Beware of the War Zombies among us! There may be one in your neighborhood, or maybe even in your own home. They’re certainly still in charge at the White House, and they’re even showing up every day in the media (and in the real media, too, not just Fox News’ right-wing echo chamber).
Who are the War Zombies? We ran a story about them in July 2005. Titled “28 Months Later.” The article used the premise of the film 28 Days Later — a lethal virus infects the world, turning people into zombies — to show that more than two years after Bush’s invasion of Iraq, war supporters were still infected with the war virus and were unable to admit that Dubya’s “mission accomplished” had become a disastrous, epic-scale mess.
Fewer WZs roam the streets nowadays, with public support of the war sinking to the kind of approval numbers enjoyed by lung cancer, but the diehards aren’t going away. In fact, we caught a glimpse of the new, improved Diehard War Zombies (DWZs) last week, after the House and Senate passed similar funding bills for Iraq that included a deadline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops.
The No. 1 DWZ, Dick Cheney, seems to have disappeared just as the media was finally catching on to the fact that he’s deranged. But Cheney’s favorite Junior Zombie, the president of the United States, spoke out last week against Congress’ actions in the strongest, “boogeyman’s gonna get you” terms.
“If we cannot muster the resolve to defeat this evil in Iraq,” read Dubya, “America will have lost its moral purpose in the world, and we will endanger our citizens. If we leave Iraq before the job is done, the enemy will follow us here.”
Never mind that the rest of the world now sees the United States itself as “this evil in Iraq,” nor that whatever moral purpose we had in the world has been destroyed by the Bush administration’s record of prisoner renditions and torture, nor that the Madrid and London bombings showed that the war in Iraq actually makes it more likely that we’ll be attacked here again. And never mind that by voting to set a deadline for leaving Iraq, Congress, for once, has heeded the voice of the American people. Dubya, contemptuous of the people and unable to admit he made a terrible mistake, clings to his original reasons for attacking Iraq as if they were a talisman — the sure sign of a DWZ.
Locally, we were treated to a return performance by former Observer community columnist — and DWZ — Cathy Floyd, who reminded everyone again that she has two sons in the military, including one in Iraq. “Will America turn its back on my sons?” she asked in last week’s op-ed.
If I had a child in Iraq, I’d be deeply concerned about it, too, and my worldview would probably revolve around the repercussions of war policy, as does Ms. Floyd’s. But I think I’d be mad at someone besides the people who are trying to bring my kid home. Only a DWZ could believe, at this stage, that it’s anyone but Bush who is risking her boys’ lives “for nothing.”
Except for getting rid of Saddam Hussein, everything Bush and Co. said they wanted to do in Iraq — with goals that have changed almost monthly as the situation deteriorated — has gone down the tubes. What’s left there for American soldiers to die for? Precisely the “nothing” Ms. Floyd speaks of — which is why we need to get them home ASAP, and quit throwing more and more of our young into the Iraq fire.
The way the White House and its loyalists in Hannity/Limbaugh Fantasyland spin discussions about the war, there’s a debate going on in the United States between those who insist on “victory” and those who seek to “lose.” These DWZs, of course, never make it clear what kind of “victory” they think can possibly be salvaged, now that we’re four years and 3,200 dead U.S. soldiers into the quagmire. They can’t, because there is no military victory available to us in Iraq, no matter what Bush does. What would be nice is a victory for sanity — fighting terrorists with strong investigative and intelligence work, and international police cooperation, rather than bombing people who had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. As for wanting to lose, the only thing critics of the war want America to lose is the outdated notion that we can stomp around the world, telling everyone else what to do and ignoring the consequences of our actions — consequences that include the creation of more and more terrorists.
But the Diehard War Zombies refuse to acknowledge that the president, their war, their rationales and their view of America’s role in the world are history, kaput, finished, defunct, D-E-A-D. The DWZ’S still roam the streets and airwaves, blathering on, talking about “victory” and “freedom in the Middle East,” as if everything there has worked out just the way they said it would.
This article appears in Apr 4-10, 2007.
Brillantly articulate. well stated!
