Liberal - not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry. Open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded. It's not a swear word pe
Democracy and Responsibility
Published on March 10, 2005 By AJCrowley In Politics
To Whom it May Concern (you know who you are),

I am sick of hearing praises for George W. Bush, and his wonderful crusade to spread democracy through the Middle East. Most recently is the various Bush fans claiming responsibility for Syria leaving Lebanon. The USA certainly had a hand in it, but this is something the Lebanese have been working on for over a decade, the US hardly deserves credit for being the sole precipitator of this change.

Though (so far) Bush's policy has really been truly disastrous in one country (Iraq of course), it looks like he's getting ramped up to invade anyone else who dares oppose him. It's hardly surprising that rogue states are seeking nuclear armament, they are under the very real threat of invasion by a foreign power, and the concept of mutually assured destruction kept the war between the US and the USSR cold for decades. A cold war is certainly prefereable to a hot one.

I'm also sick of seeing "for the camera" images, and romanticized and cleaned up stories appearing on all North American news agencies. The BBC, and CBC are two of the only news agencies left in the world that you can rely on for unbiased news, why? See: corporate conflicts of interest and agendas.

You know, there's something worse than living under a ruthless despot like Hussein - and that's living in chaos with a foreign invader shooting up civilians on a daily basis, and let's face it, for everyone that Hussein would have "disappeared" and tortured for no reason, the using is doing tenfold, so who's really evil here?

Part of the problem is that many Americans (always the loudest ones) have no sense of empathy at all. If your soldiers arrest and torture innocent people, well, that's just the price of war, but if someone tortures a US citizen, it's unbelievably barbaric and evil, and they should be nuked.

Let me ask you a hypothetical question based on real situations - many people in your country hate Bush, as many Iraqis hated Hussein, both are guilty of gestapo tactics, torture, and corruption - don't even bother trying to deny it, Cheney still makes a great deal of money from Halliburton, who strangely get overpriced no bid contracts. It's clearly matter of favours for favours in the Bush government. Anyway, back on point, half of your population hates Bush, so if some foreign power, say, China, decided that your people should be freed from the tyranny of George Bush, and they came to your country, destroyed the infrastructure so that you couldn't get electricity or running water any more than sporadically, even in your biggest cities. If China had bombed government and military buildings, as well as plenty of "collateral damage". Imagine that almost everyone you knew had lost family as a result of this. Imagine that they left your country covered in uranium dust, resulting in outrageous cancer and birth deformity rates. Would you be grateful for being liberated? Would people who hate Bush be grateful? This is the reality that people in Iraq have to live with every day because of the actions that were taken because of your government, who took these actions because they were your wishes, even if they had to lie to you to convince you. What this means is that any citizen of a country that invaded who supported the invasion bears partial responsibility, and cannot be taken seriously in claiming innocence. You, yes you are a murderer and a plunderer, these actions were taken in your name, and responsibility is the price of true democracy.

Maybe you'd have a little more empathy if before you go believing the bullshit from the usual suspects (well, it is cheaper to just parrot what the government tells you instead of having to do any actual journalism and investigation, and corporations that own the news have a legal obligation to their shareholders to maximize profits), you should try listening to what the actual Iraqis have to say.

There's a girl that lives in Baghdad that has one of the best blogs I've seen. There seems to be this impression in the US that people in the Middle East are barbarians, which is simply not the case, life there (when you're not getting invaded) is not tremendously different from life here or in the US, they are real people with real families, real friends, and real lives. She hated Hussein as much or more than any American, but now her life is far worse. She lives in the real fear, because their newly elected government has stated that they will incorporate Islamic law into their constitution. Their interpretation of that law means the beekeeper suits that you so love to talk about when preaching of the freedom you're spreading, or at least a head covering (no hair showing), and an ankle length skirt (no pants), and a wrist length loose top that doesn't show any shape. She used to be free to dress as she pleased in Iraq (which was exactly the same as many fashionable European and American women), and nobody could say anything about it, because for everything that was wrong about Hussein, he kept the government secular, and nobody dared challenge it. This kind of discrimination really is the will of the people in Iraq, this is the common Shia view, and the majority are Shia (remember the voting?), and believe this to be right. Can you really tell me that this is a country ready for true democracy? Where democracy doesn't mean freedom to do and express yourself as you please, but freedom to opress women? Even now, she gets many extremely rude comments about "dressing so disrespectfully", which she would have never put up with under Hussein, but now to argue the point too strongly would place her in real danger. These are the fruits of your invasion and your democracy, and I'll say it again, the fact that your democracy represents your wishes makes you wholly responsible for all of this. I highly recommend that you check out her blog, the url is http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com. Read it and understand what taking actions based on your assumptions of a situation about which you know nothing. Congratulations, freedom and democracy for all.

