Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq?

CptStern

suckmonkey
Joined
May 5, 2004
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
62
found somewhere else

disclaimer: this is obviously sarcastic ..if you're going to complain dont bother responding



US Policy Made Clear

Q: Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq?
A: Because they had weapons of mass destruction, son.

Q: But the inspectors didn't find any weapons of mass destruction.
A: That's because the Iraqis were hiding them.

Q: And that's why we invaded Iraq?
A: Yep. Invasions always work better than inspections.

Q: But after we invaded them, we STILL didn't find any weapons of mass destruction, did we?
A: That's because the weapons are so well hidden. Don't worry, we'll find something, probably right before the 2004 election.

Q: Why did Iraq want all those weapons of mass destruction?
A: To use them in a war, silly.

Q: I'm confused. If they had all those weapons that they planned to use in a war, then why didn't they use any of those weapons when we went to war with them?
A: Well, obviously they didn't want anyone to know they had those weapons so they chose to die by the thousands rather than defend themselves.

Q: That doesn't make sense Daddy. Why would they choose to die if they had all those big weapons to fight us back with?
A: It's a different culture. It's not supposed to make sense.

Q: I don't know about you, but I don't think they had any of those weapons our government said they did.
A: Well, you know, it doesn't matter whether or not they had those weapons. We had another good reason to invade them anyway.

Q: And what was that?
A: Even if Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein was cruel dictator, which is another good reason to invade another country.

Q: Why? What does a cruel dictator do that makes it OK to invade his country?
A: Well!, f or one thing, he tortured his own people.

Q: Kind of like what they do in China?
A: Don't go comparing China to Iraq. China is a good economic competitor, where millions of people work for slave wages in sweatshops to make U.S. corporations richer.

Q: So if a country lets its people be exploited for American corporate gain, it's a good country, even if that country tortures people?
A: Right.

Q: Why were people in Iraq being tortured?
A: For political crimes, mostly, like criticizing the government. People who criticized the government in Iraq were sent to prison and tortured.

Q: Isn't that exactly what happens in China?
A: I told you, China is different.

Q: What's the difference between China and Iraq?
A: Well, for one thing, Iraq was ruled by the Ba'ath party, while China is Communist.

Q: Didn't you once tell me Communists were bad?
A: No, just Cuban Communists are bad.

Q: How are the Cuban Communists bad?
A: Well, for one thing, people who criticize the government in Cuba are sent to prison and tortured.

Q: Like in Iraq?
A: Exactly.

Q: And like in China, too?
A: I told you, China's a good economic competitor. Cuba, on the other hand, is not.

Q: How come Cuba isn't a good economic competitor?
A: Well, you see, back in the early 1960s, our government passed some laws that made it illegal for Americans to trade or do any business with Cuba until they stopped being Communists and started being capitalists like us.

Q: But if we got rid of those laws, opened up trade with Cuba, and started doing business with them, wouldn't that help the Cubans become capitalist's?
A: Don't be a smart-ass.

Q: I didn't think I was being one.
A: Well, anyway, they also don't have freedom of religion in Cuba.

Q: Kind of like China and the Falun Gong movement?
A: I told you, stop saying bad things about China. Anyway, Saddam Hussein came to power through a military coup, so he's not really a legitimate leader anyway.

Q: What's a military coup?
A: That's when a military general takes over the government of a country by force, instead of holding free elections like we do in the United States.

Q: Didn't the ruler of Pakistan come to power by a military coup?
A: You mean General Pervez Musharraf? Uh, yeah, he did, but Pakistan is our friend.

Q: Why is Pakistan our friend if their leader is illegitimate?
A: I never said Pervez Musharraf was illegitimate .

Q: Didn't you just say a military general who comes to power by forcibly overthrowing the legitimate government of a nation is an illegitimate leader?
A: Only Saddam Hussein. Pervez Musharraf is our friend, because he helped us invade Afghanistan.

Q: Why did we invade Afghanistan?
A: Because of what they did to us on September 11th.

Q: What did Afghanistan do to us on September 11th?
A: Well, on September 11th, nineteen men. Fifteen of them Saudi Arabians hijacked four airplanes and flew three of them into buildings, killing over 3,000 Americans.

Q: So how did Afghanistan figure into all that?
A: Afghanistan was where those bad men trained, under the oppressive rule of the Taliban.

