Republican war justification: JohnnyCougar shoots it full of holes

[JohnnyCougar]

Since today, it is official that the WMD's have not been found in Iraq, I mentally reviewed in my mind all of the Republicans faces I planned to rub in the shit. But then reality set in, and that, of course was the reality that reality doesn't matter to Republicans anyway. "Now it is official that your president is either a fool or a liar!" I might remark, but only to deaf ears. The Republican mind has a bothersome habit of being completely blind to all sins of our nation, while simultaneously scrutinizing other nations' activities with a microscope. But to truly get the point across to these closed-minded folk, one must completely and throughly understand why the Republican mind defies logic and wisdom.

Their response after King George the W's folly is exposed to them is likely to be one of "Saddam Hussein is evil, and it's a good thing he is gone. He killed innocents, tortured civillians, and violated UN law!" But this is quite impossible for them to so heavily condemn such violations of the moral code. This is true because they do not condemn it.

Yes, killing civilians and torturing others is what Republicans themselves do. Over 100,000 civillians have been killed in this false war alone. Yet it is the Republicans who support it. So obviously, their claims that Saddam should go because he kills civillians are as hollow as a rotten log, save they start calling for Bush's head as well.

Meanwhile, Republicans are no stranger to torture. It seems that only Republicans are standing up for the federal government's right to torture people at its leisure. So they can not condemn Saddam Hussein for torturing his civillians.

Oh, and Saddam broke UN rules.....hahaha....don't even get me started on the UN violations we break or the respect Republicans have for them.

This leaves three possible explainations for Republicans' erroneous thinking:

1. They love torture and killing civillians, and only condemn Saddam Hussein's actions because they do not like him.

2. They hate torture and killing civillinas, but they are afraid to accuse their own government that they support of the same crimes.

3. Last, but most likely, they are just standing firm in their decision to embrace a fool as their leader. They fear being wrong in embracing a leader more than they fear supporting the wrong morals.

This, of course, paints a different picture of the moral right. To fear the exposure of their own error more than the effects of the error itself is the MOST SELFISH ACT at this time. Democrats, meanwhile, are terrified of the effects of our country's error. They are able to swallow their pride and admit error if that lessens the costs of the error itself. This, of course, is a selfless act. It is an act that Jesus himself would teach.

So tell me now, how is it that the right is more moral than us?

[Eric J in MN]

1. Interesting.

Possiblity #4:

They like that Bush lowered their taxes, and couldn't care less about torture.

[LynnTheDem]

2. He killed innocents, tortured civillians, & violated UN law! That's BUSH.

Coz in fact Hussein DID NOT violate UN law; NO WMD means he wasn't in violation.

Funny how everyone seems to forget that.

[Stirk]

3. Conservative dogma is filled with hypocrisy. They don't care.

They simply don't think as we do. For conservative true-believers, the the idea is paramount. Logic is irrelevant. In fact, they think that continued belief in the face of contradictory evidence is actually a sign of strength. There's a reason that they attract Fundamentalists.

We don't even speak the same language. When a conservative says "family", they aren't talking about nurturing, or love, growth. They're talking about punishment, order, and the strong hand of a strong daddy.

The conservative's world is frightening place. They want a strong father fighure to protect them from it. All other things take a back seat to that- whether it's personal liberties, or the Constitution, or just plain old logic. The world is a filthy, sinful place removed from god, and they want to be saved from it.

All I'm saying is that looking for consistency in conservative arguments is pointless. It isn't there, they know it, and they don't care.

[radfringe]

4. Then and Now -- Bush administration comments on WMDs

Then and Now
Bush administration comments on WMDs
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS -- January 12, 2005
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apwashington_story.asp?category=1151&slug=US%20Iraq%20Weapons%20Glance

Statements by the Bush administration before and after the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 on Saddam Hussein's weapons programs:

BEFORE THE WAR:
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." - Vice President Dick Cheney, Aug. 26, 2002.

--snip--

AFTER THE WAR:
"Although we have not found stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, we were right to go into Iraq. ... We removed a declared enemy of America who had the capability of producing weapons of mass murder." - Bush, July 12, 2004.

[Swamp Rat]

5. Bam! You got it down to a T.

Hit them with that baby! :D

GW is gonna have to reckon with the public! BwaHahahaha!!!

[Dangerman]

6. Maybe....

They remove the "evil" Saddam Hussein only to become evil themselves.

The Bush administration said they were right to go to Iraq, I believe that they are DEAD WRONG! No WMDs, no terrorist threat, no reason whatsoever...

No comment.

[TWiley]

7. "Morality is only the idea of what is right and wrong"

Republicans believe that bible scripture defines morality as "gawd" and not humans, declare "good and evil".

