I watched consumers continue to buy gas guzzlers in the beginning of this year, and I was perplexed. I chalked it up to their short-sightedness.

Me, I purchased a notoriously efficient, dependable car when I was in the market. A 2007 Toyota Corolla that I plan on driving into the ground. I keep up with routine maintenance, and do synthetic oil changes to help prolong it’s life–which I’m hoping will surpass 250,000+ miles.

If I had any confidence in an US automaker producing a car of equal quality all-around, I would have purchased the US car. Except they were more concerned with going in a different direction.

But the issue to me is all of the blue collar workers that will be screwed over if one of the Detroit auto makers goes bankrupt.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2008/11/20/bipartisan_group_works_to_revive_auto_bailout_1227203429/?page=1

“My fear is that you’re going to take this money and continue the same stupid decisions you’ve made for 25 years,” said Rep. Michael Capuano, D-Mass.

The stakes are high. The Detroit automakers employ nearly a quarter-million workers, and more than 730,000 other workers produce materials and parts that go into cars. About 1 million more people work in dealerships nationwide. If just one of the automakers declared bankruptcy, some estimates put U.S. job losses next year as high as 2.5 million.”

Either way, Congrats on America for finally getting it right… it was about damn time.

It is unfortunate that Christians do not see how Jesus’s love was intended for everyone, and that spreading their message should not include hate. Last I checked the ‘chosen’ people are not Christians, although conservative Christians act like they are the only ones who deserve a fair shake. Spreading a message does not equal imposing on others.

I understand fully, with this election as a testament, why some Americans chose not to belong to any religion and instead, believe in spirituality without organization.

Kudos to my brother for fighting for the rights of people other than himself. The fight can only be won if we join together and fight for justice and civility. Straight people must be on board with queers if we are to make any progress.

Eli - At first I thought you were my friend Eli Bolin who was joking about voting McCain… but it’s just you. Oh well.

Ethan - Congratulations on voting your conscience. A true fiscal conservative would not be voting for McCain/Palin and that’s what I’ve been trying to say here. I’ve realized through this process that I agree with much of the “true” conservative principles. Too bad Rove and the Republicans have embraced the religious fringe of this country. If they don’t jettison that part of the party they’ll never get me, EVER. So I still consider myself independant… but unless the Republican party takes a bold new approach in the future I’ll be a strong Democratic voter for a long long time.

So let’s forget all the details and focus on what bothers most conservatives (who, these days, tend to be the leaders in fighting to either take away rights, or make them hard to come by) - taking away their “hard-earned” money. More marriage rights, more money the taxpayers have to spend.

On another note - I find it ludicrous that anyone thinks that they have the right to tell me I can’t marry a woman - or to tell a black man he can’t marry a white woman, or for that matter - that anyone in this country isn’t allowed to practice their religion of choice - even if they’re freakin mormons!

The question that should always be asked first, in my opinion, is simple. Who gives you the right to take away my rights?

Even though this country was founded on freedom of religion - we consistently fight with one another to limit each others rights. As usual:

Wisdom is wasted on the past.

Honestly the funny thing is that if you look at my post through the prism of the conventional media it might seem leftish. But all in all I agree with the right on immigration, less important social issues, and to some degree on abortion. My point is that Anti War is seen as radically left but Eisenhower became anti unnecessary war after Korea. So that left labeling stuff really gets me ticked b/c traditionally the G.O.P. was anti war and anti “nation building.”

Joel asked what specifically about the Bush doctrine do I disagree with. Well, the whole premise that a nation has the right to “preempt’ war by attacking first. I also disagree with Unilatteralism unless in self defense.

The reason I am against this is b/c the fact is the this was preventative war, not preemptive which would suggest an inevitability. There were no longer WMD’s in Iraq and he was a paper tiger. Certainly no threat. Even if he had them he had no delivery systems that could reach the U.S. So…preemptive war is language used to frame the debate, to paint a illusion of inevitable conflict and allow us to forget that we are attacking and invading first. (a.k.a. aggression.)

Preventative war has been tried and was used by Hitler to justify his conquest in many cases. Also we should debate if we should go to war for allies. I don’t think America really understands the NATO commitment as well as our marriage to Israel. Should we fight and die and risk our security for their country? I’m not talking about your hyperbolic genocide hypothetical. I’m talking about whether we should preserve the status quo for them by giving them helicopters and M16’s.

