?

Log in

Dick Cheney sez: - The Fucking Bluebird of Goddamn Happiness [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Zoethe

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Dick Cheney sez: [Sep. 10th, 2006|05:10 pm]
Zoethe
[Current Mood |cynicalcynical]

We are better off today than we would have been if we hadn't invaded Iraq.

Yeah, Dick, because it would be bad to have all those billions of dollars in our coffers instead of spent on a war that can't be won. It would be bad if our military forces weren't stretch to - and sometimes beyond - the breaking point. It would be bad if we hadn't guaranteed that the whole Middle East hates us more than ever.

And I love his responses. When asked about the opinion polls that indicate that "a majority of the U.S. public believes Iraq is a more dangerous threat than it was before U.S. forces invaded," his answer is the definition of fear-mongering puffery: "You have to look at it within the context of the broader global war on terror. ... If Saddam Hussein were still in power, we would be in a vastly worse position."

Ooo, when someone asks you a hard question, throw up the terror card! The sky is falling, Chicken Little!!!! And hey, don't let's change horses midstream! We have to keep on with the politicians we have, because they are the ones with the guts for the fight. Otherwise, bin Laden will know we haven't got the guts for a fight! Why, the other guys will let him just blow up planes willy-nilly!

He doesn't blink, this dude. He says that even if the intelligence had not been "wrong" (read "ignored"), that invading Iraq was the right thing to do. Sadam made weapons once. Sure, there was no sign of active weapon making, but he could have. Someday. And then wouldn't we feel silly?! So this target - out of all the possible targets - was the one we needed to go after (once we realized that finding bin Laden was going to take a long time and not be glamorous). For our safety.

Except, we aren't safer. Not based on anything that's been done in this war. Our soldiers are fighting "insurgencies" in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and in the meantime no one is doing anything about North Korea or Iran. Or Saudi Arabia, the biggest exporters of terrorists out there. Instead, we've managed to take ordinary Iraqi citizens, people who regarded us with disdain (when they thought of us at all), and carefully curry them into true haters of the West.

Good job, guys. I think there's a medal for that now.

Now, I'm no peacenik.* After 9/11 I heartily supported going into Afghanistan and hunting down Osama-B. But the logic behind invading Iraq still reminds me of an old joke:

A man walks through a parking lot, where he sees a drunk on his hands and knees under a lamp post, searching intensely. The man asks, "Did you lose a contact lens?"

"No," says the drunk, "my car keys."

The man looks around and sees nothing. "Are you sure you lost them here."

The drunk waves toward some bushes. "No, I lost them way over there."

The man scratches his head. "Then why are you searching here?"

"Because the light's better."

bin Laden was those keys, off in the shrubbery. Bush wanted to search where the light was better, so he invaded Iraq. And this I cannot support.

Was Sadam Hussein a bad guy? Certainly; he was a rat bastard. But he's only one of many, and we don't feel compelled to go root out every bad guy - not even all the ones who have control of "our" oil.

Now, it can be argued that there is nothing we can do to compel fundamentalists in the Middle East to like us. That is certainly true. We will always have to be on the alert for terrorist activities. But we don't need to go around creating more fundamentalists out of people who would otherwise lived and worked and raised their families. And when you blow up people's homes and jobs and families, you don't leave them with many anchors to stop them becoming fundamentalists.

But Dickieboy is still touting the party line: the invasion was good, the world is safer than it would have been.

Love is Hate, Black is White.

Because if you question that, then the terrorists might slip in. Be scared! Be really really scared! And vote for the status quo, because we're doing a bang-up job!!!

(Thanks (I think) to suzieboz for the link, and for the high blood pressure.)

*Nor am I a knee-jerk Dem voter. If Guiliani ran for president, I'd probably vote for him.
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: suzieboz
2006-09-10 09:57 pm (UTC)

I only hope....

That this time around not as many people fall for his line of bullshit.

BTW don't you think he looks a LOT like Mr. Slate???
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: culculhen
2006-09-10 10:53 pm (UTC)

It's a downhill slide from now on.

It actually a step back. He just spend 5 years telling us that we were safer then before we invaded, no matter how idiotic he sounded

Now it is that we are safer then if we hadn't invaded. and in about two years he'll tell us that yes everything was fucked up, but that the democratic nominee will make it even worse.

and after the new guy/girl is sworn in, she/he'll take one long hard look and tell the people that everybody was screwed over big time.

with luck that bill allowing torture will be amendable to include him and the rest of the incompetents for aiding the enemy.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: chrishaas
2006-09-10 10:57 pm (UTC)

Nineteen Eighty-Four

For me, the most Orwellian moment was the Vice President accusing people of having consistently trying to confuse the proposed Iraq:9/11 connection with the proposed Iraq:al-Qaeda connection.

CHENEY: "There are two totally different propositions here, and people have consistently tried to confuse them."

Actually, you have consistently tried to confuse them, Mr. Vice President. Dick.

ps. I am not a knee-jerk Dem voter, either. If Chuck Hagel is nominated, I'll probably volunteer for him.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: mistapotta
2006-09-10 11:40 pm (UTC)
Being a Texan (and please, don't hold it a-gin' me...) Bush the Junior is fighting to avenge Bush the Senior.

