Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
I think it's pretty silly to think the Administration has been ignoring the issue for 2 years. We've been trying to get the Iraqi government to take some responsibility in the matter. How are we supposed to take the blame for military acting French?
The Iraqi government has taken responsibility . . . just not in a way that anyone else would approve. Oh, wait . . . the way they chose is pretty much the same way as most governments (administrations) choose. It has done what it thinks is the best way to stay in power and strengthen their ideological and religious position along with that of their political allies and cronies . . . rather than what is good for ALL of the people under their rule. And it has conveniently disregarded those good notions in their charter of government in order to achieve the ascendance of its ideology.
Surely, Obama was able to foresee and understand that when he chose to remove all troops from Iraq. Surely, he would have understood that the Iraqi government would choose to act in the very way that he has chosen to act in his administration. What kind of "responsibility" did he think the Iraqi government would take? A better one than his own?
And our military understood and told Obama that it was too soon to withdraw all troops. It warned him that there was a definite possibility that the Iraqi military would act French.
This stuff has been brewing for so long but you can't resist the opportunity to blame blame blame rather than think about what we can and should do. It's a very complex situation with no easy options.
Easy options? Is that what Presidents and Commanders in Chief are for? To deal with easy options? If so, who needs them? Life ain't easy, brother. Us common citizen grunts have to constantly deal with the not so easy. On the other hand, it would be so much more convenient, and the choices, as few as would even be needed, if we all would just get along and do what our government incessantly legislates that we must do. The complexity would disappear and we would achieve the progressive dream of the societal utopian bee hive.
The positive side to things being this dangerous is that the other Arab nations are finally waking up to the monsters they've helped create.
-spence
|
Finally? They have been aware of the monsters for a long time. Why do you think they usually resort to tyrannical regimes? To mollify the "good" Muslims? It has always been "this dangerous." And the only way to suppress the monsters has been the way of all tyrannies--force, coercion, suppression, pandering. It has been the "easy" option. Individual freedom and responsibility has not been inherent in their cultural and societal identities. A free people would have long ago revolted and taken "Responsibility" for self governance.
Oh, wait. That is a tired old train, as you would put it. They're beyond that nonsense. They are so much more ahead in their historical perspective than those who are stuck in some ancient time warp and its illusions of individual life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. They understand the need to meld into the collective and be herded by more intelligent experts and masterminds.
Surely, Obama would have understood this and not expected the Iraqi government to take some kind of responsibility other than that which they did. Wouldn't he have done the same? Hasn't he taken that responsibility to fundamentally transform America? Hasn't that transformation progressively been molded toward governance by a central power rather than local and individual responsibilities?