Journaling on estrip is easy and free. sign up here

Dcoffee's Journal

dcoffee
My Podcast Link

01/11/2008 10:34 #42837

Debt, Loans, Feudalism & Corruption
Category: politics
I took a good look at my college loans yesterday. It kinda made me feel like a slave. Maybe not that extreme, but the Worker-Master relationship started to become apparent to me.

I pay $200 per month, I've paid about $6,000 so far, and I've only paid off $2,500 of my principal balance, which was only $27,000 to begin with, because I was part of the most generous government program I've seen for poor people like myself, EOP.

So let me get this straight, I'm paying double?!?! These assholes Own me.

There was no question in my mind about going to college, and living in Buffalo I'm glad I did. A lot of my friends have a high school diploma or less, and it is a real pain in the ass for them to find a job. My one friend went back to Boces for a trade, he's still only making $10 per hour, and he's driving all over the county in his own truck.

If you're in the lower middle class in this country, they basically grab onto your nuts and squeeze. Your part of the Worker class, and they Own you. Same for women, they're squeezing your nuts too.

Let's compare my situation to my fiance, who was born a little above my class. her parents could afford to pay her college in full, no loans. She went to a SUNY school with me, not too expensive, if you call $50,000 a bargain. But still, no loans, that means she can keep her money. I had to sell my body to start making more than $10 per hour.

Here's the kicker, She puts $200 into her retirement account each month. I take that same $200, and flush it down to toilet. Or to be more specific, I give it to my masters at the student loan company.

Meanwhile, you know what the government is trying to do with my retirement account? You know Social Security? They want to give it away to the same blood-sucking companies that are already squeezing my nuts. They're trying to convince me that Social security is going to run out, and all that money I already paid into the system since I started working at 15, belongs to them, not me.

Ironic, they call this the "Ownership Society" all I own is hand-me-down furniture and a bunch of electronics. but THEY own ME.

Here's a pleasant thought, I don't have health insurance either. I had Healthy NY, that super affordable government program which costs $270 per month, and is somehow tied to the SCHIP federal program which the Republicans refused to expand a couple months back. Yea, I had that for about 4 months, and I still had to pay $40 for a doctor to look in my ear and tell me to take claritin D. that probably would have cost about $80 without my budget ass Healthy NY.

No health insurance. That means I'm one broken arm away from being better off in jail. Isn't that a peachy little thought. Maybe that's why we have more violent crime than any other nation in the world, besides some of those that are in a state of civil war. People are so fucked, that jail doesen't seem much worse than 'freedom'.

Yes, America, this is what we have become. We have betrayed our country. FDR is rolling over in his grave.

You know... I didn't learn much in my social studies classes growing up. But there's one thing that sunk in, they told me this is a land of opportunity. You can't control what class you're born into, but if you're smart, and you work hard, you can have a good life, and maybe even become the president.

They also told me I'd be better off if I went to college. They didn't mention the fact that I'd be paying double, because I was born in the lower middle class.

What happened? When did we become a nation of Masters and Workers? This doesn't look like the America they told me about.

But this isn't about my story. This is the story of America. I don't even have credit card debt, and I have 4 times more savings than my mother. How many Americans have $2,000 in the bank, and are making minimum payments on over $10,000 worth of credit card debt?

You know that the top 1% of Americans own 40% of the wealth? and the bottom 80% of people own a pitiful 8%.
What the hell is going on here, and why aren't we more pissed off about it?

We have been fooled.

How long will it take for us to realize that they lied to us about opportunity, they lied about freedom, lied about equality, lied about fairness, lied about justice, and they lied about America being a society of upward mobility, withouth classes. They lied about the American Dream. They made us thankfull to live in the most just, fair and democratic society on earth. And it is all bullshit.

I'll tell you how we can get our country back. I hate leaving people pissed off, without a solution. That ultra rich 1% is buying more than just resort homes, helicopters and private islands.

They have bought our government. Our representatives care more about money, than they do about the public. Because it takes so much money to get elected, donations are more important than votes. Elections must be free and fair. When I say free, I mean no cash.