Q: Aren't the Taliban those bad radical Islamics who chopped off people's heads and hands?!
A: Yes, that's exactly who they were. Not only did they chop off people's heads and hands, but they oppressed women, too.

Q: Didn't the Bush administration give the Taliban 43 million dollars back in May of 2001?
A: Yes, but that money was a reward because they did such a good job fighting drugs.

Q: Fighting drugs?
A: Yes, the Taliban were very helpful in stopping people from growing opium poppies.

Q: How did they do such a good job?
A: Simple. If people were caught growing opium poppies, the Taliban would have their hands and heads cut off.

Q: So, when the Taliban cut off people's heads and hands for growing flowers, that was OK, but not if they cut people's heads and hands off for other reasons?
A: Yes. It's OK with us if radical Islamic fundamentalists cut off people's hands for growing flowers, but it's cruel if they cut off people's hands for stealing bread.

Q: Don't they also cut off people's hands and heads in Saudi Arabia?
A: That's different. Afghanistan was ruled by a tyrannical patriarchy that oppressed women and forced them to wear burqas whenever they were in public, with death by stoning as the penalty for women who did not comply.

Q: Don't Saudi women have to wear burqas in public, too?
A: No, Saudi women merely wear a traditional Islamic body covering.

Q: What's the difference?
A: The traditional Islamic covering worn by Saudi women is a modest yet fashionable garment that covers all of a woman's body except for her eyes and fingers. The burqa, on the other hand, is an evil tool of patriarchal oppression that covers all of a woman's body except for her eyes and fingers.

Q: It sounds like the same thing with a different name.
A: Now, don't go comparing Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are our friends.

Q: But I thought you said 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were from Saudi Arabia.
A: Yes, but they trained in Afghanistan.

Q: Who trained them?
A: A very bad man named Osama bin Laden.

Q: Was he from Afghanistan?
A: Uh, no, he was from Saudi Arabia too. But he was a bad man, a very bad man.

Q: I seem to recall he was our friend once.
A: Only when we helped him and the mujahadeen repel the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan back in the 1980s.

Q: Who are the Soviets? Was that the Evil Communist Empire Ronald Reagan talked about?
A: There are no more Soviets. The Soviet Union broke up in 1990 or thereabouts!, and now they have elections and capitalism like us. We call them Russians now.

Q: So the Soviets ? I mean, the Russians ? are now our friends?
A: Well, not really. You see, they were our friends for many years after they stopped being Soviets, but then they decided not to support our invasion of Iraq, so we're mad at them now. We're also mad at the French and the Germans because they didn't help us invade Iraq either.

Q: So the French and Germans are evil, too?
A: Not exactly evil, but just bad enough that we had to rename French fries and French toast to Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast.

Q: Do we always rename foods whenever another country doesn't do what we want them to do?
A: No, we just do that to our friends. Our enemies, we invade.

Q: But wasn't Iraq one of our friends back in the 1980s! ?
A: Well, yeah. For a while.

Q: Was Saddam Hussein ruler of Iraq back then?
A: Yes, but at the time he was fighting against Iran, which made him our friend, temporarily.

Q: Why did that make him our friend?
A: Because at that time, Iran was our enemy.

Q: Isn't that when he gassed the Kurds?
A: Yeah, but since he was fighting against Iran at the time, we looked the other way, to show him we were his friend.

Q: So anyone who fights against one of our enemies automatically becomes our friend?
A: Most of the time, yes.

Q: And anyone who fights against one of our friends is automatically an enemy?
A: Sometimes that's true, too. However, if American corporations can profit by selling weapons to both sides at the same time, all the better.

Q: Why?
A: Because war is good for the economy, which means war is good for America. Also, since God is on America's side, anyone who opposes war is a godless un-American Communist. Do you understand now why we attacked Iraq?

Q: I think so. We attacked them because God wanted us to, right?
A: Yes.

Q: But how did we know God wanted us to attack Iraq?
A: Well, you see, God personally speaks to George W. Bush and tells him what to do.

Q: So basically, what you're saying is that we attacked Iraq because George W. Bush hears voices in his head?
A. Yes! You finally understand how the real world works. Now close your eyes, make yourself comfortable, and go to sleep. Good night.

Q: Good night, Daddy.
 
