Bookmark and Share


Sunday, February 24, 2008


Iraq stands as the most controversial issue of our day. I don't get what all the fuss is about, in fact I believe going into Iraq was one of the smartest decisions of the Bush administration. It would seem that many would disagree with me, for reasons that continue to elude even the great and insightful Danian Michael. Come chat with me or if you prefer shouting, well you can do that too.


Blogger The Terror said...


I listened to your Iraq presentation. I thought you were quite bold in saying, "WMD’s was not the root reason for going into Iraq.” Then what was? Colin Powell gave that speech with all the satellite pictures showing Iraq’s WMD locations. This was the reason we were given for going in there. Am I missing something, please explain

February 25, 2008 at 12:59 PM  
Blogger Sohpop said...

We are there, and pulling out would be a disaster that would only embolden the proponents of terror and allow them to claim victory against the U.S. and the other countries that are there in small numbers. So however you slice and dice the proposed policies of Obama and Clinton with respect to Iraq, the election of either candidate to the presidency would be a disaster in terms of its consequences on global terror. That is, if they actually follow through with all the election rhetoric. (Odds are, they will succumb to some amount of reality, creating some hybrid policy that will borderline satisfy their party.)

Now, on the issue of WMDs and the initial case for war. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it is my belief that our military efforts in Afghanistan constituted the U.S. response to 9/11—with Al Qaeda the direct link. If Iraq is an extension (and perhaps equal partner) of that initial response, as you seem to be arguing, was the whole WMD thing just smoke screen used by the conservatives to get public support for the war? And if so, what was the “root reason”? It seems to me that the administration has failed to articulate the “root reason”. Preemption? Even that necessitates some grounds (i.e. estimation of threat).

I agree that we are there to stay, and I think I understand the “root reason” for staying. But as one conservative to another, I can’t say I fully understand the “root reason” for going there. Even now, to bolster the case for staying, perhaps it would help to further clarify the case for going.

February 25, 2008 at 1:28 PM  
Blogger Danian Michael said...

The Terror,

I was hoping my statement about WMD’s would gain your attention. I had a sense, a strong sense as I was recording this presentation that my WMD statement would be an ear catcher. Yes Colin Powel gave a presentation with satellite photographs and all manner of evidence that Sadam had weapons of mass destruction. Yes that is all true but if you know anything about conservatives, you would know that we don’t see weapons themselves as being evil. We believe that good upstanding citizens of this country ought to have the right to carry a gun and that they should avail themselves of that right. My point is this, many countries have weapons of mass destruction, yet we are not concerned about going to war with most of them. It’s the holder of the weapon that is of deep concern to us. So why did we go after Sadam when we did and not before; two words; NINE-ELEVEN. Ok so 9/11 moved us into action and we moved because we want Islamic terrorist to go away and, very important here, not come back. This is why we are still there. Let’s face it; Terrorists were able to take down our tallest and biggest building, in our most important city without firing one shot. I say again, “Weapons of Mass Destruction was not the root reason for going into Iraq, more important than WMD’s was our wanting to put down the ones who did this to us” and by implication, anyone who wants to mimic this group. Where have I misspoken? Where am I wrong?

February 25, 2008 at 2:23 PM  
Blogger Danian Michael said...


First I want to say welcome and thank you for taking the time to listen and respond. Now to your statements about leaving before the time is right, all I can say is Amen to that. I think most conservatives would agree on that point and I also agree with you that if a Democrat wins the election, I think the reality of having such a colossal failure happen on their shift (the colossal failure being genocide and the reconstitution of Al-Qaeda in Iraq) I think will force a more responsible course of action from a Democrat President. I think President Bush was right when he offered some advice to the Democratic candidates saying, Don’t promise to leave Iraq because the reality of the office might dictate differently.

I was unclear about something in your response, were you asking me to clarify what I believe to be the root cause for going into Iraq or do you think the administration should clarify. If you are asking me, look at my response to The Terror and let me know if that offered any clarification. Now I would say going into Afghanistan and Going into Iraq constituted a response to 9/11 since all the reasons given for invading Iraq were conditions that existed long before 9/11. Ask yourself this question, why did we not invade Iraq before 9/11, and why did we do so after 9/11. If the terrorist attacks on 9/11 are not related to Iraq then I must say that the coincidence is remarkable. And if they are related and the terrorist involved in 9/11 did not use WMD’s, then how could it be the root cause. WMD’s was not a smoke screen so much as it was a means to an end; I could not go into someone’s home and arrest them because they have guns in the house. But I could arrest them on the basis of gun possession if close friends of theirs who they admire and want to be like shot-up a school yesterday.

