I found your comments on his article better than the article, which is just so much “where is moderate islam?” neo liberal fluff

“You can’t make sense out of madness.”

The ensuing madness in Iraq is exactly
what was predicted, planned and executed.

This is the real crime; Bush didn’t invade
to “win,” he invaded only to SMASH.

I’d say just the opposite.  If we’d gone there to SMASH, we could have done that in a week and gone home with the lowest-casualty victory in history.  With nukes, we could have SMASHed Iraq by remote and not lost a single soldier. 

The mistake came in sticking around and trying to “win the peace.” The opportunity to use Iraq for some sort of new-and-improved Marshall Plan was too tempting for the liberals on both sides of the aisle.  They’re far too enlightened and modern to go crush a country for military reasons, but make it about bringing people civil rights and public schools, and they’re all for it.

That’s the sad thing about Bush: he did the thing he’s most hated for precisely because he thinks just like those on the Left who hate him for it.  That doesn’t make it any less of a mistake, but they ought to be sharing his guilt, not piling on him.

Oh...good...God.

I’m still on holiday, but I’ll come out of my hermitage just for a moment to respond to this deadly idiotic evil shit which “Aaron” wrote, above:

“If we’d gone there to SMASH, we could have done that in a week and gone home with the lowest-casualty victory in history.  With nukes, we could have SMASHed Iraq by remote and not lost a single soldier.”

Sir.  You f---ing moron.  Let me instruct you about nuclear winter:

If just 100 megatons of nuclear bombs were detonated anywhere on planet earth, then all life would die.  Forever.  A CONSERVATIVE estimate (and we are all true conservatives here) of the lowest threshold of nuclear explosions to cause nuclear winter (through all the debris, or in layman’s language, all the dirty shit which goes into the air) is 100 megatons.  That’s a low, conservative estimate.  Do you understand, asshole?
Do you understand, that if you toss a bunch of nuclear bombs on ANY part of the earth, then all the dust and dirty shit will spread all over the world and block out the sun?  It doesn’t matter where you drop the bombs.  Drop them on the penguins in Antarctica, and the same shit will spread all over the world and block out the sun.  Do you understand that we NEED the sun to survive, to grow food?  Just a mere 100 megatons will destroy all life on Earth, forever.  Do you get it?  Do you understand, that nuclear weapons SPREAD their dirty shit ALL OVER THE PLANET?

And just a tiny fraction of that, just a few megatons (just a fraction of one percent of America’s nuclear arsenal) will f--- up all life on earth in ways that will make life not worth living.

100 megatons is less than one percent of the combined nuclear arsenals of America and Russia.  100 megatons would be approximately ten big nuclear bombs dropped on Iraq to “smash” it.  And that’s what it would take to “smash” Iraq, it would take at least 100 megatons - less than two percent of America’s nuclear arsenal - but that’s what it would take to “smash” Iraq.

And then all life on Earth would end.  Forever.

Idiot, chickenhawk.  Smash this up your ass, “Aaron.” And meanwhile, even if you’re contemplating “small” nuclear strikes (whatever the f--- a “small” nuclear bomb is), don’t you DARE suggest that anyone ever use nuclear weapons unless and until you’ve put your own life on the line to risk being burned in the most horrible way as nuclear weapons do, with your eyes melting all over your face and your skin peeling off in your own hands.  If you’re not ready to accept that kind of pain for yourself, then don’t you DARE suggest anyone using nuclear weapons, anywhere, ever.

Don’t talk the talk of war unless you’re personally willing to walk the walk. 
I know what violent death looks like, and so I don’t want even to suggest it unless I’m willing to suffer the consequences.  I’ve seen people dying of conventional wounds of metal, and I have BARELY enough courage to risk that kind of death myself if honour required.
But I know I would never have the courage to risk the kind of death that nuclear weapons bring, and so I do not want nuclear weapons to be used, ever.

Where nuclear weapons are concerned, I have the courage to be a coward in an honourable way - and all honest men will do the same.  All who say otherwise, are liars and DISHONOURABLE cowards.  Filthy chickenhawks, the lowest kind of cowards, lower than the pale ghastly shrimp who feed on shit at the bottom of the deepest seas.

The author, Mr. Foy, writes: 

“… every thinking and informed person… is repulsed and horrified at the carnage inflicted upon the people of Iraq by those suicide terrorists… that same informed individual… is disgusted with Dick Cheney and George Bush… for invading Iraq in the first place…”

BUT, is that “same informed person” also “repulsed and horrified at the carnage inflicted upon the people of Iraq by” Bush & Cheney?  Or, is it that the carnage inflicted by terrorist is somehow worse than that of, for example, HE, depleted uranium, cluster, or phosphorous ordinance from our Air Force?

The U.S. has expended more than 1.8 billion rounds of ammo in Iraq:  How many Iraqis did we kill?  (Or are we really bad marksmen?) That’s enough ammo to fill every Iraqi with 70+ holes.

And we have the nerve to smugly say: “Let the fanatics kill each other.” Uh, which fanatics?

Patrick Foy replies to Dan Stewart…

May I say I concur with Dan Stewart’s comments, to the extent I understand them.

Iraq was a dictatorship but not a killing ground prior to Washington getting Iraq into its crosshairs, starting with Bush I. The process of destruction was deliberate and on-going under Clinton and Madeleline “it’s worth it” Albright (see “The Scouraging of Iraq” by Geoff Simons). Then came the coup de grace: the 2003 invasion followed by the Douglas Feith/Henry Kissinger orchestrated occupation, presided over by Kissinger’s partner, Paul Bremer, acting as a frontman. Ask yourself, why would “neocon” operatives like Douglas Feith, Elliot Abrams, David Wurmser, et. al. want to reconstitute Iraq or do anything beneficent for any Arab country?

As a result of the foregoing, the nation-state of iraq has been destroyed. The sectarian fanatics in Iraq were set loose on each other thanks to White House policies, under the guidance of the “neocons”. Cheney and Bush are responsible for allowing that to happen, for making it happen, thereby creating a cauldron of terrorism and mayhem. Cui bono?

I am certainly repulsed and amazed by Washington’s use of depleted uranium, cluster bombs and phosphorous ordinance during both “Desert Storm” and “Operation Iraqi Freedom”. This indicates that the fanatics are located not only in Iraq and are not just religious; the much more powerful secular fanatics are located in Tel Aviv and in Washington. It is they who are in the driver’s seat. I can offer no solution to this nightmare in Iraq, but those who are responsible for it should be exposed and held accountable. I think we can all agree on that.

Indeed,

Patrick Foy

Good points all.  Your question about the destruction of Iraq—Cui bono?—is a rich one full of cynically tantalizing possibilities and scenarios.

Congressman Ron Paul once remarked that the weakest argument one could make in opposition to proposed legislation is “it’s unconstitutional.” It appears that the weakest argument one could make in opposition to the ongoing war in Iraq is “it’s immoral.”

It’s sad to look in the mirror and see what we’ve become.