If thousands didn't die this would be funny. Pretty much the right wing in a nut shell, great find.
 
CptStern said:
Q: But how did we know God wanted us to attack Iraq?
A: Well, you see, God personally speaks to George W. Bush and tells him what to do.
Well, I always thought of it more as being his dad, GHWB, talking to him in the case of Iraq, but I get the idea here and find sarcasm very illuminating and funny in most circumstances, including this one. His pandering to the evangelicals is frightening in the extreme and that fear must be alleviated by something!

Sarcasm ftw!!!
 
VictimOfScience said:
Well, I always thought of it more as being his dad, GHWB, talking to him in the case of Iraq, but I get the idea here and find sarcasm very illuminating and funny in most circumstances, including this one. His pandering to the evangelicals is frightening in the extreme and that fear must be alleviated by something!

Sarcasm ftw!!!

well actually the reference to god isnt sarcasm ..it's true:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1075950,00.html


he even said that god told him to invade iraq:


"God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them, and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me, I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them."

source
 
Pretty interesting read, though most of it is nothing that I haven't heard before - over and over again. Contradictions are just part of politics (not that I'm happy with it), so a lot of these arguments aren't entirely fair. But this right here is priceless:
Q: So basically, what you're saying is that we attacked Iraq because George W. Bush hears voices in his head?
A. Yes! You finally understand how the real world works.

By the way, that was one sharp kid.
 
What if it was lucifer talking to Bush? Maybe lucifer posed as God to tell Bush to attack , kill, torture, maim!!

The God he's supposed to be believe in wouldn't 'sanction' such evil. The only logical answer is it was the devil.........

Arghh crazy people. Shouldn't he be on medicine or be in an institute of some sort...
 
I think the public may finally be catching on to this buffoons ingenious way of running the government. The sad thing about that post Stern is that it's dead on with little signs of change.

LOL...40% approval. How much longer can the curtains burn before the whole house goes up.
 
Mr-Fusion said:
Shouldn't he be on medicine or be in an institute of some sort...

Recently....we've just enjoyed putting crazy people in the White House.
 
Its just amazing how even a kid can realise that the economy is more important than overall human well being :p. Bushy and co dont care because at present they know being slaves to the economy keeps them in a powerful position amongst elite, I dont really want to live in a Corporate fascist world, but thats the way its going, The longer these types of people are in power the louder the sound of moral obligation flusing down the toilet get's.

In fact this darker side has always existed which is often left out: for example.. the extent to which American corporations were involved in the arming of the Nazis, profited from the Nazi militarism, and even aided the Final Solution.

When you strip it down to its essential causes, its a vicious cycle of greed and violence, used to perpetuate economic growth for the elitest big bucks Its all perpetuated by megalomaniac's and people with superiority complex's, weither they be a publically agressive 'Hitler' to your modern day 'Democrat' looking to expand and impose their capitalisim on other countries. Half the time we are too ignorant and selfish in our own desires, to see that our world is corrupt at the very core, and make no mistake it will continue like this until people paradim shift to a higher understanding of what the problems actually stem from.

many examples throughout history,, DuPont for example who sold gunpowder to all sides not just their own, profiting immensley but also allowing people to easily kill each other in large number's...most likely simplton's thinking theres nothing wrong with that aslong as ive got my wealth!, < sicko's

Du Pont produced only gunpowder. They were the main supplier of this product during many wars, including:

* War of 1812 (supplying the U.S. against Britain/Canada)

* South American wars (supplying both Spain and Bolivar’s republics)

* Mexican-American War, 1846 (supplying the U.S.)

* Indian Wars, 1827-1896 (supplying Manifest Destiny’s genocidal westward expansion)

* Crimean War, 1854 (supplying both England and Russia)

* U.S. Civil war, 1861-1865 (supplying the Northern states)

* Spanish-American War, 1898 (supplying the U.S.)

http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/53/dupont.html

nice posty Stern
 
On the whole God told him to attack them thing, doesn't it say that during the end of days of whatever the devil will pretend to be the chosen one, and the one who hears God's call and follows his directions? The uh... antichrist? Now come on, don't laugh, you can't have your cake and eat it to you know hehe.
 
begs the question... does god put money in George's pocket and make his country more wealthy. I dont think so.
 
clarky003 said:
begs the question... does god put money in George's pocket and make his country more wealthy. I dont think so.

oh but he does put money in his pocket ..Mecca (the holiest city to muslims) is in saudi arabia
 
Yep, America is horrible and we should all die.