I don't care how we do it, but the bottom line is that money has corrupted our political system. That is the one issue that is more important than everything else. We are divided... global warming, war, security, national debt, health care, these are real issues. Why aren't politicians addressing them, when they talk about them in campaigns all the time? Because if they act, it will change the system, and the system is making some people a lot of money, they don't want change, they don't want uncertainty. Change won't hurt the economy, but it could hurt individuals who are making a lot of money in the current system. That's why we get such minor changes in policy, they're trying to appease us, and obey their masters, our masters.

Here's to having a debate about campaign finance in 2008, instead of flag burning.



jenks - 01/17/08 16:55
I consolidated in... 04? 05? when loans were at a "record low". i THINK it's like 2.85 but i'd have to double check... So now I just have one monster loan, which makes it a little simpler.

ok, i checked- 2.875.
but the current total is 180K not 150. makes me want to cry.
dcoffee - 01/17/08 10:13
I just got all uppity about people having 3% interest rates and called around. They told me that the interest rates on student loans have gone up over the past 4 years to 7.5% !! So if I were able to consolidate or refinance, I'd probably have a higher rate than I did before. That's messed up, over the past 4 years the need to go to college has gone up, These loan companies must be making a killing.
dcoffee - 01/17/08 09:49
Mine is about 5%, how do you get yours down to 3?
drew - 01/16/08 23:01
Mine are, too. I am paying them back as slowly as possible.
jenks - 01/16/08 20:33
my loans are <3%... what are everyone elses?!
ajay - 01/16/08 19:07
Student loans are a racket.
Heck, ripping students off is an industry in this country.
When I was in India, student textbooks used to be significantly cheaper than other books. Heck, even today, you can buy the same version of a textbook from Amazon UK for much less than what it costs here.

Student loans are basically the vultures preying on the weak. There is _no_ reason why students can't be given very-low-interest loans (like 3% or something). It is in this country's interest to have an educated pool of people. We can subsidize the 100000-acre factory farms, but we can't offer cheap loans to students? I was lucky to do my undergrad in India, where the tuition was $100/semester; room was $1/semester (yes, you read that right); meals were $50/month.

I agree with you, (e:dcoffee) . We are headed back to the middle ages, with fiefdoms (corporations), serfs (you and me), etc.
metalpeter - 01/12/08 12:55
First of all everyone makes a lot of great points and Dcoffe I agree with pretty much all of your post. The thing that I want to add is about student loans. First of all you can go to school with out them. You only take classes you can pay for. Yeah It might take you ten years to finish but that might be better then paying loans off for 30 years. Some jobs have programs where you pay for school then based on how you do they reimburse you. You would be surprised how many people don't use that program. Back in the old days (wish I would have thought of this) Credit card companies where allways at schools. Why not pull education version of what Kevin smith did with clerks and pay for it all on credit cards. Then when you can't pay one of the bills for 6 months and they send a bill collector after you file for Bankrupcy. If people where to think of ways to pay for school before hand than things would be more manageable. But that is hard when the press gotta go to colloege at ya in High School.