Also, not to get personal but do you consider yourself a Christian? If so do you think Jesus would think this is a just war? I know Joel that here we seperate religion from policy but I am curious as to whether you think God smiles when he sees George Bush say that God told him to invade Iraq. A Christian is supposed to turn the other cheek and be merciful. Certainly not to punish people who had nothing to do w/ 9/11. So all in all I don’t believe that a true Christian of humanitarian would serve in Iraq. I was 18 when it happened and I’ve seen the G.O.P. bastardize the American name and set back democracy as a viable, rational alternative do to a bad example set. Like I said, self defense is justified, maybe NATO is a good idea but that is only true if you get their input on things like Iraq too. The world hated this war from the start, as did most intelligent Americans.

Also Joel you don’t have to write an essay back to me. Let’s just debate the core of these ideas. I know it’s hard to think what you did there was in vein. Do you tink that Vietnam was in Vein? Or was that a crucial battle ground worth the sacrifice? In retrospect we all know Vietnam was a waste of the youth of a country. My uncle is still terribly messed up from it and many died not including the napalm burned children found in old news reels.

Agent Orange, a Chemical Weapon used by the U.S. has had devestation long term effects on the Vietnamese. On NPR they had a story about a young woman who’s parents weren’t even alive during the way and how they are all suffering from defects and diseases. We poisoned and killed so many that it had to come around.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6506882

We used to put cement in the milk trucks in Cuba. Just to dissuade them from supporting their communist regime. There are great documentaries with former CIA agents speaking about this.

The argument for WMD was partially that we know he has them we have the receipts. We sold them to him. I’m sure you know that and also know that we supported Sadaam in the aggressive illegal war against Iran.

If WMD was so important why not go to war with N. Korea? All this time we knew they were getting dirty and still nothing.

We didn’t b/c 1. Miltitary stretched to thin. 2. There’s a lot of ppl in N. Korea. 3. No oil or resource benefit to fighting with them.

Look, the idea of “prophetic dualism” or painting the world as a place where good and evil are battleing and that we are good is a bad ignorant way to create policy. We did it in the 80’s and it helped us rationalize the training of what was called the “Afghan Mujahadeen.” 20 years later these people whom we trained and funded prior, attacked us b/c of our military presence in Saudi Arabia. The fact that Americans defended it against Iraq humiliated the Saudis. So…are asset became our enemy…same w/ Saddam..before that the Sha of Iran..etc.

Think long term. Also regarding being called an “apolgist,” I would say that I don’t think Ahmandinjad spoke responsibly. I think Bush was far more irresponsible with his rhetoric by first labling them the “axis of evil.” As I said before the U.S. used to talk about defeating communism w/out meaning to kill all Russians or Vietnamese. I think you’re way off point here and many people can distinguish the Zionist regime from the jewish people who have a large community in Iran.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_in_Iran

Maybe by the time Joel responds we’ll have a new track for this nation!

-Ryan

Second, the supposed slippery slope of Churches being sued is a red herring and would never happen. They are private organizations and are allowed to marry whoever they want. When this country instituted religious freedom into law, there were probably people who said that would lead to Churches being forced to give communion to Jews or Atheists. That “slope” never materialized and neither will this one. Same-sex couples will find friendly churches to marry them and avoid the discriminatory ones that don’t want them.
Perhaps you should take a look at the lies and distortions of the YES on 8 campaign before you continue this line of argument.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1wM7xb6f1I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1wM7xb6f1I

What it really boils down to is family. Somehow the religious right thinks that same-sex parents can’t raise children and that “protecting marriage” is somehow the answer. What have they done as divorce rates among straight people have skyrocketed over the years? Can gay people really do any more damage to the “institution of marriage”? To the contrary, they might bring a new reverence to the idea of marriage, taking the commitment seriously and taking our society up a notch. This is what I mean by progress.

If you knew any couples like this, as I do, you wouldn’t feel this way. It would seem to you as an essential component of our free society. Indeed it is as essential to our basic freedom as equal rights for black people and women were to our grandparents. Don’t be on the wrong side of history my friend. Don’t let Jesus get in the way of your sense of fairness and justice.

The “Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000″, passed by the outgoing Republican congress and signed by Bill Clinton is the single biggest example of dangerous deregulation. It led to $60 TRILLION of leveraged speculation by investment banks and is what caused the current credit freeze and international crisis. The american mortgage industry’s problems could have been kept to America, but because of this terrible deregulation we’re now in a global crisis.