What do you think?

February 25, 2008 at 4:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'Terror', have you forgoten all your beloved United Nations tissues? I can't call them paper. Paper has sides. The UN just wants to 'wish' the world to a being a better place.

I also find it amusing that all the DEMONcrats, who saw the EXCAT same intelligence, and voted to inforce UN resolution '1992', now pretend they knew nothing about what we ALL thought was going on inside Iraq.

Then, of course their brethern in the Liberal media never hold them to the same standard, about what they say, as they do anyone with an (R) along side their name.

February 25, 2008 at 7:28 PM  
Blogger Danian Michael said...

I had one further thought,

This debate about the beginning is not just a matter of academics, it is very important. For if we say that, well yes going to Iraq was a mistake but we are there now so let’s make the best of it, then the mission will be robbed of all its meaning and makes it one gigantic cover my rear end venture (still, America's best interests will be served in covering our rear ends). I don’t think we conservatives need to do that; there is no need to concede anything. We are there for a good reason now as we were 5 years ago.

February 25, 2008 at 11:06 PM  
Blogger The Terror said...


You got my alias right, I am The Terror but that is about all you got right. Did I say anything about the UN; no I didn’t. Did I say anything about an intelligence report; no I didn’t. Even your appraisal of me being a liberal (you didn’t say it but you are assuming I am liberal), on that point, again you are way off. I was merely asking Danian to clarify his statement about WMD’s not being the root cause. Danian by his own admission says this is radical (see his response to me). And even his fellow conservative wanted clarification (see Sohpop’s entry). I can’t be too far off with my enquiry given those 2 facts. And I thought Danian’s answer was adequate, I see his point.

We try not to assume here on this blog, just stick to what I have said when trying to size me up Anonymous.

February 25, 2008 at 11:33 PM  
Blogger Sohpop said...


As regards the need for clarification on the root reason for going there, I was speaking in terms of the conservative side in general. There seems to be more "chatter" in the media (or at work) about "staying the course" than about the root reason/support for "going there". I don't know if it is a media-based problem, or if the conservative side in general (e.g. administration, members of congress, radio hosts, and bloggers) has just failed to diffuse the WMD bomb that liberals like to point to. I am not sure, and I do not regularly follow politics, but from my point of view, that bomb has yet to be diffused by conservatives. I'd say there is work to be done.

Thank you for clarifying your position. The need to invade Iraq existed long before 9/11. I see your point, and I am trying to digest it. Perhaps proof for that need can be demonstrated in the fact that we did invade Iraq in the Gulf War. Did not Iraq support the terrorist group Abu Nidal back in 1990?) Perhaps this is a step in diffusing the liberal's WMD bomb.

February 26, 2008 at 7:37 AM  
Blogger Danian Michael said...


In my presentation I said international opinion is not a concern of mine. Seriously, what other country can point a finger at the U.S. without having 9 other fingers pointing back at themselves. The U.N. is a joke quite frankly; notice when countries go through natural disasters, or internal fighting say Darfur, that it is the U.S. they look to and not the U.N.

I also said that Democrats can act like babies at times in that they don’t have a strong sense of Personal Responsibility (see my previous Presentation). They do not want to take responsibility for their actions, good or bad. Indeed they saw the same intelligence report but they are not going to take responsibility for that and so we conservative will have to drag them kicking and screaming, as usual, into a brighter future like we did in helping the civil rights movement; yeah… Republicans did that.

February 26, 2008 at 11:38 AM  
Blogger A.P. said...

LOL. That was a quick response!! I was going to replace my comment with this:
"Praise the Lord, and pass the ammunition!!"
Basically, I don't agree with any of the points you made. War on Terror. What a joke. The U.S. finds a problem, and they have to start a war on it. War on drugs, war on literacy, war on terror. Diplomacy? that's for little girls, let's just bomb them into liking us...

And there is a reason we went into Iraq. OIL. DUH!! 15 of the 19 9/11 high-jackers were from Saudi Arabia. But, W. and his cronies are butt buddies with the royal family, so they are safe... until when... oil gets to $200 a barrel??