Paying off the school loan: One reason why people owe so much is the way things happen. Your first year most people get grants and schoolerships so the loan isn't that much. But by at least the 2nd or 3rd year those aren't around anymore. Also Tution goes up every year so what started out (depending on shcool) at say $3000 loan is up to around $10,000. As long as you are a fulltime student you don't have to pay your loan back or pay anything on it. But maybe it would be a good idea to start paying on some of it in that last year to start getting it down some. The people I had my loan through don't care if you pay just the interest every month. In fact if you do that they make out like bandits because you will never get it paid back. The key thing to look at is how much in interest are you paying a month. If you take that amount away from your payment then you can tell how much money is beeing taking of your principal. The student loan people aren't as bad as the credit card people but it is the same idea really. You take so much money and each month they charge you interest well that interest is counted as money you owe so it gets put on top of the money you owe and then if you don't pay all the interest when they go and do the interest the next month that money is counted to, I think that is called compond interest so that is why it is good to pay them as much money as you can so you can get the prinicpal balance down.
dcoffee - 01/11/08 16:04
Seems like I struck a nerve with this loan thing. It just bugs me that I shop at Aldi and the Salvation Army, I don't use credit cards, I don't buy anything until I absolutely have to, and still my savings account creeps upward. Then I get something like car repair, or insurance payment, or damn, if I get a cold. And everything I saved that month is gone. And I live in Buffalo! The least expensive city in the country. That extra $200 per month would help, especially since I realized I am paying back double what I borrowed, that just bugs me.
And I am budgeting for our wedding, not to mention the honeymoon. Hey honey let's go to Italy and Croatia, sweet, oh wait, what the hell happened to the US dollar? it's going to cost $250 for a cheap hotel room? So we'll probably fly to some tourist trap cause it's cheap, and try to escape as quick as possible.
The wedding industry is crap too, trust me, I've been to about 150 of them. There's no point to all the expenses, it distracts you from the people, the family and the humanity of the whole thing. And I didn't buy a diamond either.
James is right, some of these jobs shouldn't require a 50k degree. I wonder what year the government started providing High School education, probably during the depression. If everyone needs college to get a job maybe we should fund it like other countries do.
Jason, I hear you on the new car, I have a 93 Camry, and the rust is starting to bug me. And I really wish more people realized election financing is the biggest source of corruption in our system, and that's why politicians don't listen to us.
Paul, my degree is Political Science. also not a practical degree, doesn't qualify you for anything. unlike nursing, or something.
Suddenly you Need a degree to get a job, so those who don't have 50k lying around, become property of the lenders.

paul - 01/11/08 14:01
For a while I had epeeps keep a tally of their student loans here. This is the only link I could still find (e:news,30113) - it went over 1 million dollars in no time. I own about $70,000 still which seems totally ridiculous considering my worthless MFA is what really caused it. On the other hand it got me into what I am doing now and it will pay off someday? I hope at least.

Like, you I paid for it all myself.
jenks - 01/11/08 14:01
oh yeah and janelle- I am soooo with you on the diamond industry. Those ads make me want to puke.
jenks - 01/11/08 13:59
Ugh. Loans. I am in major denial about mine. I think my principal is $150. They're in deferment right now, so they're just accumulating interest and not being paid. I got a statement a while ago- I'm on (or will be once I get into repayment) some "income sensitive" plan that lets me just pay interest for the first few years, and then it goes up to like $750/month- until the year 2037. I wanted to cry.

And that's just med school loans! thank god I don't have any undergrad/credit card debt!
janelle - 01/11/08 12:24
Tru dat (e:James). In my field, people slave away gaining experiencing in direct care positions and some of these individuals have the skills and abiities to move up in the chain but can't because they don't have a degree. So, they have to go into debt to get the AA or BA to move up the chain. But the pay increase is probably offset by the student loan expense!
janelle - 01/11/08 12:18
$10,000 for a ring, that's ridiculous imo. That's what our entire wedding cost when all was said and done and if we had less money, we would have pulled it off with less money(not including honeymoon). We spent no more than $1,000 on my engagement ring and wedding ring combined and both are quite lovely. The engagement ring, btw, is a pearl...don't get me started on the diamond industry and the whole diamond engagement ring scam! If some chick tells you that you need to buy her a $10,000 engagement ring, run the other way. And that bs about an expensive ring being proof that a man can provide...well, the chick better pony up $10,000 to prove she can provide too, imo.
Okay, I totally sidetracked but the whole wedding industry pisses me off and when Christians buy into the wedding industry it pisses me off more. It's just another example of how fucked up finances are in this country which goes back to (e:Dcoffee)'s point that we need change.
james - 01/11/08 12:17
School and student loans are such a racket. Way too many people are going to college. College is great and good and all that, but so many people go just so they can get a job, a job that really shouldn't require a Bachelors or Associates degree. Most people aren't in school for the education, they are in it for the job. Just cut out the expensive 50k middle man I say. I am sure the paralegal will be able to look up a file without that anthropology class.
jason - 01/11/08 12:02
And, PS, Janelle, shoot. Think about if you're single and in our generation. I'll never be able to afford to get married. I'll never be able to afford some $10,000 ring, or even probably one half that amount. And the costs of the wedding itself? UGH.

