Okay, so much for non-partisanship. I'm writing this mainly because I'm tired of every liberal on this dorm who wants to rehash their favorite things: "Bush is Evil! Bush is in league with Big Oil! Bush IS Big Oil! Bush is crazy! Bush is dumb!" yadda yadda ad nauseam. But I'm also doing it merely because it's time I got to espouse my own views without someone interrupting me, usually angrily and rudely, before I get a chance to say anything:
Me: But, if Bush were really...
Person: NO! HE INVADED ONLY FOR THE OIL AND HE LIED ABOUT THE WMD's!
Me: Tell that the Kurds who...
Person: NO! YOU'RE WRONG! EVIL, EVIL, REPUBLICAN!
Me: (sigh) So how about them Cubs?
Anyways...I figured it was my turn.
Bush did NOT, repeat, NOT, invade Iraq for the oil. First of all, Iraq produces a very small quantity of oil per year--it isn't exactly the top prize for a petroleum-hungry nation. Anyway, we could have gotten the oil with no loss of life and the rather uncertain bonus of keeping our ties with the UN secure merely by lifting the sanctions. Saddam was ready to trade--even with the smuggling across various Arab borders, you know he could have used the money for a new fleet of Mercedes for Uday and a couple more riverfront palaces.
And, considering another popular opinion is that Bush is in league with Big Oil, wouldn't his invasion of Iraq and the supposed oil gains therein hurt his connections? Foreign oil on the market would drive down the prices, thus hurting Amercan companies. It's one or the other, but why choose when you have two equally great epithets? Ah, diversity!
What some people, including my roommate, need to learn is not a change in their ideology but in their presentation. It is useless, tiring, and, frankly, depressing to talk to someone who uses vulgarity, obscenities, and resorts to name-calling in a "political debate."
This is the main reason I keep silent on issues--not because of my views, but because of the anger, hostility, and cynicism with which I am recieved. Over the years, I learned when to keep my mouth shut--and it's serving me well now.
Funny...were I a liberal, I could sue for a violation of my First Amendment rights.
Me: But, if Bush were really...
Person: NO! HE INVADED ONLY FOR THE OIL AND HE LIED ABOUT THE WMD's!
Me: Tell that the Kurds who...
Person: NO! YOU'RE WRONG! EVIL, EVIL, REPUBLICAN!
Me: (sigh) So how about them Cubs?
Anyways...I figured it was my turn.
Bush did NOT, repeat, NOT, invade Iraq for the oil. First of all, Iraq produces a very small quantity of oil per year--it isn't exactly the top prize for a petroleum-hungry nation. Anyway, we could have gotten the oil with no loss of life and the rather uncertain bonus of keeping our ties with the UN secure merely by lifting the sanctions. Saddam was ready to trade--even with the smuggling across various Arab borders, you know he could have used the money for a new fleet of Mercedes for Uday and a couple more riverfront palaces.
And, considering another popular opinion is that Bush is in league with Big Oil, wouldn't his invasion of Iraq and the supposed oil gains therein hurt his connections? Foreign oil on the market would drive down the prices, thus hurting Amercan companies. It's one or the other, but why choose when you have two equally great epithets? Ah, diversity!
What some people, including my roommate, need to learn is not a change in their ideology but in their presentation. It is useless, tiring, and, frankly, depressing to talk to someone who uses vulgarity, obscenities, and resorts to name-calling in a "political debate."
This is the main reason I keep silent on issues--not because of my views, but because of the anger, hostility, and cynicism with which I am recieved. Over the years, I learned when to keep my mouth shut--and it's serving me well now.
Funny...were I a liberal, I could sue for a violation of my First Amendment rights.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home