You make some decent points, but forget that there’s always 2 sides to a story. I’ll make one point to illustrate…you refer to the Bush administrations “record of prisoner renditions and torture” and don’t say a word about the brutal beheadings the are brazenly put online for all to see!!! Where’s your self righteous anger for those victims?
didn’t think we should go there to begin with, so i’m not a war supporter. However, we are nothing like the evil that exists over there. and now that we’ve shown are tails and they know we are about to run away from their victory..get ready for $10/gal gas and an economy that will not support fruit bearing folks like yourself in the workplace. they won’t have to come over here and terrorize..they just pull the plug on the oil transport and we’ll melt ourselves down. Its not about human rights..never has been..else we wouldn’t have placed Sadam in power to begin with..and make no mistake that we aren’t originally responsible for creating a counter weight to “stabalize” the area. If you think Iran won’t be barbarous in their actions towards us and those we leave behind..then you are an idiot.
The words of the zombie:
“It’s time the self-appointed strategists on Capitol Hill understood a very simple concept: You cannot win a war if you tell the enemy when you’re going to quit.”
– Vice President Dick Cheney, commenting on the Democrat’s spending bills and the proposed measure to cut funding to the troops in Iraq.
It must be a horrible thing to be beholden to a psychotically stupid president as the ham bone in the White House’s boiling soup pot. Dick Cheney isn’t making any new friends – traditionally he’s always been a loner anyway – but he’s chalked up a string of one-line doozies that this writer can only assume are meant to make the president look less stupid – a neat trick, even if it is impossible.
But this classic – this is a profoundly dumb comment on the Veep’s part, and here’s my response:
Dear Dick,
1 – These “strategists” aren’t self appointed – they were elected, and it’s time the also-elected Veep kept in the White House basement understood a very simple concept: they were elected because the brain-dead, psychotic, blithering moron of a President you work for is resoundingly hated by most Americans, for very good reasons.
2 – They aren’t strategizing, at least not in the context of war efforts in Iraq. They’re politicizing, which is what politicians (like you) do. This spending bill, Mr. Vice President, is the congressional equivalent of a bitch-slap. It’s saying something. Want to guess what it’s saying? Think policy: G-E-T O-U-T O-F I-R-A-Q.
3 – Regarding the “…tell the enemy when you’re going to quit.” First – kindly identify the “enemy”, will you? Iraq? Insurgents? You mean, Sunni insurgents or Shi’ite? Both? Neither? Muslims? Weapons of Invisible Destruction? The boogeyman? Brittney Spears’ divorce lawyer? There are bad guys there, sure, but who the hell are they? See #4, below, to find out. Next, your idiotic boss already gave his exit timeline, didn’t he? Congress wants it over in 2008 instead of 2010…so who told the unknown “enemy” we’re quitting – Bush or Pelosi? Note: we aren’t going to quit, Dick. We’re just ceasing wartime ops. There will be a force in place after that, and the Dems agree that’s needed, remember?
4 – Most importantly: what the hell do you mean by “win?” Here we go again: it’s time you understood a very simple concept: this “war” cannot be “won”, ever. Slowly, now, work with me: Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims in Iraq are currently at each other’s throats. The American attempt to “protect” Iraq invited and continues to inflame this condition. In order to “secure” Iraq, we will have to a.) eliminate all Sunnis or b.) eliminate all Shi’ites or c.) eliminate Islam. It’s a religious issue, Dick. Iraq is in the Middle East. This is a Jihad. Hello? Get it?
Your retarded boss said the object of continued hostilities is to “…provide some breathing space for this democratically elected government to succeed.” Mighty hard to breathe under a river of blood, and given the profoundly escalating terror activities there (despite John McCain’s unbelievably stupid comment that things are “safer” in Iraq” this is hardly a functional space for the democratically elected (read: US positioned and sponsored) government succeed. Come to think of it…what does the Psycho mean by “succeed?”
In the end, there are so few simple concepts in the world – but here’s some I can recommend for consideration: Withdraw from Iraq. Impeach the President and the Vice President. Ensure Hillary Clinton does NOT take office in the White House. If these three things happen, this self-appointed strategist thinks the world will be a better place.
Most people refuse to believe that we are at war with Islam. At least we are focusing the battle overseas and not here. We look at the Iraq war through Western eyes and beliefs that are rose colored on our beliefs of justice and human rights. Ask India, Israel, Serbia, the former republics of the Soviet Union and about every country in Africa how you maintain a peaceful coexistence with Islam. The fact is there is no moderate Islam. Moderate Islam willing supports and under writes the checks for radical Islam so they are in fact one and the same. Wake up America before its too late.