It's Intellectually Lazy To Blame bushco For Every Evil

[cali]

that takes place in the world. Yeah, it's tempting. I hate the bastards too, but there are other people out there doing bad things. I blame bush for the civil war in Iraq- it may well not have happened if we hadn't invaded, but claiming that bushco blew up the Mosque of the Golden Dome to advance civil war is a lame argument. Full blown civil war doesn't help Halliburton or bush. You can't make big bucks if you can't produce oil. It doesn't help bush personally or the repubs as a party. Americans are increasingly supportive of a pull out. How does any of this benefit bushco?

[xiamiam]

1. halliburton will rebuild the infrastructure and so will carlyle,.nt

[cali]

7. Can't be done in the environment of a full blown civil war n/t

[Benhurst]

12. Who says they have to do the work, prepare the meals,

whatever? They just need a contract and a big fat check from the suckers (taxpayers) back home.

[xiamiam]

16. doesnt matter, halliburton got contracts to rebuid after katrina and

hasnt started that work either...doesnt even matter if they ever do it...what matters is that they get the contracts

[havocmom]

2. bushco is just the local network for most of the corporate takeovers

of national governments. THAT is the real root of all evil.

[Norquist Nemesis]

3. I blame Reagan.

He's at the root of the whole mess down the path of this country's crumbling.

[FSogol]

19. You are 100% correct. n/t

[BlueEyedSon]

4. They screwed up from their own hubris. Plus long-term neocon plans

required that they make the Iraq force as small as possible, so there would be enough of the army left for a second front (and a draft would make their policies unpalatable to the public).

You also have a culture of criminal corruption & cronyism from the top down, so money that flowed into Iraq for security and reconstruction was basically stolen.


OOPS!

[Burma Jones]

5. Watch the Movie "Network"

It hit the nail on the head

[cali]

8. I've seen Network

I prefer reading history.

[Just Me]

6. The PNACers hidden agenda is permanent U.S. military presence,...

,...in Iraq. It is intellectually consistent to be open to the possibility that the PNACers may have backed/sponsored/caused what any rational person KNOWS would promote further civil unrest: bombing a cherished religious site. Moreover, this cabal HAVE IN THE PAST been associated with black ops involving intentional disruption of civil order.

So, I reject your claim that those who believe this cabal MAY have been involved in the bombing are being intellectually lazy.

That's my position and I'm sticking to it. }(

[cali]

11. Stick away

PNAC is crumbling. And when you make specific claims such as, " Moreover, this cabal HAVE IN THE PAST been associated with black ops involving intentional disruption of civil order." , please provide cites from reputable sources.

P.S. Do you think skull&bones was involved too?

[Just Me]

18. Read up on Haiti, Venezuala, Cuba and, oh yes, Iran/Contra.

:eyes: among many others. For pete's sake!

And, WTF does skull & bones have to do with any of this? Why would you raise that red herring?

Moreover, do you deny that the PNACers aim for permanent military presence in Iraq? What evidence do you have to offer that they have changed course on that plan? Have the PNACers' actions demonstrated that they are no longer on their profiteering war march to "deliver freedom and democracy" to the M.E.? I have seen nothing nothing which proves to me that these freaks of nature intend to deviate from their golden fantasy which guarantees their economic future.

[meegbear]

9. I have yet to blame him when I get diarrhea ....

let's watch that broad brush, shall we.

[Atman]

10. "BushCo" is just a broad term for the corporatocracy

The BFEE -- Bush Family Evil Empire -- is who we refer to when we need to narrow down the focus to actual members of the Kennebunkport and New Haven tribes, plus whatever straggler cousins can be called upon to do some dirty work, or call some early vote predictions for Fox News.

BushCo is more broad-reaching, encompassing Halliburton and even perhaps Diebold and Fox News, certainly Carlyle and any number of defense industry players. "BushCo" can include subsidiaries, either wholly owned or merely franchises.

Free your mind...blame everything on BushCo! You'd know they'd do it to you if you were president.

[danalytical]

15. Hey I love New Haven

But I understand what you mean.

OTOH, I agree with the poster, civil war is not beneficial to the Bushco at this point. Civil Unrest "maybe", more likely Bushco wanted an easy target to topple and distract America while sneaking into another term. This has added benefits for them, oil, contracts, a temporary bounce in the economy, permament military bases in the middle of the Arab world, and of course fear. All of it is tied together, but much of it has unraveled, this latest development is further proof of that.

[bluestateguy]

13. I disagree with you in the case of this example, your point is correct

and whenever I bring that up I get attacked by the "Soft on Bush" police here at DU.

There are also other dictators in the world too that deserve our vitriol.

[lonestarnot]

26. My preference is to let the bastid have it!

[Warren Stupidity]

14. Adding us into the list of possible suspects is not 'blaming'.

Cripes. This is only about the 37th time this false accusation has been raised. I haven't seen one post that claims that, categorically the Bush Cabal is to blame. You don't know who blew up the Golden Dome, nor do I. It is entirely legitimate to ask 'who benefits?'. One of the many possibilities is 'we benefit'.

