‘We have no interest in occupying your country’

That’s probably what set the wingnuts off:

The people of Afghanistan have endured violence for decades. They have
been confronted with occupation – by the Soviet Union, and then by
foreign al Qaeda fighters who used Afghan land for their own purposes.
So tonight, I want the Afghan people to understand – America seeks an
end to this era of war and suffering. We have no interest in occupying
your country. We will support efforts by the Afghan government to open
the door to those Taliban who abandon violence and respect the human
rights of their fellow citizens. And we will seek a partnership with
Afghanistan grounded in mutual respect – to isolate those who destroy;
to strengthen those who build; to hasten the day when our troops will
leave; and to forge a lasting friendship in which America is your
partner, and never your patron.

John wants to know why they’re pissed, and this is why, and this is all it’s about:


Once they put their flags down and went back to work, they weredone, man. They have the story they need to tell in their heads, and it’s about how Bush saved the people of Afghanistan with his freedom missiles. They didn’t want to have to do the messy clean-up. They never do. These are the dicks that trash the party and then slither out and leave you to clean up all the broken glass and vomit. Then the next day they’re all, “Hey, bro, when we doin’ that again, huh? Bitchin'” and then make some comment about a co-worker’s tits.


8 thoughts on “‘We have no interest in occupying your country’

  1. That, and the fact that most of them can only get a hard-on when somebody else is blowing up brown people for them. If that ends, whatever will they do to occupy those lonely hours at night in their parents’ basements?

  2. So in other words, A., the wingers hate being reminded that they’re grown-ups, with responsibilities, and that actions have consequences?
    Sounds about right. Most of the wingeres I know are arrested at about the 14-year-old level.

  3. Nah. They wanted revenge, is all. When Bush blew that they lost interest.
    And now some of them are bright enough to see that Obama just pooped all over his Presidency, and they’re going to throw him an anchor.

  4. Remember a few years back when there was a rumor floating around that the plan was for Bush to screw things up so bad, the repubs to loose the 2008 election, and leave the incoming dem stuck in an inescapable quagmire?
    Not so funny now.
    Not to mention, remember how Kerry said “Dead or alive” Bush had the possibility to take out Bin Laden and his top aides in December 2001 in Tora Bora. The repub response was “Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire”. Now a Congressional inquiry found that we had excellent intelligence on Bin Laden’s location in December 2001.

  5. MapleStreet, the bin Laden family and the Bush family are close business partners. There has never been the slightest chance that anything bad was going to happen to Osama bin Laden. Bush needed a war, wanted a war so he could be a “war president”, and this was a good opportunity. When this “war” proved to be a bad mistake, as it always was, Bush switched his war scene to Iraq, hoping to gain a huge triumph, quickly, that would make him a great “war president”. Add to that the fact that all of the advisers he was willing to listen to were with him on this primarily to make money for their business friends, and that resulted in being where we are today.
    In a just world Bush would face trial and execution, but this isn’t such a world. Obama had no acceptable choice available to him for Afghanistan, so he should have chosen the option that would harm our country the least. He didn’t do that. He will look back on this as his biggest mistake.

  6. Quite agreed, Hoppy. As pointed out in Fahrenheit 9/11, one of the first actions after 9/11 was to give the Saudis clearance to fly home.

  7. Well, it probably needs to be said. If we’re not interested in occupying Afghanistan, why are we then doing even more of just that, and for years to come, and after doing it for eight years already?
    And, it’s rhetorical sleight-of-hand to say that the problem is that the Afghans have endured three decades of war because the Soviets invaded and then al-Qaeda took over for their own purposes–when we’re the ones who lured the Russians into “their own Vietnam,” and we’re the ones who spent billions on proxy fighters who, incidentally, became the core of al-Qaeda, and we’re the ones whose CIA vetoed a coalition government which might have ameliorated the continuing bloodshed.
    That “the Russians and al-Qaeda did it” is a really slick gloss of actual history…

Comments are closed.