Not really the place for this (this is a linux group not a political 
forum)...I'm sure if I made my views on the subject known, I'd receive a heck 
of a lot of flack (I don't tow the anti-US line).


On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 08:48, Fisher, Robert (FXNZ CHC) wrote:
> I just could not resist sending this to the list among the recent
> discussions about American tactics.
>
> This line of Q&A certainly clears up a few things...
>
> - Questions and Answers about Foreign Policy
>
>  Q: Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq?
>
>  A: Because they had weapons of mass destruction.
>
>  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.  Why would they choose to die if they had all
> those big weapons with which they could have fought back?
>
>  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 a 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, for 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 capitalists?
>
>
>  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 unAmerican 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 world works.  Now close your
> eyes, make yourself comfortable, and go to sleep.  Good night.
>
>  Q: Good night, Daddy.

-- 
Simon Hansman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to