Go to a news website (or your local newspaper). Read an article and write your opinion of the topic.
We may have ?won? the war in Iraq but we sure are losing the occupation. It seems like every time I turn on the news, more Americans have been killed by terrorist attack. It doesn?t matter to me who are committing the attacks, what matters is that our people are being killed. I never thought we belonged there in the first place. Now we are mired in a mess that could drag on and on and on, like Viet Nam.
Last year around this time, we were still at peace sort of. Saddam Hussein was yanking our chains about the UN inspection team. Sometimes he?d say he?d cooperate in full and then he?d go back on his word and bar them from going into some plant. It was very frustrating.
In there, all of a sudden, President Bush began to talk about these weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. As the months went on, it sounded more and more like war was inevitable. I thought it was scary to be talking of war when there was no real evidence of these weapons. The United Nations wanted us to wait; to give the UN inspection team time to verify whether or not there were weapons.
But President Bush and Britain?s Prime Minister Tony Blair seemed bound and determined that this war would happen. The reason they gave is that Iraq would certainly us weapons of mass destruction against us and against many other countries.
And so we went into Iraq and pretty much squashed and flattened them.
No one found the weapons of mass destruction.
But that?s okay, we ?liberated? the Iraqi people and that?s really why we invaded, said President Bush.
Does this remind me of 1984 by George Orwell? It sure does! All of a sudden it seemed like we were supposed to forget about those terrible weapons of mass destruction and focus on the idea that we?d freed Iraqis from an oppressive government.
When that idea didn?t go over too well, government administrators began talking about a tie between Iraq/Hussein and Al-Quaida/bin Laden.
Please.
There was no love lost between those two leaders. In fact, during the war Osama bin Laden kept urging Iraqis to rise up against Hussein.
Eventually, administrators admitted that, oops, nope there?s no connection after all.
So why are we there? Why don?t we just go home?
Apparently, we are committed to helping the Iraqis because we basically went in and blew up their government. It would be one thing if everyone was cooperating. Since the war, though, more Americans have been killed by terrorist actions than were killed during the actual fighting.
And we?re supposed to keep sending our people there? What the hell? Well, it?s because no one else wants to put their people in harm?s way. Can I blame them? No. Great Britain and the U.S. were so hot for this war, so fine, they can deal with the outcome.
I feel sick and angry when I hear about the casualties. One soldier was going home for his mother?s funeral. A woman about to get married lost her fianc?to a terrorist attack. And there are hundreds more.
The article I read today, Occupational Hazards, said we have lost so many people because the Pentagon failed to plan for an outcome that would be other than total cooperation.
What, has the Pentagon forgotten Viet Nam so quickly?
If we are going to war with another country, why wouldn?t defense come up with Plans A-Z? I have a feeling that they didn?t have many plans for after the war, none at all. I think that?s why we see our soldiers being killed. I think it?s appalling.
And why didn?t they anticipate that this would be so costly, in terms of our money and our soldiers?
Maybe their was no plan because when you make plans and you cover all the bases, sometimes you see it would cost so much it?s better just to drop it.
We should have dropped it. We didn?t need to invade Iraq. There weren?t any weapons of mass destruction. Maybe Saddam Hussein would have continued yanking our chains. Eventually the UN would have wearied of the whole thing. A UN backed force would have been much better because as they?re mowed down one by one, the casualties are spread out among the countries of the world. We?re losing our people because the other countries are rightly saying, ?Sorry, we didn?t approve of this and we don?t want our people dying because the U.S. couldn?t wait for a UN resolution.?
So we are stuck and we are screwed.
I know this isn't Friday but I just got way behind yesterday. :P
Friday Five
1. What food do you like that most people hate?
I?ve been trying to come up with something that most people ?hate? and I guess I would have to say broccoli. I think broccoli is delicious, not to mention the fact that it?s a good source for calcium, iron, fiber, folate, Vitamin C, potassium, vitamin K and it?s full of stuff to help reduce the risk of cancer and stroke.
President Bush Sr. and Oma both hate broccoli. If they hate broccoli, I?m sure others do too.
2. What food do you hate that most people love?
Hmmm? I think it would have to be New England clam chowder. Everyone else I know likes it.
3. What famous person, whom many people may find attractive, is most unappealing to you?
Okay, there is a series on TV now called That 70s Show and the breakout star is a guy named Ashton Kutcher. He is handsome and in this one episode he was made up as a girl. He looked really pretty! But he?s just ?too? cute and he?s cast in these ridiculous movies so I find him very unappealing.
4. What famous person, whom many people may find unappealing, do you find attractive?
I?m really thinking hard here and I?m not sure who to say. Anyone I think of would be attractive to some people. I can?t think of anyone who would be so widely unappealing unless it was because of their politics or something.
5. What popular trend baffles you?
Popular? This may sound insignificant but my answer is I?m baffled by the heavier and heavier book bags school kids have to drag around. Apparently they?re not given enough time to go to the locker or something because I am seeing lots of kids with bowed shoulders, walking almost doubled over with these huge packs on their backs. Billy is packed tight and he still carries books in his hands as well! Maybe textbooks need to be on the computer. No wonder there?s a trend toward kids having back trouble!
The other one that baffles me that would be considered "popular" are those jelly bracelets with different colors. They're supposed to indicate the type of sexual acts the wearer is willing to perform? I don't understand why girls would feel they need to advertise that stuff and more importantly, why are they going to expose themselves to psychological, spiritual and physical hurts?
Posted by Cassie at November 8, 2003 01:03 PM