What Barack Obama Should Have Said While Announcing the End of the Iraq War (Rude Version)
by the Rude Pundit (Lee Papa)/ Dec. 15, 2011
President Obama gave a speech at Fort Bragg yesterday to declare the end of the 8.75 year war in Iraq. It was measured and vague. Here’s what he should have said:
“More than 1.5 million Americans have served in Iraq. 1.5 million. Over 30,000 Americans have been wounded, and those are only the wounds that show. Nearly 4,500 Americans made the ultimate sacrifice. To all of them, to all of you, and to your families, I just want to say, ‘We’re sorry.’ I mean, holy shit are we sorry. We can’t say how sorry we are. I could have a couple of hundred thousand prostitutes ready to fuck each and every one of you, and that wouldn’t scratch the surface of how sorry we are. By the way, we do not have those prostitutes because John Boehner refused to fund them.
“I look out there on all of your tired, confused, if relieved faces. Some of you have fond memories of building schools or playgrounds, of happy Iraqi children smiling at you, of people thanking you for ridding the nation of Saddam Hussein. But you’re all wondering, ‘What the fuck was that for?’ And, to be honest, I cannot tell you. I can tell you that it was all a colossal clusterfuck and a waste of time and lives and money, for several reasons.
“First, within the next few years, Iraq is going to descend into chaos, and there is not a goddamned thing we can do about it unless we want to overthrow the government and install someone who is totally our puppet and stay there in large numbers forever. But, c’mon, if these fuckers wanna kill each other, it’s gonna happen, whether it’s Shi’ites from Iran or Sunnis from Syria making the violence roll. People gotta start this shit from within. That’s what we learned this year in places like Tunisia and Libya. And it could still end up with fucking chaos.
“Second, you’re returning to an America that this war, among other things, has serious fucked up. You’re not gonna get jobs. You’re not gonna get the help you need. If you’re on unemployment, we can’t even guarantee that that’ll last. Sure, sure, I can say that we passed the Post-9/11 G.I. Bill, so that you and your families can get the education that allows you to live out your dreams. That includes a national effort to put our veterans to work. We’ve worked with Congress to pass a tax credit so that companies have the incentive to hire vets. And Michelle has worked with the private sector to get commitments to create 100,000 jobs for those who’ve served. But, c’mon. We’ve fucked ourselves with our own dicks. And when push comes to shove, you know those Republican cocksuckers in Congress will cut your benefits so that Johnny Billionaire can afford more cocaine and bigger tits for his wife and daughter.
“Now, I wanna be honest with you. I wanted to leave about 3000 of you there, along with the thousands of mercenaries we’ve hired, to keep the peace and so that these fuckers back here in DC wouldn’t say that I’m wimping out or that I failed. Yeah, I’m talkin’ to you, John McCain. Shut your whore mouth, or you’ll see the backside of my pimp hand. It’s sad but true that the filthy game of politics infected this sore. The RNC probably already has an ad online about what a pussy I am, even if we are leaving an embassy and 15,000 Americans, including a couple of hundred soldiers.
“Some of you may be wondering why we’re not declaring ‘Victory’ today. That’s because there hasn’t been victory. There was never gonna be a victory because there was never a real goal. There has only been shame brought upon the nation and death and destruction brought to the Iraqis. Oh, and purple ink for voting. There was that. When he started the war, President Bush said, clearly, ‘Our nation enters this conflict reluctantly, yet our purpose is sure. The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder.’ That was a miserable lie made by a motherfucker who was trying to act tough. This war was the indulgence of a United States that the previous administration wrecked.
“So I apologize for this war. Yes, I have blood on my hands from my own violence against the world. But not this anymore. We’re exiting Iraq because we never should have been there in the first place. I apologize for this war that was forced on you by George W. Bush and his advisers. The only proper punishment would be to have them all on stage here, all of ’em, Bush, Cheney, Condi, Colin Powell, Rumsfeld, Doug Feith, everyone who ever lied to you about WMDs and Saddam Hussein’s connection to 9/11, everyone who worked to frighten the American public into a savage froth, each and every one of these cunts, Tony Blair, all the leaders in the coerced coalition of the willing, all of the war profiteers who made millions of dollars.
