Sexy brainiac blogger Glenn Greenwald recently noted that that “Two months into Obama’s presidency, one can clearly conclude” that, unlike how the wingnuts marched in lockstep with the unelected members of the Bush regime, liberals have been “critical of and oppositional to a Democratic president when that president [undertakes] actions in tension with progressive views.”
In that spirit, I fucking cringed when I read that President Obama told U.S. troops today in a speech during his unannounced visit to Vietraq, “It is time for us to transition to the Iraqis. They need to take responsibility for their country.”
I got spitting mad when any member of the unelected Bush regime said anything like that, and I’m no happier to hear Obama say it.
The bottom line is that the Iraqi people did NOT ask for the United States to invade (er, “liberate”) their sovereign nation in March 2003 and to continue to occupy it today even when the “mission [was] accomplished” in May 2003.
In fact, the majority of world opinion was against the idea of the Bush regime invading Iraq, and when the United Nations Security Council refused to rubber-stamp the unelected regime’s invasion like a “good” little Security Council “should,” the Bush regime gave the council — and world opinion — the middle finger and invaded Iraq anyway. (And also at about that time, French fries became “freedom fries.” Shudder.)
About 100,000 dead Iraqis later, here is U.S. President Obama lecturing the Iraqis on taking personal responsibility when not only did the Iraqis NOT ask for the invasion and subsequent occupation of their sovereign nation for the war profiteering of Dick Cheney’s Halliburton and the other war-profiteering subsidiaries of BushCheneyCorp, but the United States of America still has not taken responsibility for its illegal, immoral, unprovoked and unjust March 2003 invasion of and subsequent occupation of the once-sovereign nation of Iraq. (Because being an American means never having to say that you’re sorry.)
The United States of America is in no position to lecture any other nation’s people (even indirectly, as Obama did) about responsifuckingbility.
I had considered it but I never commented on this Associated Press news story from March 31:
More than 1,000 retired military officers, including several who were top commanders, are urging President Barack Obama and Congress to maintain the law that bars gays from serving openly in the armed forces.
Obama is consulting with the Pentagon on the issue and says he supports eventual repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, which prohibits gays in the military from being open about their sexual orientation. A bill that would allow gays to serve openly has been introduced in Congress.
A statement issued by the retired officers … said passage of that bill “would undermine recruiting and retention, impact leadership at all levels, have adverse effects on the willingness of parents who lend their sons and daughters to military service, and eventually break the All-Volunteer Force.”
Among the signatories were Gen. Carl E. Mundy, Jr., a former commandant of the Marine Corps; Adm. Leighton W. Smith, a former commander of U.S. Naval Forces Europe; Gen. Charles A. Horner, who commanded U.S. aerial forces during the 1990-91 Gulf War; and Adm. Jerome L. Johnson, a former vice chief of Naval Operations.
The retired officers said they strongly supported the principle that “homosexuality is incompatible with military service” and warned that repeal of current law could jeopardize morale and “unit cohesion.” …
The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy was put in place after President Bill Clinton tried to lift the ban on gay service members in 1993. Under the policy, the military does not ask recruits about their sexual orientation, while service members are banned from saying they are gay or bisexual, engaging in homosexual activity or trying to marry a member of the same sex.
Oh, Jesus fuck, where to even begin on this bullshit?
OK, first off, these homophobic military officers are retired. These guys are mostly stupid old white men, mostly Repugnicans, I’m sure. They are relics of the past. They are not the future. They are the past.
Secondly, I’m sure that stupid white men said the same old fucking shit when the armed forces were racially integrated — that allowing blacks (and other non-whites) would jeopardize morale and threaten unit cohesion, blah, blah, blah.
And who would be more likely to do such things as “undermine recruiting and retention,” “have adverse effects on the willingness of parents [to] lend their sons and daughters to military service, and eventually break the All-Volunteer Force”: gay men and lesbians who just want to serve in the military — or the stupid white men like those who comprised the unelected Bush regime, who, Vice President Joseph Biden just said today, stretched the U.S. military the thinnest that it ever has been stretched?
I mean, if you were a heterosexual thinking of enlisting or re-enlisting in the U.S. military, would the fact that these days you are sent back to a war zone over and over and over again have less of an impact on your decision than the possibility that — gasp! — one or more of your comrades might not be heterosexual?
If you were a parent, would you be more concerned that your son or daughter might encounter — gasp! — a non-heterosexual in the U.S. military, or that your son or daughter might end up like one of the more than 4,250 of our troops who have come home from the bogus Vietraq War in a box?
No, let’s blame gay men and lesbians who just want equal rights as being the largest threat to the U.S. military. Surely it’s not the stupid white men who ran the U.S. military into the fucking ground the past eight years!
I don’t know why anyone, straight, gay, bisexual or into chickens, would have any interest in joining the U.S. military when the U.S. military has been about war profiteering and keeping military contractors filthy rich more than it has been about actual national defense for many decades now.
Not too horribly dissimilarly, I don’t know whether my boyfriend and I, who have been together for a year and a half now, ever will get married or not (provided, of course, that California gets its fucking act together on same-sex marriage, like Iowa did, and marriage is an option to us). I am not certain that I even believe that marriage is a very good idea.
However, my boyfriend and I should have that option available to us like it is available to heterosexual couples, and anyone wishing to join the U.S. military — regardless of how intelligent I might esteem him or her to be — should be able to do so, regardless of such things as his or her race or sexual orientation.
These bigoted retired military officers need to get themselves some hobbies, because clearly they have too much time on their hands.
Today the Iraqi journalist who hurled his shoes at then-U.S. “President” George W. Bush (who, unfortunately, is fairly agile) during a press conference in Baghdad in December (video grab above; I never tire of posting that image…) — in protest of the unelected Bush regime’s illegal, immoral, unprovoked and unjust invasion and subsequent occupation of his nation — had his prison sentence reduced from three years to one year, The Associated Press reports.
One year still is too long for the young man’s “crime” — after all, Bush was a mass-murdering dictator just like Saddam Hussein was, but Bush very most likely won’t spend even an hour behind bars for his war crimes and crimes against humanity — but it’s better than the three three years to which he originally was sentenced last month.
Hopefully, the 30-year-old Iraqi journalist will be released before the one year is up; he already has been incarcerated for too long.
And he should be given a medal for his patriotic action, which has inspired footwear-related anti-imperialist demonstrations around the world, such as this one in Moscow:
Associated Press photo