And the fact that you don't care what the rest of the world thinks is pretty much the root cause of terrorism. Because we have the most tanks and bombs, and aren't afraid to use them, is a huge reason that the majority of the rest of the world is not too keen to us, aside from taking aid from us. Which, if we spent half of what we spend on military, on food and aid, the world would be a lot better off, and people wouldn't have as many reasons to hate the rich and bloated US. 860,000,000 people in the world right now are living with the real risk of starving to death. And we're so hell bent on revenge for 3000+ American souls. Might sound harsh, but that sounds like to me, that you're saying one American life is worth that of hundreds of anyone not an American... that is sad.

And when you started on your tirade about, "people invading your land" referring to 9/11, you didn't consider how Iraqi's must have felt when we started bombing the be-jesus out of them... and now we've been occupying their country for years, with no real plan for the future. But I guess that ties back to your point about not giving a sh!t what anyone else thinks. That seems to be typical Christian conservative stance on life in general.

Just a thought, on your next blog, maybe you could focus on making valid points backed by facts, instead of pointless name calling, and acting as a bull-horn for probably the worst administration in American history. Okay, I have to get back to work now!!

Peace out!

February 26, 2008 at 12:25 PM  
Blogger Danian Michael said...


I have to get back to work also but just a quick response. You are right, perhaps I do need to tone down the name calling; the baby thing might be a bit over the top.

Hey I'm man enough to admit when I'm wrong. I will respond to you more fully a bit later.

February 26, 2008 at 12:34 PM  
Blogger Danian Michael said...


Now there is the Andy I know. I’m going to answer you by asking a series of questions, I suspect you are a busy man, but I hope you will make the time to answer.

1. Is it your belief that President Bush went to Iraq for oil for himself or for the country?
2. In either case (see question 1), how is that going for President Bush?
3. Do you care what Conservatives think about you?
4. Do you think Islamic Terrorists were justified in bombing us?
5. Do you think Islamic Terrorist should try to understand us?
6. Do you believe President Bush would order a withdrawal from Iraq If the government of Iraq asked us to leave?
7. Do you believe the American armed forces are a force for Good or a force for evil in Iraq?
8. Finally, of all the Iraqis that have died since the war started, did most of them die at the hands of American Forces or were they killed by Terrorist forces.

This should be interesting. And by the way, Jimmy Carter already has the title of worst President in U.S. History.

February 26, 2008 at 5:34 PM  
Blogger A.P. said...

I came in early to see your reply... so here goes...

1. Is it your belief that President Bush went to Iraq for oil for himself or for the country? What is the difference? Obviously he doesn't want millions of barrels of oil for his own personal use, but doesn't he stand to profit greatly by American control of Iraqi oil?

2. In either case (see question 1), how is that going for President Bush? So far, not so good. However, just last week, Bush signed a bill that does not permit American forces to be building permanent bases in Iraq, or for us to have any say in how they produce/process/distribute their oil. He then quickly signed a signing statement. Something he's done over a thousand times before. He'll sign a bill into law, that is all well and good, and then sign a piece of paper that says the administration doesn't have to adhere to the law. He's done this more than all previous presidents combined. Times ten. So are we really truly a Nation of Laws? Or a Nation of Laws, run by cowboys who are above the law?

3. Do you care what Conservatives think about you? Sure, but I don't lose sleep over it. And I don't bomb their homes because they aren't liberal. If someone wants to have a meaningful discussion on things, then I'm all ears. But when people start up on the same-old liberal/hippy/commie attitude, I tend to stop listening :)

4. Do you think Islamic Terrorists were justified in bombing us? I don't think anyone has a justification for inflicting such violence on others, self defense aside. But it's not like this kind of atrocity is a new thing in the world, the unique part to this atrocity were the victims. This kind of thing isn't supposed to happen in the U.S., only in countries that don't align, lock step, with the U.S. – which happens to be the majority of countries in the world...

5. Do you think Islamic Terrorist should try to understand us? Do you think Christian terrorists should try to understand us? Anyone who is involved in any kind of fundamentalism, whether Christian/Jew/Muslim, is missing the point to religion, at least in my atheist opinion, if that's worth anything... It would be nice if they tried to understand us, but so far, all they've seen is the business end of the killing machine that are the US armed forces, and if they're lucky, economic sanctions, that can be just as deadly. I think that they do understand our foreign policy anyways: Kill 'em all and let God sort it out... I think that's common ground actually...