The world is hardly safer, if al Quaeda had an advertising campaign planned, they probably withdrew it because Bush has done a great job for them, there will be no shortage of people pissed off with the USA after losing their entire families and many friends.

Anyway, I could rant all day about this, and it drives me mad how ignorant so many people (not just Americans) are about the subject, yet still seem to have such a strong opinion on the matter, which in a democracy gets acted on, there's that responsibility thing again. Anyway, despite Bush's refusal to accept liability from an international court, so that soldiers who torture innocent people can be punished instead of just a couple of them scapegoated, and then pretending that the situation was just a few bad apples, and doesn't exist any more. Despite this, Bush and Blair should be held accountable. There should be trials for war crimes, don't try and tell me that torture isn't a war crime, and it's policy, not just a few bad apples. Because yet again this is a subject on which you are no doubt blissfully ignorant, I suggest that you read Amnesty International's letter to George Bush, it's very enlightening - http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGAMR511452004.

I doubt that I'll change anyone's mind with any of this, after all, what true American would accept responsibility for the true consequences of their actions when they can be cowardly and hide behind false patriotism, believing the propagandized and sanitized stories that their governments choose to tell them, but maybe a few people who are so strongly opinionated on the subject, yet know nothing of the real facts and the real effects of this will shut the hell up.

Comments (Page 4)
5 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 
on Mar 11, 2005
>What I find amazing about the WMD issue is that the same people who have no trouble seeing improbably vast and
>sophisticated conspiracies in our own government seem totally incapable of admitting the possibility that Saddam
>Hussein could ave maybe--just maybe!--perpetrated such a simple conspiracy as moving his WMDs some time between
>when he knew the U.S. was going to invade and the time the U.S. finally lost patience with U.N. delaying tactics.

You dont manufacture WMD's in your apartment complex idiot!
And the whole mobile labs and balloon nonsense was a complete lie on the part of Colin Powell.

By the way , when would he (Saddam) have had these moved? While the U.N team was scouring the country and you had
satellites pointed at him.

Did you BOTHER to read the Dulfer and David Kay report?
Can you READ at all ... lets start with that?

You do understand that that whole theory (however STUPID and MINDLESS it has proven to be) has long since been
debunked right?

The problem with dealing with the uninformed is that outside of the latest "talking points" they cant put two sentences
together.
on Mar 11, 2005
David Kay said Iraq violated UN resolutions.

China liberating the US from GWB would be the equivalent of Nazi Germany liberating the US from the "tyranny" of FDR.

If the US was such a bad country, why did millions of Vietnamese come here after the Communist takeover?

You know, the left thought Reagan was crazy for saying that Communism would be left on "the ash heap of history".
on Mar 11, 2005
Ah, our good friend rombios has dropped in again, en flambe, to help us better understand ourselves. What a joke. I sure hope this shit is therapeutic for him in some way - there is no other redeeming value I can see.

Now stand back, 'cause you know it's comin'.

Cheers,
Daiwa
on Mar 12, 2005
I disagree with George W. Bush, but the fact is, he WAS elected by the American electoral process. The deception of the US media played no small part in that reelection (by refusing to cover other candidates besides Bush/Kerry), but the fact is, the process was/is FAR more democratic than under the Hussein regime.


This may be true, but he was elected with the slimmest of leads. Some even venture to accuse the right of stealing the election. I don't know if that's true or not (though there are arguments to be made for some of the election shenanigans that resulted in republican majorities), but the margin was so slim, as to be a plausible premise.

Anyway, my point is that, as Crowley pointed out, 50% of our American population do NOT support Bush and his neocon death cult warshippers. I am one of them. Democracy will not make up for the fact that I do believe that the dubya dummy is a lying sack of garbage, and will pay, if only via historical records, for his deceipt, lies, conflicts of interest, and abject STUPIDITY.

We took a secular country and have turned it into an Islamist one. That, in and of itself, is a huge failing of our misguided invasion of Iraq. I hate the dubya dummy for what he did. And, the Iraqis are paying the huge price for this criminally insane American oil venture. It sure would have been cheaper to just buy the freakin' oil.

Great article, Crowley. Thanks.
on Mar 12, 2005
You are correct. That is as long as their not using AP (armour piercing) rounds. And those come in all sizes including NATO rounds.