Ironically,check out Genesis chapter 3. It says that Adam ate the fruit from the tree of the "knowledge of good and evil", and are sinners.

Evidently, the republicans are the sinners as it is they who profoundly exhibit this character trait. They are willing to impose their shoddy belief system on others through violence.

The Iraq war is an extension of what has happened in this country since before its beginning. We take from the Iraqi's the same as we took from the Native Americans. Land, and their mineral wealth.

Religion supports this war, and it supported the massacre of Native
Americans through the politic of the Manifest Destiny.

It is not unlike slavery either. Blacks were exploited, brutalized, and their effort harnessed to enrich a few white men. Again, "religion" stepped up to the plate and condoned this practice as "moral".

The Japanese, Chinese, Mexicans, and Irish (among others) have also been the victims of this perverted mindset. Oh, but don't call it that. It is "Heritage", it is "Tradition", it is the "American Way", it is "Patriotic", it is "Defending Freedom", "Get behind our troops, or Get in front of them".

Apparently, the US military, which I help finance, is not here to defend "me". I am support to get in front of them so they can kill me in their effort to "defend" those who stand behind the policy of aggressive stupidity.

[Disturbed]

8. Would most Americans have ...

supported the Iraq invasion if the Bush Junta has told them the real reasons?

Why was Iraq invaded?

1) Iraq being cleared of WMD by the UNMOVIC/UNSCOM meant Desert Storm (when Saddam went off the reservation) was over and sanctions had to be lifted.

2) Iraq had European contracts for their oil.

3) Iraq was going to trade the oil in Euros not petrodollars.

"Remember, Bush/Saud are the same thing. BDM/Vinnel (Carlyle at the time) arm, train, equip man what keeps Saud in power. Saudi crude funds the whole Bush/Saud crew. Iraq suddenly free again to sell its oil, and in Euros not only screws Bush/Saud, but would cripple the US economy along multiple fracture lines.

First and obviously, having the 2nd largest oil reserve of accessible crude come onto the market will drive the value of Saudi crude into the basement. That Iraq would end run the rest of OPEC to make up for a decade of being starved would scatter the cartel members into the winds to fend for themselves. So what is better, to let Iraq crude take out your own operation at the knees or take it over and roll it into the same portfolio.

Second, because Iraq was gonna devalue your own assets in the first place, doing so outside our traditional partner firms and with European (French, Russian, German) firms visions of Chinnese orders means you are not getting a swing at that crude even in the rest of the chain.

Third, and most critical (and actually more "forgivable" in a strange circumpolar way) is that trading in Euros not petrodollars collapse our capital market funding of our debt and deficits, both Governmental budget and general economic. If China (as its demand for oil goes through the roof in the next 10 years) starts trading with Iraq, and the Euro becomes the currency for oil (not to mention it is already on the edge of surpassing the dollar for capital markets anyway base don value as it is) suddenly China has no need to continue to buy our debt. It would get more of a return in Euros, plus it buys oil form Iraq in Euros."
Christian Parenti

[TWiley]

10. I believe the Bushtapo would have lost some support

if the facts came out in the beginning. Through lies, they emotionally connected a large portion of this country to a false premise. John Kerry was demonized for changing his mind in the light of new evidence, and I expect that many of the freshly converted were reluctant to follow suit. Republiturd pundits were keeping the pressure on to support the lies of the Bushtapo at every turn whenever fresh evidence contradicted the fantasy of their loving master.

I also believe there is also a large portion conservatives who would have supported any reason to steal the wealth of a non-white, non-christian culture. They would have even supported the "ugly truth" had it come out.

The most concerning to me is the lack of critical thinking skills exhibited by our nations religious community. Evidently, a Cardinal felt it was more "moral" to excommunicate catholics for supporting any "pro-choice" candidate than it is to maim and murder innocent people under false pretenses. Oh thats right, they are non-christian and non-white. The gawd of Fartwell or Robertson would not support any Iraqi effort to defend their homeland against foreign christian invaders.

My thoughts are a bit more radical than yours, but I think your analysis is dead on true. Thanks for puting it into such concise language.

[Radical Activist]

9. The mindset comes from the idea that the Bible is inerrant

It just occurred to me how so many evangelicals can support Bush despite all evidence that he is a liar and a fraud.
They have spent years defending the Bible as the perfect, inerrant, unaltered word of God. Not matter how many contradictions are within the Bible and no matter how much different translations or early copies are different they are sure it is perfect. If you point out one of these contradictions or inconsistencies they close their mind to thought or come up with a far fetched explanation that stretches logic. They are doing for Bush exactly what they do for the Bible. They hitched their wagon onto Bush and they're sticking with him no matter what any God-hating liberal says. Conservatism is a mindset, not an ideology.