|
Dissolve into Evergreens
|
||||
|
Listening to: fact checking Turning the Sheep Around Out God, Out!! Who defines consequences? Sight Seeing Blessed are the Wackos The Answer is "No" Emotional Climbers Wal-Mart Style Justin Oldham - Politics and Patriotism
Wilco The Flaming Lips The New Radicals John Mayer Zero 7 Dream Theater Radiohead Death Cab for Cutie The Notwist O.S.I. Ani Difranco The Shins Elliott Smith Badly Drawn Boy Chroma Key Coheed and Cambria The Streets Andrew Bird Sufjan Stevens Atom Site Feed 
|
11.16.2005
...as seen on Pandagon: : Christopher Flickinger, conservative chickenhawk. "I'm not in Iraq because I don't have to be in Iraq. We have brave men and women who volunteer and dedicate their lives to fighting for our country so those of us back here at home may carry on with our livelihoods in comfort and security. But, make no mistake, Americans who cherish freedom and liberty will not hesitate to defend the values they hold dear." he goes on to say: "The price of 2,000 lives over a two and a half year period - for the cause of freedom - is small compared to what our forefathers paid." I'm sure there are thousands more disposable people out there to die for his "comfort and security"? That this war is doing nothing more than inflaming even more hatred towards the United States seems inconsequential to people that fetishize war. Here's my issue. People that volunteer to be in the military serve under the command of the political leadership; the president, the congress, and the senate, who have the responsibility to use the military in a way that will protect and defend the United States. We have the responsibility to hold those politicians accountable so that they don't abuse the good faith of the people who volunteer. I personally don't consider 2,000+ lives to be small, especially when you ask the all important questions: Is this war essential for the safety of the United States? Were the political leaders honest and forthcoming about why this war was necessary to protect the United States? I think the answers to those two questions are no, and no. 2,000 lives are too many to be wasted on a war that was conducted primarily to boost political and economic fortunes. That's the way I see it. That's the way the evidence points. And if that is true, only people that think wars should be fought to enrich corporations and make politicians look "manly and strong" should enlist. I think that will be a small army. |
Comments:
Post a Comment
|
About Me
Any Box 
|
||
|
Dissolve into Evergreens
|
||||
