Warmonger explains war to a peacenik

[pkt]

Subject: A warmonger explains war to a Peacenik

PeaceNik: Why did you say we are invading Iraq?

Warmonger: We are invading Iraq because it is in violation of Security Council resolution 1441. A country cannot be allowed to violate Security Council resolutions.

PN: But I thought many of our allies, including Israel, were in
violation of more Security Council resolutions than Iraq.

WM: It's not just about UN resolutions. The main point is that Iraq could have weapons of mass destruction, and the first sign of a smoking gun could well be a mushroom cloud over NY.

PN: Mushroom cloud? But I thought the weapons inspectors said Iraq had no nuclear weapons.

WM: Yes, but biological and chemical weapons are the issue.

PN: But I thought Iraq did not have any long-range missiles for
attacking us or our allies with such weapons.

WM: The risk is not Iraq directly attacking us, but rather terrorist
networks that Iraq could sell the weapons to.

PN: But couldn't virtually any country sell chemical or biological
materials? We sold quite a bit to Iraq in the eighties ourselves,
didn't we?

WM: That's ancient history. Look, Saddam Hussein is an evil man that has an undeniable track record of repressing his own people since the early eighties. He gasses his enemies. Everyone agrees
that he is a power-hungry lunatic murderer.

PN: We sold chemical and biological materials to a power-hungry lunatic murderer?

WM: The issue is not what we sold, but rather what Saddam did. He is the one that launched a pre-emptive first strike on Kuwait.

PN: A pre-emptive first strike does sound bad. But didn't our
ambassador to Iraq, April Gillespie, know about and green light the invasion of Kuwait?

WM: Let's deal with the present, shall we? As of today, Iraq could sell its biological and chemical weapons to Al Quaida. Osama Bin Laden himself released an audiotape calling on Iraqis to suicide-attack us, proving a partnership between the two.

PN: Osama Bin Laden? Wasn't the point of invading Afghanistan to kill him?

WM: Actually, it's not 100% certain that it's really Osama Bin Laden on the tapes. But the lesson from the tape is the same: there could easily be a partnership between al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein unless we act.

PN: Is this the same audiotape where Osama Bin Laden labels Saddam a secular infidel?

WM: You're missing the point by just focusing on the tape. Powell
presented a strong case against Iraq.

PN: He did?

WM: Yes, he showed satellite pictures of an Al Qaida poison factory in Iraq.

PN: But didn't that turn out to be a harmless shack in the part of Iraq controlled by the Kurdish opposition?

WM: And a British intelligence report...

PN: Didn't that turn out to be copied from an out-of-date graduate student paper?

WM: And reports of mobile weapons labs...

PN: Weren't those just artistic renderings?

WM: And reports of Iraquis scuttling and hiding evidence from
inspectors...

PN: Wasn't that evidence contradicted by the chief weapons inspector, Dr. Hans Blix?

WM: Yes, but there is plenty of other hard evidence that cannot be revealed because it would compromise our security.

PN: So there is no publicly available evidence of weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq?

WM: The inspectors are not detectives; it's not their JOB to find
evidence. You're missing the point.

PN: So what is the point?

WM: The main point is that we are invading Iraq because resolution 1441 threatened "severe consequences." If we do not act, the Security Council will become an irrelevant debating society.

PN: So the main point is to uphold the rulings of the Security Council?

WM: Absolutely.... unless it rules against us.

PN: And what if it does rule against us?

WM: In that case, we must lead a coalition of the willing to invade
Iraq.

PN: Coalition of the willing? Who's that?

WM: Britain, Turkey, Bulgaria, Spain, and Italy, for starters.

PN: I thought Turkey refused to help us unless we gave them tens of billions of dollars.

WM: Nevertheless, they ARE now willing.

PN: I thought public opinion in all those countries was against war.

WM: Current public opinion is irrelevant. The majority expresses its will by electing leaders to make decisions.