Your dismissal of 'we might benefit' based on "You can't make big bucks if you can't produce oil" is a possible case against 'we might benefit', but it is not overwhelming. For example, Halliburton and the rest of the military/security cartel benefit mightily from endless war. Where do you suppose all of those 100's of billions we have been pouring into Iraq are going? To the Iraqis?

Why would we not want permanent instability in Iraq? Our alleged experiment in freedom'n'moxy has resulted in a nascent Iraqi Shiite Theocracy aligned with Iran. Big oops department. Why would we want that to stabilize?

"Americans are increasingly supportive of a pull out. How does any of this benefit bushco?"

They sneer at public opinion. They believe, and perhaps rightly so, that their control over the mass media and their ability to manipulate election results allows them to do pretty much whatever they want. If the public is opposed to endless war today, that can easily be fixed before the next election, and all they need to do is get the votes close enough for the fraud factor to kick in. It is not like they are concerned that we are going to rise up and revolt.

[froshty1960]

17. You Can Make Even Bigger Bucks Not Producing Oil

Look at what happened after Katrina and Rita. Claim an oil shortage/closed refineries and the sheep will happily pay more than $3.25 a gallon to fill their SUVs. The record profits that the oil companies made in 2005 were caused by shortages and not the free-flow of oil. Just sayin' ;-)

[RazzleDazzle]

20. Quick! Cover up! Your naivete is showing.

Others have answered pointing you in the right directions, so I won't repeat their messages. Sufficeth it to say there are MANY reasons why permanent war in the M.E. is attractive to certain factions.

PNAC isn't exactly crumbling (yet?), so don't go banking on that.

And finally, statistically speaking, you would do very well to pretty much blame Bush&Co. for everything UNTIL evidence to the contrary crops up.

[cali]

21. I've said it in other threads,

I'll repost it again:\

bush is a meglomaniacal simpleton with delusions of grandeur who's obsessed with his presidential legacy. He had a quasi messianic vision that by invading Iraq he could remake the mideast in his own delusional version of democracy. Sure that included control of oil and goodies for cronies, but I'd argue that the overarching sensibility is one of a man who wants to be seen as a transformative world leader.
(BTW, I think delusions of the sort that bush harbors are far more powerful than mere greed and corruption)
Now tell me, 1) why my analysis isn't plausible and 2) How said analysis is naive.

[Warren Stupidity]

23. you are assuming that bush is in charge.

That is both wrong and naive. Junior has never been anything other than a front, a stuffed shirt paid to sit at a desk. He is junior: daddy's boy, the bosses son, put in nominal charge of this that or the other for the texas oil mafia and the neocon cabal.

[cali]

24. Actually, bush is not nearly as stupid

as we'd like to think he is, and he's monumentally egotistical, so yes I think he's in charge; prone to manipulation for sure, but able to exercise power and adament about doing just that. I know two people who knew him when he was young, one went to Andover with him and another knew him, less well, at Yale. Neither of them think he's without an inate kind of smarts. Sorry if that doesn't fit your template. I almost hate to cop to this, but I grew up in the same world that bush did. The whole mythology that takes certain truths and fabricates the scenario folks like you buy into, is largely just that-
a myth. The bottom line is that you produce neither sound reasoning or credible evidence.

[Warren Stupidity]

27. Stupid? Where did I say stupid?

You've invented an argument for me that I did not make. He might be a moron or not, he certainly talks like an idiot, but what I said was he is not in charge, and that has nothing to do with his intelligence or lack thereof.

"The bottom line is that you produce neither sound reasoning or credible evidence."

Neither of us have actual evidence to present here: we have theories about what is the correct framing of our reality. In terms of who runs the Bush administration, hardly anybody thinks Bush does. However argument ad populum is a fallacy, so lets put it in a slightly different perspective. When was the last time a vice president played such a prominent role in an administration?

[Rocknrule]

22. It's intellectually lazy to blame Clinton for everything too

which is why Repubs do it all the time

[cali]

25. LOL, coin: side 1, coin: side 2 n/t

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

28. I don't blame them for everything I just blame them for the shit that

they're responsible for.

[bigtree]

29. yeah let's all be rational and play nice

while they lie to us and roll us every way they can. How the hell do you know what is truth from this administration? How can you argue that any of theior moves have been rational or logical. Yet you try to dismiss suspicions by applying rationality and logic to this duplicitous administration.

[cali]

30. Rational, yes. Nice, no.

I'm not advocating rolling over or playing nice. I said nothing that could be considered remotely sallutary. Yes they lie, and they start terrible wars. The list of admin malfeasance is long and awful.
I do try and discern motives, though. Don't we all?

[lectrobyte]

31. A civil war provides a reason for us to maintain bases

in the region. They aren't concerned about oil production at this time, or it would be happening. It's more about control of the region and advancing the neocon agenda. Not to mention all the other benefits... Did you notice the trillion dollars pumped into Halliburton and other assorted companies?

How do you feel about the 2,287 dead American soldiers? I blame that on George. And I wonder what this straw man "every evil" is that you are referring to. I don't see anyone blaming * for every evil in the world, but it would take a lot to convince me that the last 3 years of Iraq aren't on his bloody hands.