“And then we’d make them drop their pants. And we’d let all of you line up to fuck them in the ass. The women soldiers can use strap-ons or their fists. That’s right: fuck them until they collapse. Fuck them until they can’t breathe. Fuck the mechanical heart right out of Cheney’s despicable mouth. Fuck them for everyone who died, for everyone who’s fucked up, for everyone who can’t sleep without having nightmares. Fuck them for the Jessica Lynch lie and for Pat Tillman. Fuck them with a spider hole and Saddam’s statue and a ‘Mission Accomplished’ banner and yellow cake uranium. Fuck them with IEDs and Abu Ghraib leashes. Fuck them for Halliburton and Blackwater. Fuck them in Fallujah and Mosul and Baghdad. Fuck them with shock. Fuck them with awe. And when they’re done being fucked and their asses are ripped up and they’re on the ground, contemplating what just happened to them, we’ll dump vats of blood on them, the blood of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who were killed because of the madness inflicted on two nations, on the world. And then we’ll give ’em to the Hague.
“That’s what we should do. But we won’t. Because that’d be divisive. And Lord knows I wouldn’t want to be divisive.”
thebigpicturereport ™ 
Arlen Grossman, I did not vote for Barack Obama, however, if the military base at Guantanamo Bay had been closed down, as with all other military bases around the world, we would be better off. Our policies from the standpoint of foreign matters qualify as being a shit show in nature.
it’s scary how much we agree on, Jeffrey. But I’m pleased about it.
Arlen Grossman, I know that what I said regarding letting the Middle East implode seems harsh in some ways. However, if we had not been attacked at all, we would have no reason to be over there. As I said, if Saddam Hussein had a legitimate death wish, we would have granted him that if he attacked us directly. If you are familiar with Star Trek by Gene Roddenberry , there was reference to a Prime Directive, a policy where they were not allowed to interfere in the internal affairs of other cultures. Yes, Star Trek is fictional, however, the principle is applicable in this context. You seem to me to be more reasonable with how you express your opinions than many other people that I have conversed with in blogs who have views that are similar to your own.
“Arlen Grossman, Leftist types want to put people on welfare, not back to work. Then they want to bitch about the lack of people in the workforce. All they want to do is take things from successful people and subsidize people who live in poverty.”
Uh oh, Jeffrey. You’re going back to unproven generalizations and stereotypes. Why do you do that? I could just as easily say righties want to keep poor people down, and subsidize rich people. That’s about the equivalent to what you are saying.
Arlen Grossman, I do advocate reductions on spending and taxing at the federal level. However, I would exempt the 1st $50, 000.00 from federal income tax. A family of 4 that would earn $58, 000.00 a year or more would pay 25%. So, a lot of families would be removed from the tax rolls. I would also eliminate the payroll tax. That would be replaced by a simple flat business tax of 15%.
I understand, Jeffrey. It has some good points. As I mentioned before, I would like to see a higher tax rate on the very wealthy. And I don’t mind the government spending (investing) and taxing more (except for the military) in order to solve problems (infrastructure for example). I know your priorities are different than mine, but that is to be expected.
Arlen Grossman, unless a rich person says, “The government is not taxing me enough,” all calls for graduated tax rates on the rich otherwise are a result of envy and entitlement among people who are not rich. Unless we rely on the Dictionary’s definition of the word fair, any other use of that particular word is a smoke screen to foster division. You also never directly answered my question when I asked you if you or a government official was better at spending your money.
“Fair” is not a smoke screen. Most people would probably agree with me that a CEO shouldn’t be making 270 times what the average worker in his company makes and that that is unfair.. And you may have missed my earlier post in which I mentioned that the government is better at spending some of my money, for instance in paying for infrastructure, public safety, the military and other expenses of the common.
Jeffrey, the government (school district) paid my salary. What is your point? That we should be grateful that there are rich people who will hire us? I understand your point. I just think there should be a limit to how wealthy people can get. Based on current conditions in the economy that system (capitalism) is flawed because the conditions for working people have been pretty much stagnant for several decades. Most super-wealthy people don’t give a damn about the average worker.
Arlen Grossman, even if we had a top marginal tax rate of 91%, nobody would pay it because of all of the deductions. I know what a marginal tax rate is, by the way, however, why should someone pay a higher rate if they sat on the money and a lower rate if they invested that money in businesses? From a flat tax standpoint, I think the top marginal tax rate should be 15%. Capital Gains would be taxed on a sliding scale, between 15%-25%. High tax rates may lead people to reinvest money back into their businesses or it may drive that money overseas. Now, a person who reinvests their money back into their businesses may pay little or no taxes on that money. Having said that, people who don’t make a lot of money and yet beef about the fact that someone makes more than they do have a sense of entitlement.
