the earth. The hubris that comes from this self-righteous belief makes Americans blind to the evil of their leaders. How can American leaders be evil when Americans are so good and so wonderful?
How many Serbs were slaughtered by American bombs released from high above the clouds, and for what reason? Who even remembers the propagandistic lies that the Clinton administration told us about why we absolutely had to drop bombs on the Serbs?
Wasn't it evil for the United States to bomb Iraq for a decade and to embargo medicines for children? When U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was asked if she thought an embargo that resulted in the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children was justified, she replied, "Yes."
The former terrible tyrant ruler of Iraq, Hussein, is on trial for killing 150 people. The U.S. government murdered 500,000 Iraqi children prior to Bush's invasion. When the U.S. government murders people, whether Serbs, Branch Davidians at Waco, Texas, or Iraqi women and children, it is "collateral damage." But we put Hussein on trial for putting down rebellions.
Gentle reader, do you believe that the Bush regime will not shoot you down in the streets if you have a rebellion?
Crusing for chicks.
DU-worthy.
What kind of hateful scumbag calls himself a conservative, yet lays the blame for these deaths at our door? If Saddam had used the food and medicine money for money for food and medicine instead of palaces with gold bidets, those kids would be alive today.
Carl, we're still waiting for an answer to our questons, see post 97 for mine. I edit a publication, and If somebody asked me why an article in my magazine was helping the jihadis, you can bet I'd have the stones to anser them. Do you?
Bilge. If Bush is Wilsonian, then so was Harry Truman when he rebuilt Germany and Japan after WWII.
You say you didn't sign on for Iraq...did you sign on for Roberts' bizarre claim that none of the Axis of Evil countries have attacked anyone lately? Did you sign on for the claim that the U.S. government--not Saddam "I need 48 palaces" Hussein--killed 500,000 Iraqi children?
I want Osama's head on a platter. That would be an accomplishment for the administration, but, in over six years of trying and after hundreds of billions of dollars spent, they've been unable to deliver.
Would it be great if we got Osama? Yeah. But mostly I care if we stop attacks on the U.S., and that's been accomplished for almost five years now. Tell me: When you woke up on September 12, 2001, did you even dream that we would go 4 and a half years without getting hit again?
Oh, and here's where I share my...
The Big Five Questions of Ultimate Iraqi Wisdom!
As a conservative who opposes the liberation of Iraq, perhaps you would like to answer my Big Five Questions of Ultimate Iraqi Wisdom. There are few takers, but I’m sure you’ll answer up instead of hiding under your desk. Finish one or more of the following sentences and show us the boffo supra-genius reasoning that lead you to it:
1. Iraq was not a terrorist state, and my case for this assertion is...
2. Even though Iraq harbored, trained and funded terrorists, it was not a legitimate target because...
3. We should not be fighting the War on Terror at all because...
4. The current level of military casualties in a 4 year war that started with the slaughter of 3,000 noncombatants on our home soil in 90 minutes is a huge problem because...(Note: Before answering this question, you may want to review the number of casualties experienced by the U.S. in WWII, or at Shiloh or Cold Harbor, or in any particular week of the Tet Offensive.)
5. If we leave terrorist states up and running, I foresee the next major terrorist attack will be prevented by...
Late ping. See posts 97 and 104.
I agree with that assessment (and have posited that same theory here several times over the past three years). There was a time the man was a serious columnist, published in regular newspapers and everything. I believe he was even a member of the Reagan Administration. His deterioration has progressed steadily and I hope he has friends who can steer him to people who will provide careful and sympathetic professional help. No joke.
You know, Benedict Arnold was an admirable man...except for this one area where he was rectally impaired...
Roberts had to get in the usual "America does Israel's bidding" crack, typical of the whackjobs at LewRockwell. I'm surprised he didn't sprinkle in some "neocon Zionists" language.
"Why is the U.S. superpower orchestrating fear of puny Iran?"
A country the size of Iran with a population of 80 million is far from "puny," and this particular country is currently ruled by crazed Islamists intent on manufacturing nuclear weapons. Seems Roberts is deluded into believing the MAD (mutually assured destruction) policy that worked with the Soviets during the Cold War would work equally well with the Islamic world.
Who is Paul Craig Roberts?
More people have probably heard of Buckhead than have hear of this guy!
(Buckhead - Dan Rather end of life!)
I concur. Washington was one of the greats despite these problems because he held that army together when almost no one else could, and some of his successes (Trenton and Princeton come to mind) were briliant. Arnold left wealth to fight for the cause, and was a tough and brave soldier, and he probably saved the Revolution at Saratoga. If he'd had a smaller ego there might be a state named Arnold on the West Coast.
Proof that Paul Craig Roberts hates America at least as much as Rep. John Murtha, with a dash of Jew-hatred in the mix.
Or is it simply hatred of out-of-control government?
Who is this guy, and why is he so stupid?
_______________________________________________________
Stop reading my mind. I was about to type the same thing...any answer yet?
"If he'd had a smaller ego there might be a state named Arnold on the West Coast."
And it would do wonders for the place.
Wow, the administration is fighting terrorists. That's sooooo out of control! </hippie>
Roberts is a seditionist, and this column should be exhibit A at his trial.
Wow, the administration is fighting terrorists. That's sooooo out of control! </hippie>
Roberts is a seditionist, and this column should be exhibit A at his trial.
Roberts is a seditionist, and this column should be exhibit A at his trial.
says you.............ping me when the charges are filed.
If a writer at the NYT had said, in 1944, that every rape by a GI in Europe was FDR's direct fault...that the war was caused by FDR...that FDR and the Congress were every bit as bad as Hitler was said to be and was an enemy of the American people...and that the Axis never hurt anybody and we had no business fighting them, would that be sedition? What would have happened to that gent? I don't see how it's any different from PCR's points here.
PCR says the Commnder-in-Chief is a terrorist, and that we have become a terror sponsoring state. Do you agree or disagree with that?
If your premise is correct - Mr. Roberts would be in custody today - or possibly in the near future. As I asked, please ping me when the charges are filed.
PCR says the Commnder-in-Chief is a terrorist, and that we have become a terror sponsoring state. Do you agree or disagree with that?
I think to refer to bush as a terrorist is quite a stretch, and I think everyone is welcome to their opinion. let's consider each of the writer's assertions individually and determine their accuracy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.