It seems the wars are winding down; in fact, the first one
– that would be Afghanistan – is apparently going so smoothly
that we go for weeks without hearing a single thing about it,
although as I recall we do have thousands of troops there doing
whatever it is that, as I say, we don’t hear about.
It seems the wars are winding down; in fact, the first one – that would be Afghanistan – is apparently going so smoothly that we go for weeks without hearing a single thing about it, although as I recall we do have thousands of troops there doing whatever it is that, as I say, we don’t hear about. But the second one also is just about to get to the point where the indigenous population finally throws flowers in our path and shows us the love and adulation we’ve been promised. Time to move on. Next batter up.
This of course, is a no-brainer: In the name of the Bush Doctrine, fiscal responsibility, and the maintenance of our fine reputation among the nations of the world it is absolutely imperative that we invade, wage war on, and conquer Iran. No, that’s not a typo, although isn’t it just like those devious scheming Middle-Easterners to give their countries such similar names that we easily become confused? You don’t find that kind of insidious sleight-of-hand in the West, by George, and the soon-to-be-ruling American junta should give strong consideration to giving these places better names. I mean, what was wrong with “Mesopotamia” and “Persia” in the first place? Gotta teach these people some respect for their own traditions.
But returning to our next conquest, it makes no sense whatever to have our invincible forces right next door to Iran and not take it down. Just look at the situation: First, they’re full-fledged members of Dubya’s Axis of Evil; second, they’ve got a spiffy nuclear material development program they’re not even denying – can you imagine an Ayatollah with the Bomb? – and third, we’re already on their doorstep. The cost of shipping all our troops and their stuff home and then sending it right back again for another regime change in a year or so would be astronomical compared to just killing two evils with one juggernaut while we happen to be in the neighborhood.
If Bush is truly a fiscal conservative, how can he pass this up? I mean, with the two wars we have on the burner now we’re only going to run 400, maybe 500 billion a year in deficits for the foreseeable future — nothing that would get in the way of a monster tax cut – but if we have to make two trips to whack Iran we’re going to start looking at some serious debt.
Happily, lest anyone fear that the public might be hesitant about mowing down another country quite so soon, according to polling results released over the weekend, 50 percent of the American people support going to war with Iran if they don’t accept what we have in mind for them, proving that the first war of choice is always the hardest. Now that we’ve broken the ice with Iraq I imagine that supporting various wars could become a matter of routine. But we should still attempt to save a buck or two where we can, and there are definite economies of scale to be had by waging war number three now while the troops are warmed up and in a groove.
The Bush Doctrine imposes heavy responsibilities on us, responsibilities we must not shirk, and if we are going to be true to our principles we have no choice but to confront and righteously reduce evil to unattached molecules wherever we find it. Iran has been officially branded with the Big E by Dubya himself, so what else can we do? To miss this golden opportunity would only diminish and render suspect the very doctrine around which the future world is to revolve.
Sadly, however, it means that we will have to wait, hopefully only briefly, for the inevitable conquest of North Korea. And of course, France.