Various 5.56x45mm rounds
Various 7.62x39mm rounds
Various 7.62x51mm rounds
Various 7.62x54R rounds


And your point is? Body armour will NOT stop an AP round, period.
on Mar 12, 2005
Anyway, my point is that, as Crowley pointed out, 50% of our American population do NOT support Bush and his neocon death cult warshippers. I am one of them. Democracy will not make up for the fact that I do believe that the dubya dummy is a lying sack of garbage, and will pay, if only via historical records, for his deceipt, lies, conflicts of interest, and abject STUPIDITY.


And your point would be WRONG! Over 50% SUPPORT him or he would not have gotten re-elected.
on Mar 12, 2005
And your point is?


If you click on the link you'd see what various types of ammunition and what they look like.

Body armour will NOT stop an AP round, period.


Unless you're calling the manufacturer a liar, then you're wrong.

Model AA4 - NIJ Certified Level IV Stand Alone

"Stand-alone" plates are designed to stop ballistic threats using the plate alone. No ballistic vest is required for this plate, as all the energy and fragments are stopped in the plate. These plates are usually reserved for tactical operations or anti-terrorist work where the ammunition threat is unknown, or if the wearing of a vest is considered too cumbersome. Material: Aramid Fiber Bonded AL98, Aluminum Oxide 98%
Size 10" x 12"
Curvature: Triple Curve
Front/Back: Front
Finish: Nylon Cover
Protection Level: NIJ Certified Level IV Stand Alone

Maximum Weight: 2.2 kg
It will defeat the following threats:
7.62 × 54mm lead core ball ammunition, Dragunov Sniper Rifle at 0 meters
7.62 × 54mm AP, Dragunov Sniper Rifle at 0 meters
7.62 × 51mm NATO ball ammunition at 0 meters
7.62 × 51mm AP M-61 at 0 meters
7.62 × 51mm Swiss Munitions AP (WC Core) at 0 meters
7.62 × 39mm mild steel core, AK-47 at 0 meters
7.62 × 63mm AP at 0 meters
5.56 × 45mm SS109/M855 at 0 meters
5.56 × 45mm M193 ball at 0 meters
5.45 × 39mm Russian ball at 0 meters
12 gauge slug at 0 meters


Now you can see what the ammo looks like:

Various 5.56x45mm rounds
Various 7.62x39mm rounds
Various 7.62x51mm rounds
Various 7.62x54R rounds
on Mar 12, 2005
#41 by rombios (Anonymous user) Friday, March 11, 2005

#42 by rombios (Anonymous user) Friday, March 11, 2005

#43 by rombios (Anonymous user) Friday, March 11, 2005

#44 by rombios (Anonymous user) Friday, March 11, 2005

#45 by rombios (Anonymous user) Friday, March 11, 2005

#46 by rombios (Anonymous user) Friday, March 11, 2005


Can't you condense your ridiculously stupid bullshit?
on Mar 12, 2005
Ah, our good friend rombios has dropped in again, en flambe, to help us better understand ourselves. What a joke. I sure hope this shit is therapeutic for him in some way - there is no other redeeming value I can see.

Now stand back, 'cause you know it's comin'.

Cheers,
Daiwa
----daiwa

I vowed to ignore rombios overall, and that stands. His attacks are consistent with pathologic attention-seeking. For proof of this, just see the above number of posts he left. 6 long-winded rants in a row.
I give him credit, though; he seems well-read. It's just that his view on what he reads is so myopic and viewed through a tunnel that it becomes irrelevant. Funny how he stays anonymous.
on Mar 12, 2005
I hate for threads to become "about people" instead of about ideas, but there are a select few, rombios among them, who have no interest in debating ideas, just in spoiling threads with pissed-off rants, pointless insults and hate-filled spew, and I don't feel it is inappropriate to rebuff them publicly. They contribute nothing of any value or benefit.

Cheers,
Daiwa
on Mar 12, 2005
drmiller stuttered
>And your point would be WRONG! Over 50% SUPPORT him or he would not have gotten re-elected.

The election was stolen point blank. But then again maybe you dont consider the following
important:

1) the head of Diebold PERSONALLY guranteed that he would deliver the election to BUSH
2) minority disenfranchisement was rampant. guess what ... it tended to be in DEMOCRATICALLY leaning
communities
3) fielding that MORON and WEAKLING Kerry was probably the worst decision the moranic democrats
ever had. Kerry who stood just one shade away from BUSH's own policies.

It doesnt really matter ... considering all the proposed changes to the Budget the RED STATES are
about the feel "the burn". Neo conservatives have no true allegiance OTHER than to their "interests"

on Mar 12, 2005
>Reply By: Daiwa Posted: Friday, March 11, 2005
>Ah, our good friend rombios has dropped in again, en flambe,

Daiwa ... I am not here to cause trouble .. but to participate in a "sensible" exchange. I know its
lacking with your involvement, but we can AT LEAST try? Cant we?

