Log in

No account? Create an account

he's still around?

Nausea inducing: Rush Limbaugh wants the US to attack Iraq on September 11</a>.


"[The president and Congress] are so worried about how our view is from the rest of the world, or the United Nations – forget that. They're not gonna stand shoulder to shoulder and back to back with us in this war anymore."

Yes, the world will not back us. And with good reason.

*Sigh*. Sadam Hussein is a pretty terrible person. I read an article in the New Yorker several months ago about his treatment on the Kurds. How, in the early 90s or late 80s (I forget now and the New Yorker is such a pill and doesn't archive its articles) the Iraqi government attacked and killed thousands and thousands of Kurds in what seemed to them to be a scientific experiment to discover the precise effects of the biological weapons they were producing.
It made me want to cry.

But this is not the answer.
Oh, I agree about Sadam being a terrible person who mistreats his people. I just don't buy this as the excuse for going to war now. Maybe it is a good reason, but I don't think that we're terribly good about going into horrible situations and making them better. I feel like we left the Kurds and other anti-Sadam people out to dry in the last war and am just not convinced that a president opposed to "nation-building" would do any better this time.

It just seems like anti-terror has been a good excuse for the present administration to do a lot of things it couldn't have done otherwise.

(It is upsetting that the New Yorker isn't well archived or even available in full text databases like ProQuest.)
Absolutely. It's really bizarre to me that Bush is linking Al Qaeda and Sadam so strongly, and raging against Sadam for terrorism. Sadam Hussein is a bad person, but from what I can gather the only terror he sponsors is against his own people and the Kurds. In all honesty, since when has the US really cared about a leader enacting genocide against their own people, unless it somehow upset our interests (or there was so much outcry in the rest of the world that we were compelled to do something)? Pretty much never, that I'm aware of.
This is clearly an excuse to topple a leader who offends our interests. We've already got Turkey desperately courting our favor (they are the biggest recipient of IMF money). If the US got "control" over the government of Iraq, we would really have a power base in the Middle East.

Perhaps I should start archiving the New Yorker? I really don't ever throw them away, so now all I need is a database and a storage facility. Hrm...
Sadam Hussein may also sponsor some terror against Israel (or am I mixing up the martyr payments with Saudi Arabia?), but you're right. If we were to go after everyone who has hindered the hunt for Al Qaeda, we'd need to go after Musharraf who backed out of commitments to track Osama bin Laden after the military coup.

The argument about liberating the people of Iraq sounds similar to Bush's assertion that the attacks on Afghanistan were to liberate its women from the Taliban.


I think the database for the New Yorker exists; so the storage and retrieval system may be the biggest obstacle.
So, we're clear on this:
Sadam Hussein = bad.
US Government = stupid.

Now, on to more important things.
This New Yorker database, where does it exist? Because what I generally do is just flip through what I have lying around. Are you talking UW library style? All I can really remember is the subject, never the author or the actual article title.

And btw: do you read Talk of the Town? Hendrik Hertzberg (sp?) is my favorite! He wrote that great piece about the book about the constitution a few weeks ago.

Oh Josh, you need to subscribe!
The database of which I speak is ProQuest Direct (a.k.a. Reference Library Complete). It usually finds citations for the New Yorker, but doesn't contain full-text. I fear the day that I'm not associated with an institution with subscriptions to lots of databses.

As for the New Yorker subscription: I just realized that I've been doing the math in my head incorrectly, but I want to wait until I move to a new apartment to subscribe.
Yay! Then we can be those assholes who sit around in social situations and discuss New Yorker articles, alienating everyone else.