I never bothered to turn the TV off after the McCain speech and got the privilege (@@) of hearing another speech by the Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina).
In his speech he talked, of course, almost exclusively of the war in Iraq, using the exact words, “We cannot afford to lose.”
Just in case nobody knows anything about this guy, he serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Sure we can’t afford to lose. Well, YOU can’t afford to lose. How else are you going to keep getting kickbacks from whatever weapons manufacturer is schmoozing you that week to make sure you keep the country’s soldiers in harms way.
But seriously folks, we can’t AFFORD to lose? In what way does he mean afford? Does he mean financially? What about the nearly $900 billion that we have already spent on it? Could we afford that? Is he talking about the cost of life? What about the 4000+ dead U.S. soldiers? Could we afford them?
In my opinion, it all goes back to where the money for this war is going. In my opinion, nobody currently serving in Washington has the guts to end all the war profiteering that has been going on since way before I was born.
Okay, so we overthrew the government of an evil dictator. We did accomplish that. But isn’t this the same guy that WE (the United States that is) provided with money and weapons back in the 80s?
There is a lot of talk around about “victory in Iraq.” Does anybody know what that victory really is? I would have thought that capturing Hussein would have been our victory. Could we not have called it quits then? Okay, the bad guy is gone and dead, we can go now. Was there really any reason we had to stick around?
I have an analogy I would like to give before continuing. Let us say there is a schoolyard bully named Johnny. He is the toughest kid on the playground. There is another kid on the playground that wishes they were as tough as Johnny named Billy. Billy used to be Johnny’s friend but for whatever reason Johnny doesn’t want to be friends with Billy anymore. So that upsets Billy a little bit. But on top of that, Johnny is bullying Billy’s other friends. Johnny has been doing this for so long that Billy has gotten to the point where he can’t take it anymore. So, when Johnny isn’t looking, Billy runs up and sucker punches Johnny in the back and runs away. Johnny knows who did it. He knows where Billy is. But instead of taking up the issue with Billy himself, he finds another one of Billy’s weaker friends and beats him up. What do you think the result of this is? If you guessed that it really pisses Billy off and he decides to continue to attack Johnny whenever he can, you are right.
The reason the politicians (among others) give for sticking around in Iraq is to make sure that the terrorists never attack us again and keep them from being to use Iraq as a training ground.
If you understood the reason behind the above analogy, you might see what I am getting at.
Who pissed who off first?
What do you think?