WelcomeVisitors | RecentChanges | Preferences

Y'know the news from Iraq has been so grim over the last few months, we all really need a way to lighten up. So to counteract all this "soldier urinating on the Iraqi prisoner while groining him with his rifle"- dreariness, I offer the following jokes:

Q: Why did the Iraqi prisoner cross the road? A: Ooops! Our soldiers used 220 volts instead of 120 volts on him!

Q: Why can't Bush get the Iraqi people to support the American occupation? A: Halliburton is three months late with its shipment of genital electrodes.

Q: What's the main difference for the Iraqi people under Bush rather than Saddam? A: The genital electrodes now read "Made In America."

Q: Why is Bush having a such a hard time winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people? A: Hey, relax! Even the U.S. military police can only work over one body part at a time!

Q: Why did the U.S. soldiers force the Iraqi prisoner to wear women's panties? A: Don't ask, don't tell.

Q: Why did the U.S. military police force the Iraqi prisoner to masturbate? A: They were tired of drinking their coffee black.

And then there are the self-punchlining jokes:

Q: How many Halliburton employees does it take to screw an Iraqi prisoner?

Q: How many Republicans does it take to screw an Iraqi prisoner into a lightbulb socket?

Halliburton: Working with the Iraqi people, one fingernail at a time!

A recent visitor editorialized as follows:

Once the terrorists have their hands on WMD, all the anti-America spewing headline readers can roll up into a fetal position and prepare for death while those who value freedom and life find out how to disarm them.

Yeah, those Iraqi WMDs were a real threat, weren't they? I bet the thousands of Iraqi civilians who we killed in the name of safeguarding our own citizens from those imaginary weapons feel that their sacrifice was very much worth it, given the contribution they made to the advancement of "freedom and life." Or not.

Saddam is insane of course his weapons were a threat. He used them on innocent villages of Kurds, native people, Iraqi citezens. He would have used them on the UU if he thought he could have gotten away with. (Anyway, now returning to your regularly scheduled ranting:)

So, is the current US involvement in Iraq reminiscent of a Vietnam-style "quagmire"? I've asserted that it is; Craig has questioned that assertion (see http://www.lies.com/blog/archives/001056.html). Craig wrote there:

Iraq is nohing lik vietnam, Vietnam lasted several years, made little progress, and the military was led around by the nose by our civilian government. In Iraq our military make the decisions, this directly leads to a more direct and effective war. The progress they are making is impecable as well, Every day we draw nearer to free and idependant Iraq, There is a plan, Vietnam did not have anything comparable.

Rather than simply trotting out this emotionally-laden phrase, I'd like to see someone with a real appreciation and detailed knowledge of all the social, political, cultural, and military dynamics of the Vietnam War actually lay out a rational and coherent analysis of how this really compares in any specific, factual way to Vietnam.

Hmm, maybe it is a BIT like Vietnam...

  1. America illegally invades a country in order to establish a government it can control
  2. America expects everything to go their way. It doesn't
  3. Fighting continues sporadically for years (it will you know)
  4. The rising death toll and lack of coherent plan embarass America
  5. America withdraws (they will)
  6. They leave behind an unstable mess of a country, hoplessly politically divided.

Come to think of it, this sounds a bit like Afghanistan too. And Korea...good old uncle Sam.

I was too young when the Vietnam war broke out, but all I can see is tht this Irak stuff is shit. Shit for the USA and shit for the government of my country, Spain. How can they be such goddam liars and tell me that it's all because of the MDW? How can Bush be so cinical and say that's ll for the Iraki's liberties, freedom and democracy? Did you first ask them whether they want your democracy? Or is it you that wants their petrol? The government in my country has paid for what they did (NOT listen to the MILLIONS of citizens who demonstrated in the streets against the war)and has been put out of power in the last elections.

Without making any special claims for detailed knowledge, reason, or coherence, I wanted to do my best to explain why it is that the two situations seem similar to me.

I've posted my argument in the weblog; see http://www.lies.com/blog/archives/001059.html. It's not the sort of in-depth analysis Craig was asking for, but it at least describes some of my thinking, such as it is.

-- JohnCallender


Here's a list of news items, opinion pieces, and random web commentaries that bear on the question. They're currently in a random order; at some point it might be useful to try to rearrange them to group together the pros (Iraq is like Vietnam), the antis (no it isn't), and those not really taking a position.

If you have more sources, especially those refuting the Iraq/Vietnam? similarities, please post them. I know of at least one weblog entry I was reading the other day that made some pretty disparaging comments about using the "q" word for the situation in Iraq, but now I can't find it.

Here are a few newer items as of 18 September 2003:

text moved to FeelLikeaKing

WelcomeVisitors | RecentChanges | Preferences
This page is read-only | View other revisions
Last edited October 27, 2004 4:22 pm by dsl-142-066.sea.blarg.net (diff)