PN: So it's the decisions of leaders elected by the majority that is
important?

WM: Yes.

PN: But George W. Bush wasn't elected by voters. He was selected by the U.S. Supreme Court.

WM: I mean, we must support the decisions of our leaders, however they were elected, because they are acting in our best interest. This is about being a patriot. That's the bottom line.

PN: So if we do not support the decisions of the president, we are not patriotic?

WM: I never said that.

PN: So what are you saying? Why are we invading Iraq?

WM: As I said, because there is a chance that they have weapons of mass destruction that threaten us and our allies.

PN: But the inspectors have not been able to find any such weapons.

WM: Iraq is obviously hiding them.

PN: You know this? How?

WM: Because we know they had the weapons ten years ago, and they are still unaccounted for.

PN: The weapons we sold them, you mean?

WM: Precisely.

PN: But I thought those biological and chemical weapons would degrade to an unusable state over ten years.

WM: But there is a chance that some have not degraded.

PN: So as long as there is even a small chance that such weapons exist, we must invade?

WM: Exactly.

PN: But North Korea actually has large amounts of usable chemical, biological, AND nuclear weapons, AND long range missiles that can reach the West Coast AND it has expelled nuclear weapons inspectors, AND threatened to turn America into a sea of fire.

WM: That's a diplomatic issue.

PN: So why are we invading Iraq instead of using diplomacy?

WM: Aren't you listening? We are invading Iraq because we cannot allow the inspections to drag on indefinitely. Iraq has been delaying, deceiving, and denying for over ten years, and inspections cost us tens of millions.

PN: But I thought war would cost us tens of billions.
[$75 billion was the 'war budget' that George W. submitted to Congress. - PK]

WM: Yes, but this is not about money. This is about security.

PN: But wouldn't a pre-emptive war against Iraq ignite radical Muslim sentiments against us, and decrease our security?

WM: Possibly, but we must not allow the terrorists to change the way we live. Once we do that, the terrorists have already won.

PN: So what is the purpose of the Department of Homeland Security, color-coded terror alerts, and the Patriot Act? Don't these change the way we live?

WM: I thought you had questions about Iraq.

PN: I do. Why are we invading Iraq?

WM: For the last time, we are invading Iraq because the world has called on Saddam Hussein to disarm, and he has failed to do so. He must now face the consequences.

PN: So, likewise, if the world called on us to do something, such as find a peaceful solution, we would have an obligation to listen?

WM: By "world", I meant the United Nations.

PN: So, we have an obligation to listen to the United Nations?

WM: By "United Nations" I meant the Security Council.

PN: So, we have an obligation to listen to the Security Council?

WM: I meant the majority of the Security Council.

PN: So, we have an obligation to listen to the majority of the Security Council?

WM: Well... there could be an unreasonable veto.

PN: In which case?

WM: In which case, we have an obligation to ignore the veto.

PN: And if the majority of the Security Council does not support us at all?

WM: Then we have an obligation to ignore the Security Council.

PN: That makes no sense.

WM: If you love Iraq so much, you should move there. Or maybe France, with the all the other cheese-eating surrender monkeys. It's time to boycott their wine and cheese, no doubt about that.

PN: I give up!

--
Judi Stevenson
Minerva Research & Communications
631 Mount Belcher
Salt Spring Island, BC, V8K 2J3
(250) 537-5599

"Not everything that counts can be counted, and
not everything that can be counted counts."
- sign over Albert Einstein's desk at Princeton University.

