Advertisement

Archive for Saturday, May 27, 2006

Growing list

May 27, 2006

Advertisement

To the editor:

Recently a senior honor thesis, "Uncovering the Rationales for the War on Iraq: The Words of the Bush Administration," by Devon Largio, (a student at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign), uncovered 27 different rationales between Sept. 12, 2001, and Oct. 11, 2002, for invading. All but four of the rationales originated with the administration of President George W. Bush. I am so looking forward to a follow-up list that will count the large number of reasons given since October 2002 for this illegal war.

Daniel Patrick Schamle,

Lawrence

Comments

billyflay 7 years, 10 months ago

flay was mistaken, we could try out our weapon systems in this country's ghetto's,

Monday, May 29, 2006 1:22 p.m. EDT

Iraq Less Violent than Washington, D.C.

Despite media coverage purporting to show that escalating violence in Iraq has the country spiraling out of control, civilian death statistics complied by Rep. Steve King, R-IA, indicate that Iraq actually has a lower civilian violent death rate than Washington, D.C.

Appearing with Westwood One radio host Monica Crowley on Saturday, King said that the incessantly negative coverage of the Iraq war prompted him to research the actual death numbers.

"I began to ask myself the question, if you were a civilian in Iraq, how could you tolerate that level of violence," he said. "What really is the level of violence?"

Using Pentagon statistics cross-checked with independent research, King said he came up with an annualized Iraqi civilian death rate of 27.51 per 100,000.

While that number sounds high - astonishingly, the Iowa Republican discovered that it's significantly lower than a number of major American cities, including the nation's capital.

"It's 45 violent deaths per 100,000 in Washington, D.C.," King told Crowley.

Other American cities with higher violent civilian death rates than Iraq include:

Detroit - 41.8 per 100,000

Baltimore - 37.7 per 100,000

Atlanta - 34.9 per 100,000

St. Louis - 31.4 per 100,000

The American city with the highest civilian death rate was New Orleans before Katrina - with a staggering 53.1 deaths per 100,000 - almost twice the death rate in Iraq.

0

i_tching 7 years, 10 months ago

One-more-bob,

Tar sands and oil shales do indeed hold petroleum, but it takes an enormous amount of natural gas, for example, to highly heat the water necessary to process tar sands.

Similarly, extracting, grinding, and processing oil shale consumes a great deal of energy.

At peak oil, the best and most easily-obtained oil deposits are gone, leaving only the more difficult fields for exploitation. It is the law of diminishing returns. That is a large part of the problem we will face very soon, perhaps even now.

0

billyflay 7 years, 10 months ago

illegal war? BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! according to whom?

for the narrow minded, this little skirmish is just what the doctor ordered, it is an excellent opportunity to try out our new and diverse weapon systems, develope new technologies on the battle field, new systems in the care of injured soldiers, and a multitude of other practices that can't be replicated even in our ghettos,

this is the perfect field lab,

ever hear of practice makes perfect?

0

rightthinker 7 years, 10 months ago

Satchel, the simple and plain truth is Arabs have never had, nor do they want our lifestyle.

There is no "Tear down that wall!" moment here. The most optimistic of Republicans would agree with me I'm quite sure. I don't direct but a small amount of my frustration to the W adm.......mostly to the people who don't want to be helped. End it, get out, strengthen our borders, our intel, our nation and send a different message. My choice of a message would be something like:

"You picked it, now enjoy the rest of your lives on earth as we've known it---we've got our own nation to run".

The World Police thing is getting old.

0

satchel 7 years, 10 months ago

You all crack me up!

The major koolaid drinker is the person who posted about us being misdirected and not going into Saudi Arabia. I about died laughing! I don't have to mention why we went to Afghanistan, but I happen to believe it was brilliant going into Iraq. I think the main reason was WMD's, but I do believe that while there is a 'main' reason, there are always other side reasons as well. In the case of Iraq, it was brilliant because Iraq is central in the middle east and they have become a democracy.

The thought was that If they do, then other arab nations will want that. You already see it spreading there. That is a great way to take out terrorism.

Some of the Arab nations who are run by these horrible, oppressive dictators, and the other nations such as Cuba and Venezuela are praying we get a far-left wacked out liberal as our next president. They are hoping our congress turns over as well because liberals are spineless. (So are the moderate republicans).

Have you ever thought that if we went into Saudi Arabia, as you suggested, that things would really be different in your views? I don't think so.. You would be whining about that as well. I don't buy what you all are saying about how things could have been done different.