For some great information, check out This American Life’s October 3rd show :http://www.thisamericanlife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?sched=1263
And 60 minutes recent episode about “CDS financial instruments”. It’s illuminating:http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/26/60minutes/main4546199.shtml

As to your point about the value of spending more money. It’s important to get money into the hands of consumers so they can spend more… not to encourage them to spend more and rack up more credit card debt. I think my statements show a nuanced view of the complicated issue and not hypocrisy.

At what point do your disagreements with Obama on taxes and abortion become outweighed by his superior temperment, intelligence and ability to inspire? Don’t we need someone to inspire us in these times of international and fiscal crisis? Don’t we need a leader who is bigger than his policies and will inspire millions to take up the cause? I do… and I don’t think that McCain and Obama come even close to equal on those issues… which are far more important than 49% of working families receiving tax rebates. (if that’s even true)

Think bigger, Joel. Think about the support we’ll engender from the rest of the world… the benefits of true leadership and inspiration that Obama will bring to all Americans and world citizens. Think about the better use of technology under an Obama administration and, though you may bristle at it, a Democratic house and senate that can work swiftly to GET THINGS DONE. In a time of crisis we need to be united as one America and tackle our problems, not spend our time squabbling over a few percentage points of taxes and government programs here or there. Obama’s promise (which you’ve never really doubted and I give you credit for that) is much bigger than any issue!

I agree with you that when people spend money (middle class), the economy benefits. This is exactly what you found fault with, a while back, in Bush’s recommendation to spend money after 9/11. A little bit hypocritical, no? I realize the two situations are very different, but the principle, increased spending benefiting the economy, is the same.

I respect the conservative endorsements that you cite, but that does not convince me that voting for Obama is the best course. What it does tell me is that Obama’s inspirational message is capturing the minds of some moderate conservatives, and a handful of those further right, who are willing to stay their personal convictions for the moment. For the record, I think Obama could be a good President as long as he doesn’t realize some of his campaign promises. But my disagreements with him on a variety of issues lead me to support the American hero John McCain.

“If by a ‘Liberal’ they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a ‘Liberal,’ then I’m proud to say I’m a ‘Liberal.’

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_American_liberalism

The Federal Government is indeed imperfect, though not “broken” as you say. If compared to the big banks and investment firms on Wall Street, it seems to be doing pretty well. In terms of “expansion”, the Bush Administration has done more to expand and bloat the beurocracy of the Federal Government than any administration in recent history and I fail to see how Obama could be worse. I hesitate to cite any Federal program’s success that you couldn’t rebut… for there are certainly more partial failures than outright successes… but the National Park system comes to mind. Our highway and transportation system seems to work pretty well, as does our military. Social Security still provides retirement benefits to millions of senior Americans, too… and while virtually every program one can cite could be improved by reform, removal or replacement (and I’ve got my own list of things to change) it seems defeatist to say that it’s all broken and beyond hope for change.

So I’d like to define my liberalism with a few principles. Equality, including equal opportunity is huge for me. A distrust for the status quo and conventional wisdom (which you seem to share) is also a factor in my thinking. I favor progress in human rights and a repudiation of traditional ways of thinking when those thoughts are discriminatory and unfair. I believe in personal responsibility and freedom but know that some problems (like Global Warming) are far to large for individuals to tackle alone. We need an organized and effective Federal Government that can nudge the private sector into doing the right thing even before it becomes profitable. I want the government to stay out of my bedroom, my spiritual life and the way I choose to have fun.
I’m a Libra Liberal who weighs the pros and cons of every argument (as evidenced by this blog) and even though we’ve spoken in person about some of these issues I’m not clear as to what you see as our positive way out of this mess.

Whether you like all of his policies or not, Obama has vision and the ability to lead and inspire us. He also shows an incredible affinity for deliberation and debate as well as an ability to reach across the aisle and adjust his policies without losing his convictions (offshore drilling would be a good example of this). These things will combine to bring about more positive change than we could have hoped for with Kerry in 2004… and that’s why I’m so excited.

Reagan’s trickle-down economics didn’t actually trickle down and even though there is still a laissez-faire fringe in America (just follow his links if you’re curious about that fringe), the economic crisis we’re in shows that it’s time for a fundamental change in the way we think about wealth and taxation. Obama is supported by many economists and even many conservatives because they know his tax plan is superior to and more FAIR than McBush’s. When you lower taxes on the middle class you get more spending which leads to a stronger economy.