But you're so right on about the Student Loans. I'm absolutely dying here. I don't have as much as grad students but it still hurts. I want a new car.
jason - 01/11/08 11:57
I completely agree that elections should be pubicly funded.
jim - 01/11/08 11:15
This is totally off topic of the substance of your actual post, but if you pay a little extra each month, that'll go straight to principal and shave a bunch of interest off over the years.
janelle - 01/11/08 10:54
College loans are definitely the economic monkey of our generation that will make a large impact on our economy. Our generation can't afford to buy homes, afford health insurance or start families. It's part of the whole middle class crunch.
Harvard and a few other Ivy League schools are really making interesting strides in college tuition. Students whose parents make under $60,000, I believe go for free and students whose parents make between $60,000 to $120,000 pay a percentage of their income. I hope other universities hold them up as an example, because just Harvard and a handful of others isn't enough to solve the problem.
Personally, I prefer the German model of placement into different types of educational settings via testing with a strong philosophy of not everyone has to go to college and one can make a good living from learning a trade. And not just a trade as in plumbing, but also jobs that often in the US you would have to have a college degree to do. Of course, there are problems with that model too.

10/24/2007 19:38 #41786

Laughing my ass off
Category: political
Ok, it's the president, doing standup, about himself!! it's from the Radio correspondents dinner. Last year Steven Colbert roasted the president, this year the president is the opening act, and he's roasting himself!!



paul - 10/25/07 19:07
I seriously cannot believe how much he has to check his cue card for those simple one liners.
dcoffee - 10/25/07 15:44
My favorite part "Speaking of subpoenas, it's good to see Speaker Pelosi here tonight."
man, I was on the floor.
joshua - 10/25/07 13:47
People like Pelosi even say that on a personal level they like the president. For me he passes the beer test, although he doesn't drink anymore.
jbeatty - 10/25/07 12:10
That was actually pretty funny.
james - 10/24/07 20:22
I will give the man one thing, he has a sense of humor.=

11/10/2007 11:38 #42069

New Music Video
Category: business
Just wanted to share a video I made for the West Seneca Music Center. I created their website last January,

They wanted to update the photography on the website and add a video sideshow. Their inventory has improved quite a bit since the last photoshoot I did for them.

They have tons of guitars! they've just about run out of room to store them. If you know anyone in a band, they have some really stylish stuff, classy designs, and realy loud designs. You can see a bunch of stuff in the video. I was pretty impressed.

The video is pretty fun. I just created it from the photos I took, and animated the slides together. Youtube degrades the quality a little bit, it will look more crisp on their site..




11/09/2007 09:54 #42056

Musharraf is an asshole
Category: political
image

I read the news with disbelief.

Pakistan suddenly jailing thousands of Musharraf's political opponents. Arresting members of the government and the courts, for no reason, other than their political opinions. He shut down the Supreme Court, and All independent news and TV stations. As of yesterday around 2,500 people had been arrested.

The US has given this asshole $10 billion dollars since 2001. And don't worry, we've agreed to continue funding his tyranny, regardless of the whole martial law thing.

The short explanation is that, Pakistan has no term limits for its prime minister, Musharraf has been in power for two 5 year terms. There was a recent amendment to Pakistani law that the Prime Minister could not simultaneously be a Military Leader. So General Musharraf was supposed to make a choice, Prime Minister OR head of the military. He said, Fuck That. He was reelected, and even though he promised to give up the military if he won, he kept both of his roles, and awaited the consequences. A few months back, he removed the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, but that didn't do the trick.The Supreme Court was about to hear the case, and determine whether or not this was legal (it's not) so a week before the Supreme Court was scheduled to rule on the issue, he shut the motherfucker down. Shut the whole country down.

One self interested Power hungry asshole terrorizing the entire population.

Luckily I don't have to research and summarize the whole thing for you, because there's a great synopsis on Huffington Post which gives a bunch of sources like I usually do.

Oh, almost forgot to mention, Musharraf says it's about terrorism. what a load of horseshit. That makes me hate him even more. A poor excuse for the rest of the world and America in particular. Were fighting terrorism, just like you, so were abandoning the constitution, just like you. Fuck off.

Yea, and the US, still giving him funding, no worries. Condi Rice said we're "disappointed" in what he has done.. wow, tough words. I'm disappointed when the Bisons lose. And the Whitehouse is disappointed when a tyrant abandons democracy and arrests thousands of political opponents. nice.

