Bush Lied, People Died. How to Run Away and Kill People in the Process
By: Guest Authors
The hallmark of liberalism is the screeched slogan that is completely devoid of any actual thought. Through a sense of emotional rightness, liberals assume that the correctness of their slogans would be borne out if they only had the time and the brains to think them through. Everything from â€œBush Lied, People Diedâ€ to the single word, spitted with authority and the jutting, pointing finger of accusation, â€œGREED!â€ are assumed by liberals to have some universal truth behind them simply because it feels good to say them. Today Iâ€™ll skip â€œgreedâ€ (manifested in liberals through coveting and jealousy) and save that for later this week. Today Iâ€™ll look at the anti-war side of the Thoughtless Emotion-Riven Drones (TERD). Iâ€™ll not concentrate on their inane slogans, which it pains me to have to listen to; Iâ€™ll concentrate on the false idea that quickly pulling out of Iraq is the right thing to do.
First, letâ€™s establish some common ground with our TERD friends. Just to get them listening (not because itâ€™s true), weâ€™ll say that â€œBush Liedâ€ about WMDâ€™s and that this was the only reason, besides Bushâ€™s greed for â€œdirty oil moneyâ€, that we went to war. If we canâ€™t concede, however disingenuously, these points, then we have to start back further in the argument. This way, we can avoid rehashing the past and just move straight to what needs to be done now.
Let us also adopt the concepts behind the â€œPeople Diedâ€ statement if we can figure them out. This is a war, so the fact that people died was not to be unexpected. And people were already dying there in vast numbers under the iron fist of Hussein, so we are stuck agreeing with a nonsensical statement. So be it. Anything for the cause of showing the ineptitude of liberal thought.
So Bush lied and we made a mistake going into Iraq. What has been the result of this mistake and what happens if we pack up and leave today? Reports of our successes there are varying, but the general trend is that the situation is still slowly improving and that the new Iraqi government will eventually be able to take control on their own, thus freeing us to come home. But, in a nod to our TERD friends, letâ€™s take the opposite view. Weâ€™re hardly making any progress and will be there for years on end. We are in a quagmire.
As for the quagmire, this is merely another TERD catch phrase used as often as possible to instill a sense of hopelessness. Yet, okay, we are in a quagmire. What will be the state of this quagmire in the future? That is uncertain. Conditions have certainly changed in the last year. By all accounts, though there has been a very, very small rise in violence lately, the situation in Iraq has approved. Going by trends, which is all we have to go on, we must admit that the supposed quagmire would be, eventually, broken. But what if it isnâ€™t broken? What is the state of the quagmire today compared to the previous Iraqi administration?
According to the TERD site http://www.iraqbodycount.org/, the current Iraqi civilian body count lies somewhere between 82,000 and 90,000. It should be noted that these figures include Iraqi to Iraqi violence. How does this compare to Husseinâ€™s reign?
Well, in one three year period from 1986 to 1988, Saddam killed 180,000 Kurds. Already, Saddam is winning. In separate events in the late seventies and in 1983, he killed more than 10,000 Kurdish and Iraqis of Iranian descent. In 1991 he killed 60,000 Shiites. In 1992, he killed tens of thousands of Marsh Arabs. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105071,00.html. And these are just the mass killings. Nearly countless political and religious prisoners were killed during his reign. A conservative estimate of the total numbers is about 450,000, or 18,750 people per year during his 24 year reign. Taking the high end of the body count during the first 5 years of the occupation of 90,000, you can see that the occupation is averaging about 18,000 deaths per year. This shows a little advantage to the occupation, but much bigger numbers are coming. Despite what youâ€™ve heard to the contrary, civilian deaths have declined and stayed low of late. Even the so-called recent escalations are far below earlier numbers. Averaging out the figures for the last six months and weighting a little bit more for the most recent months, one can estimate that in 2008 the numbers of civilian deaths will be between 10,000 and 12,000 http://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/beyond/enforced-security/. By remaining involved in this quagmire for the remainder of 2008, we stand to save up to 9000 lives. Thatâ€™s saving more than three times the number of people who died in the 9/11 attacks.
But this is only part of the story, because withdrawing our forces would cause a mass escalation in violence. The Shiites, who have been so helpful in this process of forming a new Iraqi democracy, have forever soiled their already heretic reputations in the minds of the murderous Sunnis. Any withdrawal before the new Iraqi government is ready to maintain at least a modicum of order is liable to create an atmosphere ripe for mass genocide with both the Shiites and the Kurds once again the targets of Islamic fundamentalist jihad. If you are appalled by the 10,000 who might die under the continued occupation this year, you will surely be appalled three-fold by the numbers who would die if we left. We must maintain, and even strengthen, our course. Lives depend upon it.
And since our conversations strayed last week into Christianity, with the godless TERDâ€™s attempting to sway religious opinion to their side, I will point out that I was never instructed to turn your cheek, only my own. To permit the weak to die under the hands of evil was never, in my mind, the idea behind the New Testament call to peace and certainly does not fit the idea of Christâ€™s call for earthly justice.