And to you who said you don't care what they do over there, and hope they just fight themselves to death and we just need to stay out of it? If you are a liberal, you just exposed your hypocrisy. You said they are ALL hateful. That is hate-speech. That is bigotted. You should be ashamed of yourself!

What goes on over there does matter over here.. eventually. It seems the republicans, once again, are more compassionate than the libs. Another great reason that goes hand in hand with the spread of democracy over there so we DON'T have to go into every country run by a dictator, is that WE FREED AN OPPRESSED PEOPLE WHO WERE BEING RAPED AND MURDERED AND TORTURED.. You liberals say you care about humanity, yet are against freeing these people. Then you say, "Well, then why didn't we go into other countries and do it, why Iraq?".. Because Iraq is central in that region and it's freedom makes a HUGE impact on the countries around it so we don't have to go into all of them. It is brilliant, and compassionate.. Yet you are against it because you hate BUsh, and you are a liberal who has no core.. No values. It is sad.

0

one_more_bob 7 years, 10 months ago

Ever hear of oil-shale and tar sands? Those unexploited resources could provide decades of consumption. Don't hold the wake for oil production just yet.

0

rightthinker 7 years, 10 months ago

For what ever reasons........it's time to figure a way out. Put aside the theories, the association or not debate, the WMD's, oil, whatever--------get out!!

Let the murderous A-rabs kill each other, I don't care. They have always been lying, murdering people and they will never change and they hate us. I don't have one ounce of trust in these guys that are supposedly taking leadership on over in Iraq.

0

Jamesaust 7 years, 10 months ago

Apparently, the author of this letter hasn't read the thesis. It can be found here: http://www.pol.uiuc.edu/news/largio.htm

For those (like the author) who cannot be bothered to do the work, here is a mini-summary.

During the period quoted, rationales for war in Iraq varied, depending on current developments and the viewpoints of the actors. There are no "post-October 2002" rationales that differ from those initially given, just differing prioritization as events dictate (less "wmd" arguments but re-emphasis on democratization, for example).

Money quote: "...the war in Iraq was broad and the rationales emcompassed a wide array of topics and concerns, from terrorism to oil, from protecting peace and freedom to finishing unfinished business."

The thesis really just categories the reasons given, when they were given, and to an extent who gave them. BTW - many of the reasons overlap or, to a non-academic, seem to be nitpicking distinctions; I'd say the thesis really identifies about 7 rationales.

The author here seems to conclude (by implication as there never is a direct statement made) that multiple, vaired, and at times, nuanced justifications for a decision are a sign of a weak argument or post hoc rationalization. Perhaps. And, like any "post-purchase consumer," he can only remember 1 or 2 of the "selling points" rather than the dozen or so that were thrown at him. Or perhaps just as any "marketing campaign" will show - there are many reasons to buy a car, a skincare product ... or a war.

If the author believes there is a "post-October 2002" reason, perhaps he can read the thesis and see if indeed there's anything new under the sun.

0

moderator 7 years, 10 months ago

Posted by rightthinker (anonymous) on May 27, 2006 at "Illegal war" ........I love it.


Only a wonked out wingnut can love a war of aggression.

0

i_tching 7 years, 10 months ago

If we extract every last drop of oil in the earth, and continue to burn up this resource only at current levels of consumption, it will run out in less than 40 years.

Then Saudi Arabia will go back to being a sparsely populated desert of violent tribespeople, and Kansans can go back to dirt-farming with animal and manual labor.

They can hate us all they want. When the oil runs out they've got nothing but themselves to fight with.

0

mefirst 7 years, 10 months ago

Saw a news clip the other night on Saudi Arabian textbooks used in all schools. They're full of hatred for the "infidels" (aka us). They instruct children to hate the infidels and to hurt them whenever possible. The U.S. is pleading with Saudi Arabia to water down the language; we'll see whether or not they feel like it. Doubtful.

It's likely the terrorists on the 9/11 flight (the majority of whom were from SAUDI ARABIA) went to these same schools. We continue to wage war in Afghanistan and Iraq while our sweet heart, SAUDI ARABIA, continues to indoctrinate its young people to hate the U.S.

Misguided, ridiculous, insane, costly, deceptive, ineffective, and just plain WRONG! Just a few more words to describe this war (and in some cases, those who support it!)

0

rightthinker 7 years, 11 months ago

"Illegal war" ........I love it.

0

xenophonschild 7 years, 11 months ago

Why wait? Arminitwit can concoct them all, and probably more still, from his own bogus website.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.