I'm going to write a letter to the foreign relations committee and call my representatives. This has to stop.


If you're interested, don't forget to read the article from the Huffington post, Tyranny and Terror in Pakistan, by Ali Eteraz


Joe Biden talks about it too.


tinypliny - 11/10/07 16:33
I hope your govt wakes up. :(
dcoffee - 11/09/07 13:19
Jason, both of your comments are great, the first one had me rolling. Thanks for pointing out the nuke issue, and the fact that the former prime minister is barricaded in her house by the military. Her house arrest is a perfect example of why the prime minister and the military should be separate.
The other thing you reminded me of was the elections, Musharraf "compromised" and promised elections on February 15. What happens until then? 4 months of Millitary rule with no independent media? come on.
james - 11/09/07 13:04
On the bright side, he said he would give up his position in the military before starting his next term and he just released Bhutto...

But seriously, I don't know why we are buddy buddy with Pakistan when Iran is more democratic. It is just amusing when rhetoric and action don't match up.
jason - 11/09/07 11:25
A couple more points, if you will indulge me. I read the articles you've given to me. Normally, I am really apprehensive of HP, but that article is really fantastic, and is really persuasive - it details why the relationship with Musharraf has been a bad deal. He's right - instead of going after the extremists, he appeases them, and goes after the moderates.

And, I have to say it again, Biden is the only Democratic that makes any sense at all. He isn't a partisan bloviator, and he isn't gratuitous and cheap in how he talks about Bush (normally Congress absolves themselves of sins they themselves have commited, being the hypocrites they are, and people eat it up like Marzipan).

Biden understands exactly why we cannot just get all emotional and do something that will make the situation worse, and Eteraz also touches on this. There just cannot be a power vacuum. The extremist element must absolutely not get their hands on those nukes. There has to be a realistic plan in place to get those elections moving, and to protect the vast majority of people who just want to live and work from being intimidated or killed.

Of course, reading the comments below Biden's article, you have a mix of reasonable comments from Dems who agree with me about Biden's strengths, and utter irrelevant tripe from far-left softheads who probably should be medicated. I mean, really, this Bush Crime Family, impeachment, jail time, that shit has nothing to do with the situation and anyway it is opinion that has already been relgated to nothingness by the rest of America, including most of the left. I just don't see the point.

Oh, one other thing you didn't touch on - Bhutto has been placed under house arrest. Got razor wire and men around her house. She can't leave. It's getting worse. Bush has to re-iterate his demands, and Congress (who actually control the purse strings, not Bush) have to be willing to do the right thing too. Elections have to happen ASAP, and I think (as does Biden) that we can do a lot to help.

Sorry about the novella
jason - 11/09/07 10:45
I agree. Congress should yank the funding right this second. If they don't, I'll kick them in the balls, if they have any.

10/03/2007 23:49 #41487

What is the reason for Iraq?
Category: political
So here's a question, What is the point of the Iraq War? Why are we there and what is the goal? Give me an opinion, a joke, a cynical rambling run on sentence, whatever, I just don't get the reason.

The purpose of the war is rarely explained or questioned. Here's some words from the Whitehouse website "If We Withdraw Prematurely.. Violent Extremists Would Be Emboldened.. Al Qaeda could gain new recruits and sanctuaries.. Iran would benefit from the chaos and be encouraged in its efforts to gain nuclear weapons and dominate the region. Extremists could control a key part of the global energy supply. Iraq.. could face a humanitarian nightmare, and democracy movements throughout the region would be violently reversed."

All these Whitehouse points can be refuted, here we go... We embolden violent extremists by allowing military contractors to Kill civilians without punishment. Al Qaeda's biggest recruiting and training tool is Iraq, and if we left Al Qaeda would have a diminished purpose, fewer recruits and the Iraqis would kick them out. Iran has been the biggest beneficiary of the Iraq War so far, we got rid of their enemy Saddam, dismissed the UN which might have prevented nuclear activity, and more. The Mideast might control their own oil, ok that's true, but what gives us the right to control someone else's oil? Iraq already faces a humanitarian nightmare 2 million refugees inside Iraq and 2 million in neighboring countries, the whole region faces a humanitarian crisis, and nothing the US has done so far has helped. Democracy movements? Anybody seen any Mideast countries saying "Check out Iraq, I need to get me some of that Democracy!"