6. Do you believe President Bush would order a withdrawal from Iraq If the government of Iraq asked us to leave? hehehe, are you serious? He's the decider!! I thought they had asked us to leave... the majority of Iraqi's and American's want us out of there. But we're still there. The U.S. government will continue to do what the U.S. government wants to do.

7. Do you believe the American armed forces are a force for Good or a force for evil in Iraq? I'm not going to fall into the trap of "not supporting the troops." I have deep sympathies for the families that have been torn apart over this illegal war. But, aside from removing one dictator, only to be replaced by, what is the strategy now? Arm the Suni's, so they can take care of their own neighborhoods. The only thing that is going to work over there is to install another strong arm dictator, so what's the point right? The Iraqi people want us out. The government we've installed there is a joke. A total front. No real leadership. A Shia lead central government that is going to let its Sunni constituents starve, or be blown up, and let the Kurd's in the north be slaughtered by Turkey... another one of our allies in terror... oops, I mean in the war on terror. In general, the armed forces are good for one thing: killing. How is that ever a force for good?

8. Finally, of all the Iraqis that have died since the war started, did most of them die at the hands of American Forces or were they killed by Terrorist forces? That is something that you really can't put a finger on. But ask yourself this, how often did you hear about suicide bombings in Iraq before we were there? And the fact that you call people defending their own country terrorists is funny. WE INVADED THEM!! The first Persian Gulf War was in an effort to protect Kuwait. Saddam invaded a neighboring country. So we stepped in. But this time, it was purely an offensive operation, whether it was for oil, or for Cheney to make billions off of the no-bid contracts awarded to re-build the mess we made, or a good training ground for the private militias that have popped up and made millions, or as a launch point or an attack on Iran, or to train CIA agents on how to torture... either way, it was wrong. We aren't there for any "noble" reasons.

Whew. That was fun.

peace out!

February 27, 2008 at 7:29 AM  
Blogger A.P. said...

Now I've got a question for you:
Who Would Jesus Bomb?

February 27, 2008 at 7:33 AM  
Blogger Danian Michael said...


Who would Christ Bomb? Well I believe he would bomb California, maybe D.C. also.

February 27, 2008 at 12:11 PM  
Blogger Danian Michael said...


This might be the calmest response I have ever received from you. Which is a good thing, removing emotions from a debate always takes the debate to a higher level. You might have thought the questions were a means for me finding out about you and where you stand on issues, the truth is, it was mostly for your benefit to gain some insight as to how we conservatives can go to war against a group or country and see nobility in that. Now I may not have been able to convince you to see things my way but I hope you are starting to understand that we conservatives just don’t like going to war just for going to war’s sake. You might think I am misguided, I think you are misguided but I also think your intentions are good. I just don’t think your good intentions if carried out would promote a better America. I hope you would grant that my intentions are good also, as I tried to indicate with my question.

That said, let’s get to work:
To question 1. Indeed President Bush would benefit greatly from control of Iraq oil, so would you, so would I. But I defy you to point to one action taken by this administration to control their oil. We have spent billions in Iraq and lost over thousands of the best people this country has to offer, yet Iraq has not written one check to the United States in Re-payment. You might think our actions are misguided but you cannot impugn our motives, you must not impugn our motives. Incidentally Andy, if a terrorist wanted to do some real damage to this country; they might try to get rid of all of our oil (a hypothetical). Millions would die in a matter of weeks, all of us would be out of a job and you would not be able to provide for your family; I ask you Andy, what is so bad about protecting the flow of oil into this country? What if it were water? Would you forcibly defend our water supplies? Well that was questions 1 and 2 in that we have not received one red cent from Iraq.

I asked you question No. 3 because I wanted you to concede that doing the right thing does not amount to what is the most popular. In the end you are not going to do or believe something because conservatives think you should, you will do what you think is right. This is what I meant when I said, I don’t care what the world thinks about us or our action; we have to stand on our own feet.

With question No.4 I wanted to take your focus of the U.S. if not just for a moment to think about what would justify killing over 3000 people; certainly not a difference in opinion. It seems to me Andy that the terrorist think more highly of the American military than some of you on the left do. They dress up like civilians and hide amongst them because they now that we DO NOT just indiscriminately shoot civilians. Do you understand that we have the fire power to end this war tomorrow but we chose not to. DO you think if Islamic terrorist had our fire power, you and I would be talking like this? There would be a couple of terrorist running around with our heads in their hands right now. Now Andy, given the fact that terrorist dress up like civilians and hide among them to fight us, why would you insinuate that we don’t care about who we kill over there. I have a lot of family in the armed forces and this is not the military they describe to me.