Also, Iraq could easily defeat America according to the Canadians...if they had WMD. Also, the U.N. wouldn't have done anything once Iraq started attacking with WMDs. Then again the U.N. hasn't done much anything than get in the way.
 
Didn't realize it is supposed to take longer than 3 minutes to read the main post. I didn't read anything that followed but my point still stands.
 
Glirk Dient said:
Didn't realize it is supposed to take longer than 3 minutes to read the main post. I didn't read anything that followed but my point still stands.


if you can read all that, type a response all in the span of 3 minutes I'll eat my virtual hat ..just admit you didnt read it (bet you still havent)
 
lawl. Stern FTW
In all seriousness though, it worries me how much of that stuff is actually what a lot of people beleive :blush:
 
CptStern said:
3 minutes Glirk ...3 minutes from your last post to this one ...no way you could have read it ...please do us all a favour; just stop posting in this section

LOL, I don't usually do this but this calls for:

YOU'VE BEEN PWNED BITCH!!!!!!

:cheers:
 
Canada should invade the US, seeing as it has 'weapons of mass destruction'.
 
Icarusintel said:
wheeee more liberal propaganda!
and yes, i read it


you should be able to easily dismiss the points if they're propaganda ...care to take a stab at it?
 
CptStern said:
you should be able to easily dismiss the points if they're propaganda ...care to take a stab at it?
No, but I will provide a definition of the word, which should be more than enough to justify my calling it propaganda

From Merriam-Webster Online
2 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=propaganda&x=27&y=13
 
For christs sake can't we all just get along and stop the fighting?! Stop the fighting!!


ARGHHHHH *head explodes*
 
Even tho they're sarcastic...they're very very true. :LOL:
 
Propaganda? It's called a satire, Icarus. Why don't you look that word up and study it, brandishing "propaganda" for a source that actually deserves it. :rolleyes:
 
MrWhite said:
For christs sake can't we all just get along and stop the fighting?! Stop the fighting!!


ARGHHHHH *head explodes*

Politics is nothing but fighting....it's sad but true.
 
Absinthe said:
Propaganda? It's called a satire, Icarus. Why don't you look that word up and study it, brandishing "propaganda" for a source that actually deserves it. :rolleyes:
hmmm... seemed to have an agenda to me
it's pretty poor satire if so, certainly wasn;t that funny
 
Icarus...everyone has some type of agenda. Rather it be political or not. If a republican posted something similar...the lefties would probally say the same. What do you expect?

Most of that shit is truth anyways..agenda or not.
 
dream431ca said:
Politics is nothing but fighting....it's sad but true.

Which is why I dispise politics... yet am strangely interested in it all
 
"Politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."
- Mao Tse-Tung
 
Tr0n said:
"Politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."
- Mao Tse-Tung

Sig material, almost got my sig but im way too lazy
 
Here's another good one:

"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."
- John Adams

Which sadly, is true.
 
Tr0n said:
Here's another good one:

"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."
- John Adams

Which sadly, is true.

Lets bring back communism!

soviet ftw!
 
Communism only tends to last as long as human corruption doesn't start up. Which is usually impossible to stop.
 
Tr0n said:
Communism only tends to last as long as human corruption doesn't start up. Which is usually impossible to stop.


Only Mr. Lennon ever got it right. tear tear... and such.

Such a shame, wasn't he only in power for 5 or 6 or 7 years or something? Then he died and stalin took over. If I remember correctly Lennon lead the country out of depression with his soviet republic
 
Like I said...human corruption. Even tho he wasn't...his succesors were. It's a cycle.

Only way communism or a dictatorship would work is if the leader is very compassionate, wasn't corrupt, and was immortal. Which the former sadly isn't possible.
 
Tr0n said:
Like I said...human corruption. Even tho he wasn't...his succesors were. It's a cycle.

Only way communism or a dictatorship would work is if the leader is very compassionate, wasn't corrupt, and was immortal. Which the former sadly isn't possible.


DAMN YOU STALIIIIIN! DAAAAAMN YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU! ALL CAPS RAWR!

Damn Tr0n, we spam like it's our damn job... or, atleast, I do
 
Back
Top