Thursday, August 5

Is This Really Too Complicated For You?

Rod Nordland, "Portrait of Pain Ignites Debate Over Afghan War". August 4 [Caution: second-hand war porn if you scroll down]

OKAY, so Time's an ever bigger piece of pre-digested Twinkie filling than it was back when it was a news magazine. But surely there was someone at an editorial-decision level who took a look at the caption--What Happens if We Leave Afghanistan No Punctuation--and said--right out loud an' stuff--"This happened while we were in Afghanistan!" If I'm too much of an optimist for the modern world let's just kiss it all goodbye right now and enjoy the sweet thrill ride to the bottom.

Use of graphic, shocking, even, photographs to make a point? With you 100%. It just doesn't absolve you from the requirements of rhetorical honesty. "Taliban: Medieval Barbarians Who Think God Is With Them"? Sure.

But the treatment of women is not part of the debate. It's there only because the people who got us into this debacle desperately needed--and still need--some way to make themselves look noble, since there's no way left for them to look astute. Or semi-competent. Yes, in many parts of the world women are chattel. In many parts of the world religion, or some similarly plerophoric system based on race or economic certitude, functions as a cudgel to keep people in line, and thank God we're beyond that here. Such is not recognized under international law as grounds for invasions unilateral or multilateral; feel free to lobby to change that if you wish. If it were it doesn't make the saintly observers in the US of A (Motto: Proudly Permitting Many Negresses To Vote Since 1964) the sole arbitrators, nor does it make it a Good Idea in every instance, and it sure don't make it possible, as The Longest War In US History If You Look At It In Just The Right Light keeps pointing out to us on a regular basis. Furthermore, it's not why we're in Afghanistan. Let us remind you, merely, that the Taliban crime family controlled Afghanistan for five years while no one at Time gave a shit. For that matter, in 2001 then-Acting President Bush announced that, theoretically, at least (the word comes to us from the Greek, theoretikos, meaning "try to keep a straight face when you hear this"), that the Taliban could just hand over bin Laden & Crew and we'd let 'em get back to defacing women and monuments next morning. If you weren't arguing for the United States to invade Afghanistan on human rights grounds in the 90s, then your argument now is tainted; if you were--or if you've since added our perfect track record in establishing and preserving the rights of women and minorities in countries we hate to the list--then it's your responsibility to tell us how we leave while keeping the craziest motherfuckers in a lawless land from doing pretty much whatever they please. And if you've got that plan, by all means, please share. I'd like to see if it would work on cable news.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

As opposed to "...our perfect track record in establishing and preserving the rights of women and minorities in countries we hate"?? How about our track record re: same in THIS country? Oh, wait, my sarcasm detector was turned down. Carry on...

Brock said...

"...it's your responsibility to tell us how we leave while keeping the craziest motherfuckers in a lawless land from doing pretty much whatever they please. And if you've got that plan, by all means, please share. I'd like to see if it would work on cable news."

I'm just glad I wasn't drinking something when I read that...

KathyR said...

"...and thank God we're beyond that here."

Ow. That stings!

DPirate said...

I'm glad to see a post like this. We should apply this logic to everyone who called for Bush's impeachment without supporting the impeachment of Clinton.

StringonaStick said...

A blowjob between 2 consenting adults, granted one being married to someone else, does not equal invading a country and starting a war based on false pretext, violating the Geneva Convention, or violating on a mass scale the constitutional protections against illegal search and seizure. This is a blog for intelligent people; do try to keep up.

Sator Arepo said...

It's ludicrous that "they" think god is with "them"! Because he's [sic] so obviously with US. I mean: clearly. Jesus.

KWillow said...

People like DPirate really can NOT see a difference between ignoring warnings of a Terrorist Attack on US land, running away/around like a blind rabbit after the attack took place, invading and destroying a country that had no connection to the attack in retaliation for same attack...and using the Attack as an excuse to eviscerate the 4th & 1st amendments, to boastfully flout a dozen Geneva Convention rules, to create a Police state in our country, to commit Treason, and God Knows what other horrific crimes .... or a President who Boinks a Bimbo!

to DPirate and the multitude of brain-seeking right wing zombies the boinking is exactly as evil as the Treachery, Torture and deliberate Destruction of the USA.

R. Porrofatto said...

Fun fact:
Deaths resulting from Bush invasions: 600,000+
Deaths resulting from Clinton blowjob: 0
(Well, except for some of these people.)

DPirate said...

Of course I can see the difference between a blowjob and killing. What you apparently do not know, is that Clinton was not impeached for getting a blowjob. He was impeached for perjury.

I happen to think that having our elected officials lie to us is a very serious offence.

Perhaps we could have kept ourselves out of Iraq, for instance, if Bush hadn't lied about WMD and Al'Qaeda? Do you think that is unimportant?

I did not say that Clinton was as bad as Bush. He was not. However, he was bad, nonetheless.

StringonaStick said...

He was impeached for lying about a blowjob; fine. I also think Clinton was the best Republican president the US ever had; please see "Glass-Steagal, repeal of" + "current financial meltdown" for a complete explanation. However, lying about a blowjob is simply not on the same level as lying to start a war; one keeps you wife off your back, the other reduces thousands of people to a fine pink mist and gives us yet another generation of mutilated returning soldiers. But please, do persist in your moral equivalence argument; it makes it so much easier for the rest of us to identify the monsters that walk amongst us.

weaver said...

Dang, and for a second there I thought DPirate was making a point about Operation Noble Anvil, Operation Infinite Reach and the sanctions against Iraq.

Brian M said...

Heck, if DPirate was making that argument, Mr. Weaver, then he actually has a point.

I would add in our whole glorious Balkan adventure, the Sudan pharmaceutical plant bombing, Waco, Ruby Ridge, and heck, Robert Reich being anywhere near the levers of power. But then, I am one of those radical leftists Obama's Mini-Goebels (Godwin's Law, Godwin's Law!) was lambasting the other day :)

Anonymous said...

For the millionth time, Ruby Ridge was on Bush Sr.'s watch. Jesus. Another few years and it'll be in history books as Clinton's fault.