The Whitehouse narrative is obviously a bunch of BS, and the American people are skeptical about what they say, but we don't really have an alternative. The press usually treats the government opinion as truth, all other explanations are conspiracy theories.

What's the purpose of this war? I'm asking you, why did we invade, and why are we still there. I just don't get it.


We Americans live in a bubble of official sources, part of the reason is that there aren't many journalists in Iraq, and the ones who are there, are usually embedded with American troops and government officials all day. This media blackout means that the Bush administration can create its own narrative about what's going on in Iraq, and we have very little evidence to contradict them.

In the eyes of the American News Media, the view of the government is the official objective analysis, and should be assumed to be as close to the truth as we can get. Why? The officials in government are self interested. This government in particular, is the most secretive and least transparent in this nations history. They won't let us see what they are doing, but instead they will explain it to us in press briefings. Information Control. (Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia by the way)

I'm rambling a bit. Anyway. Here's my thoughts on the goals and purpose of the Iraq War.

The US strategy is NOT, to find common ground between warring factions and foster a lasting peace. The real theory is Divide and Conquer. We are handing out weapons like they're candy, and loosing thousands more. We're training the Shiite army and police to use our weapons against Sunni insurgents, then we turn around and give weapons to Sunni insurgents to drive out foreigners from Al Qaeda. We are essentially arming two militias that hate each other, we are giving them both guns and teaching them how to kill.

8 officers currently serving in Iraq wrote an op-ed and sent it to the times, they said "Armed Sunni tribes have indeed become effective surrogates, but the enduring question is where their loyalties would lie in Americas absence. The Iraqi government finds itself working at cross purposes with America on this issue because it is justifiably fearful that Sunni militias will turn on the government of Iraq should the Americans leave." I'd encourage you to read the whole thing,

That leads me to my next point, we're not supposed to leave Iraq. The war may be bad for Military families, Iraqis, Taxpayers, America, and just about everyone except defense contractors, but that's OK. We blow things up, pretend to rebuild them, and get rich. Good plan, from that perspective the war is going perfectly. They waste our money, and that's just fine, boosts the economy, or something. $88 billion in contracts for Iraq are being audited for fraud
The thing is, since we've been in Iraq everyone has been laughing at us. Iran Russia, we started an arms race and there's nothing we can do about it because we look like fools in another Vietnam. But let's stay there indefinitely.

Here's Tom Friedman after he got back from Iraq on what he saw, "Peace in Iraq has to be built on a Shiite-Sunni consensus, not a constant balancing act by America. So far, the surge has created nothing that is self-sustaining. That is, pull us out and this whole place still blows in 10 minutes."

Iraq is part of a Mideast strategy, which is stupid, evil, and harmful to America. Need proof? "Under the guise of promoting a 'security dialogue' in the Persian Gulf, the Bush Administration has proposed $63 billion in arms transfers to the Middle East over the next ten years... $20 billion worth of high-tech arms to Saudi Arabia and the other oil-producing states in the Gulf." Great Plan, makes me feel real safe.

Divide and conquer, establish permanent bases from which to demand power, and make Americans comfortable with permanent war. Why? I can't figure it out. Power for the sake of power? just for the sake of staying on top in the world, as PNAC stated? Are the Neo-Conservatives really that evil? Can it all be about Oil?

I don't know, it just doesn't make sense. Why stay in Iraq when it helps Al Qaeda and hurts America? Why trash international law in favor of the bomb, when it just proves we are selfish, destroys our alliances, and creates enemies? Why create Mercenary armies, send 180,000 contractors to Iraq, and blow billions of dollars on nothing? Why create so many enemies? Why destroy so many families?

Are we just trying to save face? the best way to do that would be to impeach Bush, no really, I'm serious.

I'm linking to this article again, because it is one of the few perspectives from inside Iraq, from the 8 soldiers in the NY times

Here's Bill Moyers talking about them. video

2 videos inside Iraq, I posted these before but they're a rare and recent glimpse inside Iraq.