That same middle class is threatening to die out while fat cats who make over $250,000 (and receiving multi-million dollar parachutes for running banks into the ground) are doing just fine. They can afford a little bit higher taxes to pay for the trillion dollar Iraq war and $700 billion Wall Street bailout.

It’s unconscionable to say, at this point in history that we should continue the tax policies of George W. Bush! There has to be a better way (the fair tax might be it) and if you look past the far right opinions you might find it.

http://www.nysun.com/national/obama-aides-say-he-would-lower-taxes/83970/?print=8900088121

Besides, taxes are just one of many important issues in this campaign. I encourage you to read some of the conservative endorsements for Obama that have been coming out recently and give them some serious thought:

http://smskullsessions.com/blog/archives/389

“This is what democracy is supposed to be. These people actually listened, considered and were open to the possibility of change. They didn’t support a candidate. They actually chose one. And while I’m happy this year they are voting for “my team,” they also inspired me to be more open in my own political life.”

I am thankful that this site has exposed me and opened me up to many other ways of thinking about issues. I am also thankful that it has caused me to critically examine my own beliefs and convictions.

John McCain is an American hero who has served his country faithfully for over 40 years. He shares my beliefs in smaller government, fiscal conservatism (kind of), and social conservatism. He is outstanding in foreign policy, hands down better than the record of the Dem VP candidate. He has always done what he thinks is right in the Senate, even if it disappoints many conservatives like me - remember that McCain was one of the last people I supported in the primaries because of his maverickness. However, given his clarification on many issues that are important to me and what I believe are important to the future of our country, he has my vote. I do not believe that the liberal agenda of Obama is what is best for the country in the years ahead especially under the current economic conditions.

I don’t believe that we should expand social programs as Obama indicates he will do. I don’t believe we should talk to Iran without preconditions (they have recently said that they would actually have preconditions to talk to us). I don’t believe in redistribution of wealth. These are the biggest differences between the candidates. On the environment and energy they are practically identical with the exception of when we should drill. On moral issues like abortion…well you know where I stand on that. So, despite your best efforts, I still support John McCain for president.

Supply side economics has been proven to be damaging to the wellbeing of the median of our nation as well as disasturous to those white collar number pushers who came to the tax payer for salvation in the end. TRICKLE DOWN is B.S. GAME OVER! You ask for small government now? After your party increased the size of gov. more then anytime sinde FDR’s New Deal. Smirconish just endorsed Obama too and he’s a “conservative.” Robo calls calling Obama by virtue a person that pals around w/ terrorist. Get a life. McCarthyist type stuff is outta here man. The War is over b/c that’ how we like it. But we wont rest till they pull every brick from that astrodome base apart. Your party just initiated the Nationalization of the banking system. So what about small gov?

Let’s start by undoing the Dept. Homeland Security b/c that traditionally was a D.O.D. job. Defense. NSA officers recently blew the whistle on the spying of Americans over seas. Journalist, Soldiers, Aid Workers having phone sex. Way to go Bushies! Way to freakin’ go! Vote people. Don’t elect another IDIOT!

Illegal Spying http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1491889

THE WAR IS OVER IF YOU WANT IT!
OBAMA-BIDEN ‘08

It will be interesting to see how the Republican party comes out of this election into 2010. One probable course of action is illuminated in a WSJ opinion piece (you know how I love that paper).

Cheers,
Joel

It’s not a bad argument, Joel, but it would be more effective if we hadn’t just sat through 8 years of Bush and 14 years of Republican House and Senate, y’know?

< < begin rant...

Or more specifically, the Gingritch revolution which began in 1998 when Republicans surged to power in Congress. They then took the executive branch in 2000, appointed two conservative Supreme Court justices, had innumerable political and Wall Street scandals and Katrinas and Iraqs while racking up a $10 trillion debt...
oh and did I mention that they had a Vice President who wanted (and managed) to be pretty much in charge of the Executive and Legislative Branches at the same time? An idea that spits on the Constitution, by the way.

is THAT the kind of divided government you mean?

...end rant >>

Yes Joel, you nailed it. We could take this back as far as the Reagan Revolution (R.I.P. 2008) which is now being questioned with increased fervor! One could argue, and many have, that Bush has shredded the Republican party of its values and direction.

