What Are We Winning?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
What Are We Winning? By John Sammon
The war goes on, a war we started.
Iraq didn't do 9-11. Bush lied that they did.
Bush gets real unpopular because the American people start to
catch on. Then, he does a PR job and says the war is good, and
we're winning. People still listen to him, and he gets a little
more popular, for a little while.
We're winning! Oh boy.
Does that mean that because we're winning, we're going to win?
Win what?
What are we winning?
The war. We're winning the war.
Who's going to surrender to us? When? We don't know. We hope
they'll just give up. This is like Vietnam. Same mindset.
We haven't learned, at least some of us.
We launched the war to take out doomsday weapons it turned out
they didn't have. When that became clear, Bush said we launched
the war to make them nice like Democrats and Republicans, and to
get rid of a bad man. Bush said they are people who would
"attack" us.
We attacked them. First. We attacked them.
Bush said be patient. Why? Patient for what? When will it
become okay to be impatient?
Bush says because it's war, a war we started, he has expanded
powers. How much expanded is only interpreted by him.
Remember, Iraq didn't do 9-11, and wasn't working with
Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda wasn't in Iraq.............until we attacked
Iraq. Now they're there.
Because it's a war, Bush said he has a right to do anything,
anytime, anywhere, anyhow. He has a right to spy on American
citizens. This makes us more secure. After we win in Iraq, the
government won't spy on us anymore.
It's a win win.
What are we winning?
Let's just say...for argument's sake. Let's say Bush gets lucky
for the first time in this fiasco, and something turns out
almost the way he said it would. That would be unlike the
"Mission Accomplished" sign he put up on the aircraft carrier
two years ago.
Let's say the Baghdad regime we set up holds on somehow once we
leave. If we ever leave. The bad guys also hold on. Still exist
in Iraq.
At a cost of 3,000 Americans and 30,000 Iraqis killed, plus
billions of dollars, money that could have been spent going
after the guys who really did 9-11. (Bush lumps 'em all
together, like we used to do the Indians...a Sioux is just like
an Apache. The only good Indian is a dead Indian).
If that's the case, then Iraq was a fragmented country, without
weapons of mass destruction, with a bad man in charge. So, after
we've won, Iraq will still be a fragmented country, without
weapons, and without a bad man.
Or at least, they'll have a less bad man.
Iraq will have more...sort of...democracy than they used to,
and we'll have less democracy (because of okayed illegal spying).
Iraq used to hate Iran. But now, Iraq, which is to be ruled by
Shiite tribesmen, is friendlier to Iran, which is also ruled by
Shiites. Iran is hostile to the West, and is developing nuclear
power.
We won.