No they have not asked us to leave, they have asked us to stay. The president of Iraq has been to Washington countless times begging our government not to leave. You can look this up on the “.gov” sites. President Bush has said that if they ask us to leave, we will leave. Now you might not believe him but we could hold him to his promise to leave if asked; no one has done so.

Finally, fine, Ok, we invaded them; well then attack us. Why attack innocent Iraqis in markets with bombs laden with ball bearings. These are not good people Andy and at the very least we are protecting innocent Iraqis by standing between them and the terrorist (called them what you will). Thankfully, the tide has turned against the bad guys and this has happened in part because Iraqis are now standing with us.

February 27, 2008 at 1:10 PM  
Blogger Agent of change said...

Great Blog Danian and great conversation. Good points being made on both sides. Nothing more to add you guys have pretty much covered it all.

One question for both you and Andy and really everyone.

What do you think would happen if we leave Iraq today? You know what I think; I think, just out of spite, to make Bush wrong, the insurgents would stand down. That's my take.

February 28, 2008 at 4:35 PM  
Blogger Danian Michael said...

Agent of Change,

The Terror, Anonymous, Sohop, Reality Check... What's with all the fake names? You guys aren't afraid of me are you?

All kidding aside, to Agent of Change, thank you for the compliment. You ask a great question; your answer was even more interesting. Islamic terrorists are so crazy and removed from logical thinking that you may be on to something. Walk away out of hatred for Bush, very interesting indeed.

In my opinion Iraq is too big a prize for the terrorist to walk away from. By their own admission Iraq is the new battle front. They have the fire power and ability to take Iraq tomorrow if we left today, why wouldn't they. When the U.S. left Vietnam the North Vietnamese didn't just go back to the North. They killed over 100,000 innocent civilians and took the country. In my opinion why risk it? It is a huge leap of faith to think the terrorist will act honorably of their own volition.

February 28, 2008 at 6:50 PM  
Blogger A.P. said...

Here's the deal. 9/11, and the majority of Muslim terrorists stem from one thing: the USA's endless and unconditional support of Israel. I thought that was common knowledge. Danian, you asked me to do some homework in a few blogs ago. I think it was one where we got into talking about corporate power. I'm asking you to do some. Watch, with as open a mind as possible, these two films. well, one film, and one speech given. Naomi Wolf, 10 Steps to Fascism. And this one: The Corporation: A documentary about the corporation. If you watch those, I've got a couple others that rocked my world... I'm BEGGING you to watch these. I want you to consider how your political, social, religious views are influenced by the world we live in.

Peace out!!

February 29, 2008 at 9:10 PM  
Blogger Danian Michael said...


I will watch these videos and I'll try to do so with an open mind. But not so open that my brain falls out; a caution to you.

I'll respond shortly.

March 1, 2008 at 11:59 AM  
Blogger Danian Michael said...


I watched these two videos and I must say, they were very painful to watch. Neither of these presentations was in the least bit scholarly and didn’t reveal anything I didn’t already know nor have heard before. There is a saying among philosophers, “we all wear glasses.” You Andy and these presenters on You-Tube have glasses on that have painted on them, GEORGE BUSH IS EVIL AND CAN DO NO GOOD. And so everything you see and experience will be interpreted as such. You have no objectivity Andy (nor do I or anyone for that matter) and so these presenters can mold you very easily. Sorry Andy I just didn’t see it, all their conclusions were circumstantial just completely subjective. When one presenter for example lamented on how corporations are only concerned about the bottom line and another presenter warned us about how a government might put down democracy by creating an internal villain; all the while using the internet, video and audio equipment built by corporations to make his point. You should also know that there is a new book out called, Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg. The book describes how liberalism is the vehicle by which fascism can be born in a society. I further suspect that this woman probably believes 9/11 was an internal job by the Bush administration to create the “internal villain.” A lot of people have asked me to watch videos showing government conspiracies and my new policy is, I am never watching another video recommended by the left, ever again. If you have seen something that you (and I don’t mean you in particular Andy) think might interest me then just give me your interpretation and I will do the same. It never seizes to amaze me that the same people who think such vile things about the government approve of higher taxes and universal healthcare; giving that same government more power.

March 1, 2008 at 4:52 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home