A great articulation of this position is made by some random guy I found linked from somewhere:
http://larrygellman.blogspot.com/2008/10/will-republican-party-survive-and-does.html

Face it. Many conservatives feel more comfortable with Obama at the helm than McCain in this critical moment in history. MANY. They know he’s no socialist and they realize that Obama has the temperament to handle any 3am phone call better than McCain.

Like Reaganite Paul Rubin said in your Wall Street Journal link, we could be coming upon a new era of dominant thought in this country. An era that I see as more humane and more challenging to the human spirit. An era where any man or woman, white, black or muslim can aspire to inspire and lead. An era with a leader who will deliberate and consider all sides of an issue…. like we do here on Skull Sessions.

Read some of these Obama endorsements. It’s a new world out there. The Republican party has been defeated and humiliated by themselves. The pendulum swung so far right under Bush that you can bet it’s time for it to swing back left…. and that’s definitely not a bad thing.

I agree with most of what you said in the last four replies. Thanks for your thoughtful and respectful comments. I especially love the support of my perspective of the Iraq war that Joel and some other Skull Session commenters don’t share. To try to understand and respect the perspectives of all middle east inhabitants is usually painted as “appeasement” by the pro-war Bush Administration… and is essential to victory in today’s entirely new world order!

On Powell, see my recent post about my agreement with you. His endorsement is huge. http://smskullsessions.com/blog/archives/344

On cost plus contracts and the privatization of the military, I agree with you… it’s morally and strategically wrong to have private contractors doing the job that soldiers should be doing. We should not overcommit our armed forces to the point of needing companies like KBR for “security”… and trust me, I’ve seen Iraq for Sale. However even though I’m not a Democrat, I don’t think that the Democratic party “likes it that way” at all. Perhaps you meant Joel in that comment?

On the empire, have you seen our session with my comparison of America to Rome? You’d like it: http://smskullsessions.com/blog/archives/285

On religion’s influence in the middle east, I agree that it’s not the only factor, but I really think that all of the other obvious factors like poverty and pure war-torn hatred are merely symptoms of the greater, underlying problem: religious extremism. Moderate religion is fine with me. Worship something you can’t see if you want, just don’t force it on me!

thanks again. now I look forward to a Joel rebuttal to some of this kumbayah gushing on this page! haha…

justin

You probably know that there are 150 thousand private contractors in Iraq that don’t have any rules of engagement to follow and that can’t be held accountable by the Iraqi government or by the U.S. government.

Private Contractors from KBR, a subsidiary of Halliburton, have tortured suspected terrorist. Fact is there is no accountability and you’re party Justin likes it that way. Their mantra is to privatize more to reduce cost and increase competition but that is just a ploy. They gave KBR, Haliburton etc. the contracts without any other bids being accepted. Cost Plus is another way they screw over we the people.

Watch the documentary “Iraq For Sale.”

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6621486727392146155

Empires cost money and we borrow to uphold ours. Look at our giant bases in Japan, Germany and Korea. The argument that we’re not an empire is that we don’t claim the territory that we conquer. We give it back. Not so. We’ve stayed there despite the objections of indigenous peoples.

Check out Chalmers Johnson’s book Nemesis.

The truth is that John McCain would have the U.S. fight in Iraq until we have hegemony over the country and it’s resources. To leave with anything less would be to lose face and acknowledge that America can’t do anything it wants.

Colin Powell I hope will serve in the Obama Administration for the benefit of all. But let me be clear that I don’t like the two party system. The GOP and the Democratic Party are two sides of the same coin. To use the cliche of the century we have to decide between the lesser of two evils and that clearly points us towards the Democratic Party.

Looking forward to your response.

Justin’s making the argument that Bush made, if we don’t fight them there we’ll have to fight them here. How so? Do you not see that this is a criminal issue and not a military one. It’s like using a hatchet instead of a scalpel to remove the unwanted problem. U.S. Army is the wrong tool for the job. We need legal lawfull intellegience gathering and a competent administration that understands the political history of the Middle East.

This War was an excuse for a tranfser of wealth from citizen taxpayers to the M.I.C. The Republican war hero Esienhower said that every dollar we spend on war is a dollar we could have spent on education and to be weary of the influence the Military Industrial Complex has on our public policy and discourse.

