Flutterby™! : Warblogging & Flowers 2003-03-28 20:32:48.555151+00

Warblogging & Flowers

2003-03-28 20:32:48.555151+00 by TC 9 comments

Okay I think I've been one of the few people in Blogspace that's been clearly Pro War(meaning I support the explicit action of liberating & rebuilding Iraq). I'm pretty sad right now and have that pit in my stomach that you get when you have to fire someone or punish a child. You do it because you know it's right but you don't like doing it. With that said, I see things that worry me about how this is being executed. Notably, Rumsfeld almost openly threatening military action against Syria(eeeeesh) and General Myers response to the question of Why did coalition forces advance to surround Baghdad so quickly? Because we could This reminds me what Shiva told the last living warrior when he asked her "why did you destroy the world?" Because I can. So to balance out the war, here is a picture of a field of wildflowers I saw yesterday

When I started reading your entry, noting it was about war, when I looked at the little thumbnail (on my high-res monitor) of the pic you posted and thought it was a blurry image of tanks through a night-vision system, or something similar. It wasn't 'til I finished reading the blurb that it was supposed to be a PEACEFUL pic.

Whoah. No offense, Shadow, but I think you need to turn of the CNN and take a little walk...

Very nice photo, Todd. Where did you take it? The flowers remind me of the 1960's. Can you say "Vietnam?" Seriously, great pic.

Thanks for the links to not one but two of my blogs, which is how I found you - via referrer logs.

You have the dubious distinction of being the first person I think I have encountered who essentially agrees with just about all of my opinions EXCEPT you support the war and I don't.

Bottom line is that like democracy and communism, "liberating and rebuilding Iraq" is nothing I could disagree with in principle. But it only works as principle and not act, like communism or democracy, neither of which have ever been viably practiced by a national government on this planet, in this universe.

I have too many problems with BushCo. to support just about anything they do, and it seems to just get worse, worse, worse.

That said, I also will state that antiwar protestors are sadly often guilty of the exact same egregious problem that warmongers themselves are: involving the uninvolved in their disputes. Blocking streets does not make friends, nor does it "wake us up". No one likes to get awakened by an alarm ringing, which is what this sort of action is often likened to. Perhaps waking people up in a more subtle and persuasive manner would do better things.

There's a huge problem with this war, and that is we are not allowed to know what is happening over there. The "no-fly zones" given to reporters result in a mishmash of data, most of which is just CNN line-towage with alternatives being mostly coloured by whatever monotheist faith the reporter/author subscribes to.

If this country is fighting a just war (they're not) they'd have nothing to hide.

And that bit with Bush fisting the air, saying "It feels so good!" That's just ill. The man's mentally imbalanced (who wouldn't be, with George Bush Sr. as his dad?)

Monde, there are actually a number of us here, Todd probably being the most supportive of the war, and of those who've expressed an opinion, I think Meuon the least.

I'm not even that dissatisfied with not getting information back from the war zone, frankly I think we're getting so much that it's endangering U.S. troops, what bothers me is what we're not hearing from neighboring states. The success or failure of this will be partially based on whether we do in Iraq what we did to various other states in the region, like putting the Shah in power in Iran, and how th eother countries react to our presence. If Syria decides to get uppity, all of a sudden it's us against the whole damned neighborhood; while I've no doubt that we could win militarily, it's a super bet that this would just send the region back into another century or so of the worst sort of fundamentalism.

Shadow: yup. I know my photography leaves much to be desired. I posted the photograph as a purposful conudrum of my feelings.

Jeff: It' off the 680 between the 780 and 80 (sorry non local folks). The interesting thing to me was there are miles of verdant hills and then a sudden burst of orange.

Monde: WELCOME! I must say that I like your comments and would very much like clarification on some of your points. I am guilty of sarcasm(more than not)but am sincer in my questions.

Are you implying our goverment(and many others) are not viable or are making the distinction between a democracy and a republic? Additionally I would point out the objective in the "Iraqi Invasion" is to remove a tyrant and give the general populace a voice in their governing.

I have too many problems with BushCo. to support just about anything they do, and it seems to just get worse, worse, worse.

Bush is a moron(a clever one I conceed)but just because I don't like him doesn't mean this action is wrong. Don't even get me started on domestic policy. I have yet to read the patriot act(only snipets in the paper) but I think a major flaw in current politics is that issues are not looked at on their own merrit. Platforms and parties get in the way and obfuscate the real issues.

If this country is fighting a just war (they're not) they'd have nothing to hide.

Wow. I don't know why you think there is something being hidden. I think they have gone out of their way to embed reports all over the place and it now causing(tolerable) problems. Over zealous reporters are releasing names and numbers of casulties before family notification can take place and as Dan pointed out the best intel Iraq has is probably CNN MSNC & Fox.

And that bit with Bush fisting the air, saying "It feels so good!" That's just ill. The man's mentally imbalanced (who wouldn't be, with George Bush Sr. as his dad?)

Watching Ari Fleischer repeated insist the president does not watch war coverage is very damaging to his credibility. Right or Wrong it's very had for me not to imagine this texan with a big bag of pretzels yelling "Yeee Haw" as he watches tanks explode on a big screen.

I can think of all sorts of reasons to hide military action. We're already broadcasting a hell of a lot of information about troop movement and supplies status, and this seems to be information that the other participants are taking advantage of. Even after the war, I think it's also reasonable to want to keep various strategies and the capabilities of assorted weapons mostly secret, or at least obscure.

I think that the U.S. military could do itself a world of PR help by keeping running tallies of various casualties, including civilian casualties (something that's getting harder to define), and I think they should be more forceful about making accusations when it looks like the Iraqis are killing their own civilians for sympathetic video footage, but I understand the thinking that's keeping this from happening.