>Now stand back, 'cause you know it's comin'.

To borrow a Bushism: BRING IT ON!!!
on Mar 13, 2005
And your point is?


If you click on the link you'd see what various types of ammunition and what they look like.

Body armour will NOT stop an AP round, period.


Unless you're calling the manufacturer a liar, then you're wrong.

Model AA4 - NIJ Certified Level IV Stand Alone

"Stand-alone" plates are designed to stop ballistic threats using the plate alone. No ballistic vest is required for this plate, as all the energy and fragments are stopped in the plate. These plates are usually reserved for tactical operations or anti-terrorist work where the ammunition threat is unknown, or if the wearing of a vest is considered too cumbersome. Material: Aramid Fiber Bonded AL98, Aluminum Oxide 98%
Size 10" x 12"
Curvature: Triple Curve
Front/Back: Front
Finish: Nylon Cover
Protection Level: NIJ Certified Level IV Stand Alone

Maximum Weight: 2.2 kg
It will defeat the following threats:
7.62 × 54mm lead core ball ammunition, Dragunov Sniper Rifle at 0 meters
7.62 × 54mm AP, Dragunov Sniper Rifle at 0 meters
7.62 × 51mm NATO ball ammunition at 0 meters
7.62 × 51mm AP M-61 at 0 meters
7.62 × 51mm Swiss Munitions AP (WC Core) at 0 meters
7.62 × 39mm mild steel core, AK-47 at 0 meters
7.62 × 63mm AP at 0 meters
5.56 × 45mm SS109/M855 at 0 meters
5.56 × 45mm M193 ball at 0 meters
5.45 × 39mm Russian ball at 0 meters
12 gauge slug at 0 meters


Now you can see what the ammo looks like:

Various 5.56x45mm rounds
Various 7.62x39mm rounds
Various 7.62x51mm rounds
Various 7.62x54R rounds


No you didn't read all of your link. Go to the linked page and before you scroll down to far you will see a blue pane with a picture of a vest on the left and writing on the right. In the FIRST sentence it PLAINLY states that it will stop rifle rounds and SOME AP rounds. Notice they do NOT say ALL AP rounds.
on Mar 13, 2005
ler stuttered
>And your point would be WRONG! Over 50% SUPPORT him or he would not have gotten re-elected.

The election was stolen point blank. But then again maybe you dont consider the following
important:

1) the head of Diebold PERSONALLY guranteed that he would deliver the election to BUSH
2) minority disenfranchisement was rampant. guess what ... it tended to be in DEMOCRATICALLY leaning
communities
3) fielding that MORON and WEAKLING Kerry was probably the worst decision the moranic democrats
ever had. Kerry who stood just one shade away from BUSH's own policies.

It doesnt really matter ... considering all the proposed changes to the Budget the RED STATES are
about the feel "the burn". Neo conservatives have no true allegiance OTHER than to their "interests"


BullSHIT! PROVE it coward! And you must be since you won't use your own name, ya gotta use mine?
on Mar 13, 2005
No you didn't read all of your link. Go to the linked page and before you scroll down to far you will see a blue pane with a picture of a vest on the left and writing on the right. In the FIRST sentence it PLAINLY states that it will stop rifle rounds and SOME AP rounds. Notice they do NOT say ALL AP rounds.


I read the entire page. And I read what you said before. You said:

Body armour will NOT stop an AP round, period.


That's not true. I will quote the manufacturer here, and highlight exactly the point I'm making:

It will defeat the following threats:
7.62 × 54mm lead core ball ammunition, Dragunov Sniper Rifle at 0 meters
7.62 × 54mm AP, Dragunov Sniper Rifle at 0 meters
7.62 × 51mm NATO ball ammunition at 0 meters
7.62 × 51mm AP M-61 at 0 meters
7.62 × 51mm Swiss Munitions AP (WC Core) at 0 meters
7.62 × 39mm mild steel core, AK-47 at 0 meters
7.62 × 63mm AP at 0 meters
5.56 × 45mm SS109/M855 at 0 meters*
5.56 × 45mm M193 ball at 0 meters
5.45 × 39mm Russian ball at 0 meters
12 gauge slug at 0 meters


The armor stops AP rounds in calibers that are most likely to be used. There aren't too many insurgents using .338 Lapua rifles with AP rounds, if there even are any. And even if armor could stop a .50 BMG round, the energy from the impact would probably kill the person wearing the it anyway. Deaths to American troops from gunfire is now quite uncommon. And it is thanks to the armor.


* Has good penetrating ability, but is not technically considered armor-piercing
5 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5