Thanks

I promise, non political entries soon! woo hoo! those might not take 2.5 hours to write!
metalpeter - 10/04/07 18:26
First of all the War is Over. Once we beat the Iraq Army and got Saddam we won. What we are in now is ocupation.

Why we went to war is because we where attacked and we had to respond with equal and even more force so that we look strong. See if any one attacks us and then when we strike back we destroy there country then no body else will fuck with you. It is kinda like if someone in school is picking on you what you do is go out to the playground find the meanest bad ass bully out there and in front of everybody bit the shit out of him.
The other reason we went to war was Iraq hide Al Quda. But that was stupid what we should have done was fly was have spies and seceret units over there and attack them and take them out like in the old days. Maybe even invade and say we only want the terrorists and go after them and leave the country alone.
Saudi Arabi are our buddies and some of them actully fund the people who attack use but see they are our friends so we can't go after any of them

Sadam did keep his people in line and we can't do that for a number of reasons. Yes some people like us there and some people don't. If you come in and try to liberate people then you morally you can't just go now lets let them all die. When we disbandend the army we lost that level of protection. At the same time though The US staying there hurts the people we are trying to protect. Anyone who doesn't like the us knows to come to IRAQ and can fight us. Of course this could have been avoided if the UN sent troops in to all the sections to keep the peace. Oh yeah that is right the UN doesn't mean jack shit anymore because they told us not to go in and we "Fuck you we are doing what we want" and then what did the UN do nothing. If the UN did what it was supposed to there would have Been UN troops around Iraq making sure the US didn't invade. Oh yeah that's right most of the troops are really americans.

The real problem is that you have 3 groups of people who don't like each other and then you have people who don't like us there also, so I don't know how you fix something you fucked up this bad.
joshua - 10/04/07 15:54
Its interesting you mention that Carolinian... I think FDR wouldn't have thought twice about doing things (and didn't, for that matter) that in these times he would get impeached for, if it meant protecting the nation's interests.
carolinian - 10/04/07 15:45
There weren't international law kinda trials for Nazi insurgents.

:::link:::

That's pretty much how the "greatest generation who fought the last good war" dealt with terrorists. By the standards of WWII, Guantanamo is club med.
joshua - 10/04/07 15:11
Some people wonder if there is ever a good reason to stay in a war... my answer to that question is "yes" but of course all of that is dependent on the situation. In Iraq, because of the reason I stated, this is why I think we need to stay... however unfortunate and sad. We have an obligation and we have to meet it. We've lost credibility around the globe, but to not clean up our mess would make it even worse.

Last night I was watching a news program and one of the pundits actually had a good point to make - one of the differences between Vietnam and this war is that in the 70's, the political climate at home made the soldiers in harms way dissolutioned, whereas in Iraq this is not necessarily the case. There are some anti-Iraq veterans out there now that are organizing, but I'd venture to say (based on the words of the majority of the soldiers that I've heard and read, anyway) that this isn't a situation where there is widespread dissolutionment... yet anyway.

As for the Iraqi law, that may be true... I can only assume that this sort of law is in place. The fact that Americans are enforcing a foreign law seems bizarre to me, but I have to say in the military's defense that since the war started, there has NEVER been a lack of gory pictures to show on TV... the media has always made sure of that. Given the plethora of gory shit the media is eager to air and has never had a shortage of (to what end besides "the truth" I have no idea... it should be no surprise that war is gory), I have to say that I don't know why people are worried about this incident. I don't think we are in danger of having a media in Iraq where the incidents are dictated to the press - and lets not forget the incidents where the media completely fabricated or took photos out of context in print, or intentionally altered photos in order to make them look worse, in the case of Reuters. The media can't necessarily be trusted whole heartedly either these days, although unfortunately they are the only independent voice available. I hate to say it, but this is exactly why I don't trust this article from the NYT... which is an organization that has proven its bias and editorial slant time and time again. However, I will say that an article written by any soldiers (whether or not they were intentionally collected to present a certain point of view) deserve to be read and considered every time. For me this is actually part and parcel... lefties critical of the war embrace these soldiers because they like what they say. When the anti-war left don't like what the soldiers say, they take out ads IN THE SAME PAPER as this article and call them traitors. I'm sorry but that is a disgrace.