[pkt]

Cost of WARS
as a percentage of the US GDP
All in 2002 dollars

As % of US GDP in Billions

Revolutionary Wars 63% 2.2
War of 1812 13% 1.1
Mexican War 3% 1.6
Civil War 104% 62.0
Spanish American War 3% 9.6
World War I 24% 190.6
World War II 130% 2,900.0
Korean War 15% 335.9
Vietnam War 12% 494.3
First Gulf War 1% 76.1

Second Gulf War 73.0
(1st Budget submitted)

[pkt]

MEMO



From: MINISTRY OF DEFENCE (United Kingdom)



NOTIFICATION OF COMPULSORY ENLISTMENT



Under the Emergency Powers Act (1939) as amended by the Defence Act (1978), you are hereby notified that you are required to place yourself on standby for possible compulsory military service in the Iraq Conflict.

You may shortly be ordered to depart for the Middle East where you will either join the Third Battalion, The Queens Own Suicidal Conscripts or the Second Foot and Mouth.

Due to the recent rundown of the Navy and the refusal of P&O to lend us any of its liners, because of what it claims was due to the deplorable state in which they were returned after the Falklands adventure, it will be necessary for you to make your own way to the combat zone. HM Government has been able to negotiate a 20% discount on one-way trips with Virgin Airlines and you are strongly urged to take advantage of this offer.

Because of cutbacks in Government expenditure in recent years it will be necessary for you to provide yourself with the following equipment as soon as possible:

* Combat Jacket
* Trousers (preferably khaki - but please no denim)
* Tin helmet
* Boots (or a pair of sturdy trainers)
* Gas mask
* Map of the combat zone (the ordnance survey 1:2800 Outdoor Leisure Map of Iraq will do)
* Rifle
* Ammunition (preferably to suit previous item)
* Suntan oil

If you are in a position to afford it, we would like you to buy a tank. (Vickers Defence of Banbury is currently offering all new conscripts a 0% finance deal on all X Registration Chieftains, but hurry, as offer is only available whilst stocks last).

We would like to reassure you that, in the unlikely event of anything going wrong, you will receive a free burial in the graveyard of your choice and your next of kin will be entitled to the new War Widows Pension of GBP1.75 per calendar month, index-linked but subject to means testing, and fully repayable should our side eventually lose.

There may be little time for formal military training before your departure and so we advise that you hire videos of the following films and try and pick up a few tips as you watch:
* The Guns of Navarone
* Kelly's Heroes
* A Bridge Too Far
* The Longest Day
* Apocalypse Now
* The Matrix
* Blazing Saddles
* The Desert Song
* Mary Poppins

We do not recommend that you watch Khartoum.

To prepare yourself mentally for your mission try reading the works of Wilfred Owen or Rupert Brooke. This should give you some idea of what may be involved.


Yours faithfully,

Geoffrey Hoon, Secretary of State for Defence.
A Bush - Blair Production
Sponsored by Mars, Pepsi and McDonalds. The Official Snacks of World War III

[135711]

This was wonderfully written, I enjoyed it very much. I forgot about the Supreme Court thingy! I went back to read a little about Attila the Hun, and did you know, his group invaded Italy? I'm sure I have some Chinese Blood in me, way back there. What do you think? Do you think Italy is part Asian?

------------------------
you know, the italians have the worlds best cheese.

[pkt]

135711,

As an American, did you hear about Senator Byrd's regrets?

If you think you have Asian blood in you, you should perhaps read Gavin Mavis' book.

Remember: had marco Polo not gone to China who knows maybe the Italians would have to wait another hundred year or years before they invent pasta...

Do you know how chinese people make noodles? free hand?

PK

[Aoife]

Wonderfully well-written and hideously accurate (both the conversation and the Memo).
Where did you find them? Did you write them? I have a freidn who's written some rather Monty-pythonseque scripts to the war debates et cetera. I'll see if I can dig them out.

[pkt]

Aoife

No, as the ex-President of Coca-Cola once said, "We are not that smart." in response to the New Coke fiasco.

I have an e-friend (a friend's friend whom I've never met) from Hong Kong who works for an outdoor advert company. She gets stuff sent to her from all over...

Then I have another e-friend in Canada, etc.

I'm just the conduit.