Let me clarify, Jeffrey. Speaking for myself, I only dislike that some people make an obscene amount of money (often as a result of favorable tax laws) because too many others don’t have enough to live on and that makes trouble for society. You may ask what is an obscene amount of money: The Koch brothers $60 billion and using it to destroy the environment and influence elections, and the Walton heirs, who have more money than the bottom 40% of all Americans. Meanwhile, millions live in poverty and struggle for food and shelter. That to me is obscene. Do you think it’s good for our society?
My mistake. David Koch has $60 billion. The brothers together have $100 billion.
Arlen Grossman, to answer your question: I think it is wrong for some people to get rich on the backs of other people. However, if someone got rich by producing products that people wanted, I see no issue with that. Bill Gates created Microsoft. Henry Ford (when he was still among the living) created the Ford motor company. These are 2 of many examples of people who got rich by producing things that people wanted. Those college age Leftist types when they leave produce nothing but Left wing propaganda.
That’s a rather harsh stereotype, Jeffrey, and beneath you. Many leftist types on campus go on to teach, create, serve, etc. and do not deserve the sweeping generalization you accuse them of.
Arlen Grossman, Leftist types want to put people on welfare, not back to work. Then they want to bitch about the lack of people in the workforce. All they want to do is take things from successful people and subsidize people who live in poverty.
Re: the Middle East. Another issue that we find common ground, Jeffrey.I suspect our disagreements will be on economic issues.
Arlen Grossman, I know that you advocate taxes being progressive. With the various federal agencies and programs, that is probably part of the reason we have a graduated tax structure in the United States. Assuming that we got rid of most or all of these programs and agencies, would you be fine with a flat tax in that scenario?
Jeffrey, there is value in not having a small portion of the taxpayer base with obscene wealth while others in our country are homeless and hungry. That is the basis of progressive taxation and what I favor. A flat tax would only widen the disparity, in my opinion.
Arlen Grossman, that claim is not even remotely accurate. Even with a progressive tax structure, we will still have a 1%. Do you deny that? Can you logically refute the claim that money is better spent by people in the private sector than it is by politicians in Washington D.C.? Poverty is a problem. However, poverty is a result of Left wing policies.
First, Jeffrey, I don’t mind having a 1%, it’s the amount they have that is problematical. Why should someone have more money than he can possibly use, and millions of others suffer with poverty? I think there are areas in which government can use money more efficiently than people in the private sector. Medicare is the first thing that comes to mind.
Millions are saved from poverty while rich people have fabulous dinner parties. And I would maintain that left wing policies usually help poor people, while right-wing policies lead to poverty. The economic arena is where we have sharp differences.
Arlen Grossman, when you were in your working life, who wrote your pay checks-a poor person or a wealthy business owner?
Arlen Grossman, I honestly think we should never have been involved in the Middle East. Just let it implode and let them kill each other.
At last, something we agree on!
Arlen Grossman, I am glad that we agree on this. The Middle East conflict should never have involved Iraq being invaded. You said that this is something we agree on. What part? The not having been involved there or my statement that the region should implode and they should be allowed to kill each other?
I agree we should not have gotten involved in Iraq, or anywhere else in the Middle East, Jeffrey. I don’t know that I want the region to implode and for them to kill each other. I would prefer they get along. They are human beings, after all. But ultimately it’s up to them what they want to do.
Arlen Grossman, if we (the U.S.) had not been attacked at all, we would never have needed to be in the Middle East. When I said let it implode and let them kill each other, the reason for such a statement was because if it had worked out that way, we would not have needed to be over there at all. Yes, I would want them to get along, however, we (the U.S.) should have been minding our own damn business instead of acting like we have a non-existent right to police the world.
You write very intelligently; but, why all the cuss words? It’s not necessary!
Sorry for the profanity, Melody. But that was written by The Rude Pundit, so the off-color words come with the territory. It’s not my style of writing. But I still wanted to post this, in spite of the strong language, because the message is so strong and so right and nothing like you would hear in the mainstream media, which tries so hard to put a good face on this wasteful, unnecessary, illegal war. Thank you for your interest and feedback.