I don't know if chaos in Iraq was intentional... I'm not prepared to enter Alex Jones territory and accept that sort of assumption to be true! Its in our interests for Iraq to be stable.
dcoffee - 10/04/07 12:48
Here's a side note about information control. From todays news.

"A daring ambush of bombs and gunfire left Poland's ambassador pinned down in a burning vehicle Wednesday before being pulled to safety ...
American authorities CONFISCATED an AP Television News videotape that contained scenes of the wounded being evacuated. U.S. military spokesman Lt. Col. Scott Bleichwehl told AP that _IRAQI LAW make it ILLEGAL to photograph or videotape the aftermath of bombings or other attacks_."

Iraqi Law?!?!? Yea right, what a ridiculous excuse. The iraqis can't even have elections, but they came up with that law right away, top of the list, really important to the Iraqis that Americans don't see wounded polish people on American TV. Give me a break.
Information control, Can you say memory hole?
dcoffee - 10/04/07 12:32
That seems to be the best reason to stay in Iraq, we broke it, we fix it. it's pretty sad really. How'd you like to be a soldier, "Bush totally screwed this place up, we have to stay until we fix his mess." that must really inspire some pride in the mission. Meanwhile we're still making bad decisions, passing out weapons and cash, allowing widespread fraud by American contractors who are above the law, insisting on Oil privatization, phones and electricity still don't work after 4 years. and at the same time the Whitehouse is trying to screw Iraq veterans.

as for things 'seeming' to improve, read this article if you haven't yet :::link:::

I'm all for spying and gathering inelegance, and the war has hurt our alliances, so any inelegance other countries are gathering, we don't have access to, because they don't trust our good intentions, and why should they.

Terrorism is a crime, not a country, or a philosophy, it is an illegal means to any number of different ends. We should be using international law like we insisted upon for the Nazis, but instead Bush set out to dismantle the UN so we could go it alone.

as for pre war planning, you gotta see the movie No End in Sight. :::link::: There were tons of plans developed over years of study, bush opted for a free market pipe dream, which has so far kept Iraq in chaos. That's why I'm starting to think chaos is the goal, not peace. Everything they've done has led to chaos, can it realy be a mistake?
joshua - 10/04/07 10:42
David -

The dirty little secret is that we aren't leaving Iraq anytime soon, regardless of what the anti-war crowd is being told. I think that DailyKos/MoveOn are going to be sorely disappointed - the new date being tossed around by Democrats and Republicans alike is 2013. I'm telling you - the anti-war crowd are being placated by the likes of Obama and Hillary now, but you are going to be ignored once one of them gets the nomination.

We all know the initial rationale behind the war. At the moment, and by all accounts things in Iraq "seem" to be improving, our current purpose in Iraq is to stabilize the country - which itself is an extreme uphill battle. Politically the country is fractured and there is no way to quickly resolve 1,000 year old tribal disputes.

Its unfortunate that we've never really had quality human intelligence in the Middle East, primarily because of the gradual decline in our ability to put actual people on the ground (yeah, I'm talking about spying). It appears that nobody considered in an adequate way what would happen once we cut Saddam out. In a morbid way, Saddam's presence stabilized the tribal factions out of fear. Now that there is no fear, and they've never bothered to consider how to get along without Saddam, our job is much harder. How do you predict a reaction that has never been considered by the population itself, let alone our inadeuqate intelligence capability in the region?

I think that many people fail to consider that in the past, even in the best of conditions, the US occupied Japan until 1952. It took us a full seven years, with no war in the country, to rebuild and stabilize their nation. That sort of comparison highlights exactly how difficult a task we took on in Iraq.

People want to end the war primarily because the initial rationale was flawed. I think we are beyond relying on that kind of luxury to determine our future course. Our obligation to make things right in that country trump anything else as far as I'm concerned. Its our mess and now we have an absolute obligation to clean it up. The debate is not when we're getting out of Iraq, but how. The Democratic presidential candidates know that Iraq will end on their watch if they get elected, one way or another, but none of them are prepared to take the blame if we pull out too early and a genocide occurs. Bush deserves the blame for starting the war, but he will not credibly be blamed for how the war ends - believe me, this is exactly why the Democratic presidential candidates are double talking depending on their audience.