GHWB was insulted by Ann Richards, so Jr. had to beat her for the govenorship

GHWB was beaten by Clinton, so Jr. had to beat ClintonClinton's Proxy.

GHWB was bested by Saddam, so Jr. had to take over Iraq, no matter what the cost.

When the War On Terror(tm) started, I could think of four countries that deserved more to be invaded than Iraq:

  • Afghanistan (yes, this was one of the few things he got right, but even then...)
  • Pakistan (Democratic government taken over by military + nuclear weapons + openly hostile vs. world's largest democracy (read, India) + harboring militant forms of Islam Fundamentalism)
  • North Korea (Fanatical leader + nuclear weapons + well sequestered populace + large democratic neighbor that constantly feels threatened)
  • Iran (nuclear weapons + militant forms of Islamic Fundamentalism + open hatred of US/the West)
  • Iraq is here. They had chemical weapons ten years previous, maybe they redeveloped them. Who knows. Saddam often dresses as if he's preparing for a fox hunt with a rifle in his hands. He's in control of 1/3 of his country. Clearly he's the biggest threat to the world.


I'm not a knee-jerd Demo either -- for the Gubernatorial elections I'll be voting for the Republican Comptroller. If John McCain ran for the Republican ticket for President, I'd probably vote for him. Hell, I'd rather vote for him in a Republican primary than whatever war horses the Dems bring out.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: moropus
2006-09-10 11:47 pm (UTC)
I agree. And the nearly 3,000 dead and the 20,000 wounded, why thye don't matter because they're only working class guys/girls who don't have money or hunt quail.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: suzieboz
2006-09-10 11:48 pm (UTC)

no matter what the cost

And to begin wtih that cost was thousands of innocent lives and the dignity of the Office of the President which has been completely disgraced by this asshole.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: annan_dum
2006-09-11 01:47 am (UTC)
The real question, to me, is whether or not he actually believes what he says. Personally I think GW is a bumbling, babbling rat bastard raised by some sick and twisted people. He's like a very confused dog that only knows how to obey commands and attack things with his teeth. But Cheney...Cheney, in my opinion, is an intelligent and - I dare say - cunning man.
So does he BELIEVE all the crap that he says? Or does he merely say it because that's what he's trying to convince others to believe, because his real opinions - or motives - are too private?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2006-09-11 02:00 am (UTC)
I'm all for Door Number 2, but I think he believes at least some of what he's saying. How could you look at yourself in the bathroom mirror otherwise?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: apostate_96
2006-09-11 02:39 am (UTC)
Isn't this coming from the same guy who shot a friend of his and wanted to keep it quiet? Yeah, real good source of moral guidance...
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: jfargo
2006-09-11 02:01 pm (UTC)
Gini, why do you hate America?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2006-09-11 02:10 pm (UTC)
All that freedom talk. What is,/i> wrong with me?!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: vrax
2006-09-11 03:23 pm (UTC)

Sweet Pic

That user pic is A-1 awesome, I can't quite tell, but is it an axe-wielding Ferengi?

Oh. I almost forgot. Fuck that Cheney dude, Heathers Style*.




























*Gently, with a chainsaw.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2006-09-11 03:31 pm (UTC)

Re: Sweet Pic

No, it's Alan Rickman in Galaxy Quest.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: vrax
2006-09-11 04:55 pm (UTC)

Re: Sweet Pic

I love Rickman, especially his very disturbing work in Closetland. It's one of the only performances I've ever seen that made me truly uneasy.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2006-09-11 05:53 pm (UTC)

Re: Sweet Pic

Haven't seen it - haven't even heard of it!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: vrax
2006-09-11 07:34 pm (UTC)

Re: Sweet Pic

Yeahneither had yourhusband, which was surprising given his proclivity toward disturbing things in general.

It's an obscure film, which I will not spoil here. It's about a political prisoner and her interrogator. Rickman plays the interrogator, and he does it very, very well.

I don't think I could watch it again. The time I saw it the majority of viewers walked out before it was halfway through. It's gruesome and chilling because it's not graphic. I could sit through slash horror and faces of death and shit all day without blinking, this got under my skin, though.

It's not even something I can exactly recommend.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: theferrett
2006-09-11 10:27 pm (UTC)

Re: Sweet Pic

Please tell me you've seen Galaxy Quest.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: vrax
2006-09-11 10:50 pm (UTC)

Re: Sweet Pic

I'm in trouble huh?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2006-09-12 01:56 am (UTC)

Re: Sweet Pic

This MUST be remedied.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2006-09-12 01:58 am (UTC)

Re: Sweet Pic

Hate to say this, but I can't see the pic. I thought maybe it was a browser thing at work, but....
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: violacat
2006-09-15 10:47 am (UTC)
One of the things I find most troubling, is that we're still in Afghanistan, troops are still dying over there, and hardly anybody mentions it. It's all about the Iraq.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2006-09-15 11:02 am (UTC)
Yeah, it's really weird. Except when you realize that talking about Afghanistan would remind people that we never did manage to complete the mission we set out to do - get bin Laden.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)