My offer of the University of Milan piece re 'Why the US goes to war' is also good.

Having worked in the provincial government before we got defeated I have special appreciation of 'Yes, Minister' and 'Yes, Prime Minister'.

PK

[Aoife]

Ah, Yes Minister and Yes Primeminster! Quality viewing of my early childhood!

[pkt]

This past week since the original showing on the 26th, CBC - Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the Cdn version of BBC - has been showing and repeating a most chilling programme of their Fifth Estate. A full 60 minutes of solid programme with no ads.

It is called 'The Forgotten People'.
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/kurds/index.html

The programme covers
Tony Blair joining the Dubya road show and its aftermath;
the chemical attack of the Kurds;
the passing in Congress and Senate of the Genocide Bill and the scrubbing of it by Reagan under the pressure of the industry lobby;
the Wolfowitz new doctrine for world dominace by the US in the 21st century;
ad nauseum.

As they say it's gripping TV expose'.

FYI, CBC is getting a lot of kudos on their coverage of the war by the Cdn TV crtics.

As Cdns, CBC do not suffer the handicap the Iraqis put on CNN & Fox: CBC have their own roving reporters on the ground in Iraq as well as those 'embedded' - read 'in bed' - with the armed forces. Call it a 4th point of view if you wish: US, UK, Arab, Cdn.

They pointed out how, when Wolfowitz's new doctrine leaked out while George I was on the throne, then UK's Dame Pauline Neville-Jones, a senior civil servant in the UK's foreign service had this to say, "...sent a shiver down my back. It did. It's not so much that I tak a moral view about it. [A most correct stance of a member in the foreign service. - PK] I just said to myself, "No country, however powerful, can operate in the world in this way, by itself and hope to have friends and ultimately succeed."

It appeared that George I felt the chill down his spine too and chose to remain a team player.

Then Clinton took over. Then George W. The rest is history being written and we're bearing witness to that.

Salom,

PK

[pkt]

This past week since the original showing on the 26th, CBC - Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the Cdn version of BBC - has been showing and repeating a most chilling programme of their Fifth Estate. A full 60 minutes of solid programme with no ads.

It is called 'The Forgotten People'.
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/kurds/index.html

The programme covers
Tony Blair joining the Dubya road show and its aftermath;
the chemical attack of the Kurds;
the passing in Congress and Senate of the "Prevention of Genocide Bill" and the scrubbing of it by Reagan under the pressure of the industry lobby;
the Wolfowitz new doctrine for world dominace by the US in the 21st century;
ad nauseum.

As they say it's gripping TV expose'.

FYI, CBC is getting a lot of kudos on their coverage of the war by the Cdn TV crtics.

As Cdns, CBC do not suffer the handicap the Iraqis put on CNN & Fox: CBC have their own roving reporters on the ground in Iraq as well as those 'embedded' - read 'in bed' - with the armed forces. Call it a 4th point of view if you wish: US, UK, Arab, Cdn.

They pointed out how, when Wolfowitz's new doctrine leaked out while George I was on the throne, then UK's Dame Pauline Neville-Jones, a senior civil servant in the UK's foreign service had this to say, "...sent a shiver down my back. It did. It's not so much that I tak a moral view about it. [A most correct stance of a member in the foreign service. - PK] I just said to myself, "No country, however powerful, can operate in the world in this way, by itself and hope to have friends and ultimately succeed."

It appeared that George I felt the chill down his spine too and chose to remain a team player.

Then Clinton took over. Then George W. The rest is history being written and we're bearing witness to that.

Salom,

PK

[epeefencer74]

Wow, that was a wonderfully written piece. I wonder if it can be a basis for a satire on the world today. But seriously the US has got to relook at it's reasons for the war. It's alienating all of it's support gained during 9/11. Even friends are afraid of being associated with them. They've got to handle the post war Iraq with kid gloves, otherwise they might just make the current terrorist situation even worse than it is now.