About Liberalism vs. Realism I think you’re right about Bush throwing out the old play book and adopting an combo of the two. The problem is that both realism and liberalism are flawed but that’s another post.

Take care.

Also, you linked to an biased article by a Israeli Journalist to examine Ahmadinejad’s statements? I don’t think he was advocating for genocide at all. Iran has the highest population of Jewish people out of all the middle east. They are represented in Parliament as well. The U.S. wanted to destroy the U.S.S.R without killing all Russian people. Same goes for his want of the Zionist regime to fall. He advocates a referendum which treats the votes of Palestinians and Israelis as equal.

Also there is what I was trying to say about the movie 300 was that I met Marines who told me that they were referred to as “Spartans” by their C.O.s They were taken out to somehow see that movie in Iraq. The right wing created that movie to promote the narrative of the U.S. being “defenders of freedom” and Persians (Iran) being Imperialist. Quite the opposite exist in reality. These Marines told me that they have coins, Military collector coins with the new logo of a Spartan’s shield and spear on it. This is propaganda but I was entertained by it in the iMax.

If you’ve read the books you mentioned then I’m sure you’re familiar with the CIA coined term, “Blow Back.” It’s a reference to the reactions and byproducts of our hazardous foreign policy.

i.e. Blow blow back from U.S. Coup in 1953 lead to the Islamic Revolution and these hostilities to the U.S.

Same goes for many countries in many different cases. I’d look at some old Ron Paul speeches and see if you understand his perspective on our militaristic imperialistic foreign policy.

Being the best country in the world doesn’t mean being the strongest military power. It means living by our ideals and laws and being an example for the world to look up to. Not being the great ironic punchline of the world.

Peace.

“The War is over…………….If you want it.”-John Lennon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax

(US overthrow of a Democratic P.M of Iran)
———————————————————-
quagmire |ˈkwagˌmīr|
noun
a soft boggy area of land that gives way underfoot : torrential rain turned the building site into a quagmire.
• an awkward, complex, or hazardous situation : a legal quagmire. <————————————–

(two of the above apply)

You said Iran is doing what any other country would do in the region. Amadinejad came to power b/c of the economy that the U.S. helped insured was stagnant.

Iran could be a cultural allie with the U.S. but the U.S. is fairly committed to balancing the Sunni Arab and Israeli balance. Iran would throw off the political interests of the others.

Clinton is a hawk and there is a reason she didn’t become V.P. or the Demcocratic Nominee. She played dirty, she was over agressive in foreign policy because she’s always been afraid of being painted as a soft woman.

In a hypothetical situation Iran would never drop a wmd on Israel. Their former supreme leader Khomeni said it would be unislamic to have a nuclear weapon.

Religion is a really small part of it. It’s a factor along with the political, territorial, ethnic, economic factors. To say its about religion is clearly oversimplifying it to a ignorant fault.

Islam seeks to conquer? How so? Tell me where you get that notion? Watch too much of the 300 movie? I sat and spoke with marines who were pleasent guys and we didn’t talk politics. We talked about how he thought it was cool blowing shit up and playing ps3 while getting paid for combat. One on one flight said he didn’t know why we were still there. Most Americans don’t understand what the mission is because the premise and logic of the war was false. Now what mission can be accomplished? To build a nation that was forged from dictatorshiops and in turn leave it to another? Let the Shia dominate? It’s not our place to decide the fate of such an ancient place.

Colin Powell said something to the effect of “If we break it we buy it.” The truth is that we broke it and we’re now financing it. Printing money and borrowing from China to support the Military Industrial Complex.

The interest of the military industrial complex which includes the petroleum industry has helped to shaped the policy of our country in horrible way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bqr5DVx3dw&feature=related

(Esienhower wars America about the M.I.C.)

We spend and spend because you so-called conservatives need to invent and exacerbate threats that include any corner of our effective empire. Here is an article about the 10 billion spent on the former Dictator of Pakistan, Genral Musharaff.

http://www.twq.com/07spring/docs/07spring_cohen-chollet.pdf

We undermined the Pakistani people by allowing him to continue his allowance while at the same time jailing Pakistani lawyers, sacking judges, and helping or turning his head when the ISI aided the Taliban.

Fact is the we need to debate whether we should distingquish between the Taliban who are fighting for control of Afghanistan and a small part of Pakistan. Remember these countries are in some cases arbitrarilly drawn by European powers at different times. The