November 7, 2003
FOUR FOR FRIDAY
Q: If you were elected President of the United States tomorrow, and took office next Monday morning, what's the very thing you'd do after you were sworn in?
Fire the White House chef and install my brother, Kenny, as the new 'First Chef.'
Q: How has your attitude about the war in Iraq changed since U.S. President George W. Bush, on March 18, 2003, gave Saddam Hussein 48 hours to leave Iraq or face invasion?
On March 25th I wrote the following, and my thoughts havenít changed since:
While I'm not too crazy about it, I do understand why we're doing it. Saddam Hussein and his regime represent a threat ñ to what degree exactly, Iím not so sure ñ so I suppose it's best to deal with him before he becomes so powerful that he cause real harm to humans all over the world (including US citizens). That having been said, I'm not happy with intentionally putting our troops in harms way, and I'm also not happy with the lack of true diplomatic efforts aimed directly at Saddam Husseinís regime on the part of the current US administration.
If there's anything though that bothers me more than anything else about the whole premise upon which this war appears to be based, it's the notion that Weapons of Mass Destruction are okay for the USA to have in its possession, but its not alright for some other countries to have them in theirs.
I'm also concerned about the net effect this war may have on you and me and our fellow US citizens living here and abroad. I fear that we will be retaliated against by factions who are opposed to how we handle our foreign relations. I think what happened on September 11th is now going to happen again and again and again. As a friend of mine recently said, we (Americans) do not need a tax break from our government; what we really need is a 'fear break'. We need to feel safe again, and I do not see this war as being a positive step in that direction.
Q: Before making a telephone call, do you ever rehearse what you're going to say?
Unconsciously, perhaps, but certainly not like I used to when I was in grade school.
Q: Would you agree to have one of your thumbs surgically removed if it somehow guaranteed immunity from all major diseases?
I would not. The only things that separate us humans from all other living things are: 1) Our ability to make informed choices; 2) The fact that we had enough ingenuity to invent duct tape, and 3) Our opposable thumbs. Thereís now way Iím voluntarily giving up a thumb, not when I believe that most everything happens for a reason.
Posted by Mikal at November 7, 2003 5:08 AM
| TrackBack
1. I would start a movement to remove the Golden Parachute from the retirement package of the Congress. It's 5:49. Sorry, it's the best I could do.
2. It has been up down and all around ever since he mentioned war.
3. No.... should I?
4. No, it's not the major diseases that worry me.
I'm only answering half the questions this week.
Q3: No. I just need to remember the reason I'm calling.
Q4: Considering that I work in a microbiology lab and take all precautions--no.
1. I would invite WWE wrestlers to have a Battle Royale cage match with Dick Cheney on the White House lawn. After they finished him off, I'd invite Condaleeza to play with the boys. Then, I'd get serious.
2. I was against the lack of international support then; I'm still against lack of international support in our efforts to 'free' the Iraqi people. I think the pretense for going to war was wrong and I have no respect for Bush's Cowboy Diplomacy.
3. Yes...regularly.
4. No
Matt, I think Condaleeza would whoop their butts!
1: Call my mom??? I'd reverse every executive order Bush signed.
2: My attitude hasn't changed. I am saddened that Hussein did not leave voluntarily and that a diplomatic solution was not found. I am gladdened that the Iraqi people are no longer being systematically and institutionally "governed" by a tyrant.
3. I rehearse calls only on ocassion - usually romantic personal calls.
4. No.
1. Resign. I can't imagine a worse job.
2. I've gotten progressively more disgusted with it.
3. Occasionally, usually when I'm making an uncomfortable call to a contractor who isn't keeping up his or her end of a contract.
4. No.
1) I'd put about 2 million marines in Iraq.
No more debate about right or wrong.. we're there. Now we need to protect our people and get the rebuild going.
No more debate about whether or not we under estimated anyone. Our guys are dying. Make us Marines the population majority until order is restored. What the hell happened to shock and awe?
2)See number one... no more debate. It's pointless. Lets just help the people of Iraq and try not to get any more of our guys dead.
3) Yes absolutely.
4) How important could a thumb possibly be?
Doug, you're answers to the first 2 questions are unsettling and frankly, disturbing. Such a deployment is unheard of in modern times. Why is there a need for a majority population of soldiers? Not one nation has to maintain such a presence - not even dictatorial regimes. It's that kind of thinking which marginalizes not only your opinion, but practically yourself as well. There is little - if any - rationale or reason attached to such a position. Therefore, your place at the table is questioned. Perhaps not your place, but certainly your influence and power to persuade. Seems to me this is the same problem Bush has had with the international community and disparate domestic communities.
Yeah you're right. I was serious when I said two million marines.
Anyway regardless of however extreme I may have been in an effort to be "cute" for the blog I stand by the underlying premise.
Whether or not we SHOULD be there the fact remains we ARE.
The rebuild it taking altogether too long which only hurts the natives and exposes our men to danger.
The situation could be made MUCH MUCH better if the administration would admit that we are over powered and not enough is being done.
Post a Comment:
|
