Quatrain - 8 syllables per line


acrid smoke that rises for days
our streets are painted with blood
the dead will see that someone pays
the rage of those survived will flood

bring forth our fierce weapons of war
apply them as they are needed
they quake you to your very core
reap death from whence it was seeded

how innocent are those who hide
allowing terror’s arms to spread
O brother’s heart where it abides
I am he who speaks for our dead

I am he who summons struggle
I am he who calls out the tanks
I am he who freedom smuggles
who will one day receive your thanks

those who die without fight, unarmed
are struck down by mutual foes
heroes are who your words have harmed
submitting to terrorist woes

righteous are those who enlist
to make it right they do their part
true innocence can not exist
inside of a coward’s cold heart

wars are fought for just these reasons
not to sate your sad tender fears
they will be fought by our legions
as you cry the enemies tears

I have no idea why your poem went on unnoticed, but I hear you! I think you have great rhythm and I like the following the best...

righteous are those who enlist
to make it right they do their part
true innocence can not exist
inside of a coward’s cold heart

my fave stanza too.

every life form has it's typical traits. It's "nature" if you will. I read somewhere that mankind's natural state is to be at war. I see nothing in history (or the present) to convince me otherwise.

Thanks. I hate this. Reading it again, out of context, I think its crap.

It was a reply to another persons piece elsewhere, and each line addresses his, in the same format. I find that most people who are given to poetry tend to sympathize and misrepresent war. I think Tony is a genius, but he is convinced we are the enemy. BenBrownLow is brilliant, but seems to believe that we spend billions of dollars developing smart weapons that seek out crippled children. People seem to disregard the fact that we have spent more time, more money, more effort and more of our own blood trying to minimize civilian casualty than any force in history. People seem to believe that GWB is the most ignorant bastard to ever sit in office yet was somehow able to convince the entire worlds intelligence communities that Saddam was developing WMDs. People tend to ignore the fact that as recently as 1998 the UN had catalogued 400 tons of anthrax that was never destroyed... they still claim it didn't exist. They ignore the fact that on march 17th 2004 markVII munitions containing serin gas that werent supposed to exist were used against our troops. People insist we went to Iraq for oil, yet we have no control over it and our gas prices have reached record highs. People ignore the fact that under Saddam's regime 300,000 people per year were killed (a net gain of 270,000 lives since we arrived). Their compassion for Iraqi lives lay silent the last 30 years, only now that we are killing those who would oppress the Iraqis do their lives matter. People act as if the millions of dollars UN officials made under Iraq sanctions had no influence on their unwillingness to hold accountable the violation of 14 of its resolutions. People act as if the French, Russians, and Germans had no vested interest in keeping Saddam in power, and have become all but mute now that we have seized government documents. People seem to think it is coincidence that we have not been attacked since 9/11. People give no thought to the fact that instead of overcoming the difficulties involved in getting to this country and carrying out acts of terrorism against unarmed civilians, they are drawn to the most fierce fighting force in history a bit more locally. People seem to ignore the fact that what separates us from our enemy is that we do our best to minimize civilian casualty, while they do their best to target them. I have friends and loved ones in Iraq this very morning, and in denegrating what they do without understanding, you denegrate them. Without understanding that women were executed for dress code violations, they can now vote. That there are more schools that educate children now than there were indoctrinating them with hatered. That there is electricity where there wasnt. Infrastructure. Democratically elected government. Hope. Idealists will cry for peace, but there is a certain kind of peace that can only be found on the other side of war.

I think I have been typing for a while. Ill stop.

Umm...

Who. exactly, do you think i think is the enemy?

I have friends in Iraq too. I honor their efforts.

I lost friends on 9/11. Seven, in fact.

You make an awful lot of generalizations, suggesting that those who oppose the Iraq war fall into the same beliefs in all areas. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I'm no pacifist. Never have been. I have been the victim of violence, and returned it with violence, and perpetrated violence of my own. Sometimes I did right, others I did wrong. I accept that.

I oppose the war in Iraq from one reason: it makes no sense. It was a distraction, an unnecessary distraction, from other more important things. It was a personal vendetta, planned BEFORE 9/11 (plans for the war were developed in the Bush Administration's first month in office), and which cynically used the deaths of people like my friends to raise public fear to the level that allowed them a mandate to go in and do what they wanted.

Iraq is an imperialist adventure in a sham war on "terrorism" tha thas been used to justify global bullshit.

Do I think it's a coincidence that we haven't been attacked? Bet your ass I do. Overall, terrorist incidents across the globe have RISEN since 9/11 -- go check the State Department stats. "we fight them overseas so we dont' need to fight them at home." Bullshit. We fight them overseas so we can maintain the state of war that we've missed since we lost the Soviets.

The WMD argument that you say successfully convinced so many people? This is a huge canard. The point is, vast numbers of people were NOT convinced. And most tellingly, there was one group that DID get it right, and said so -- the deeply reviled UN inspectors. You remember them -- the ones who described the state of Saddam's program most accurately, and who were dismissed with sneers and cast aside by the Bush administration's rush to war? All you had to do was listen to the group of people who were closest to the action, who were trained to look, and you would realize that someone was lying. Governments eager to please the only superpower fell in line with the liars like lapdogs.

As for the vaunted statistics: talked to an Iraqi lately? Electricity is far below prewar standards of availability. Iraq imports oil and gas; shortages are common. The infrastructure has been rebuilt on a minimal scale, and only where it suits the coalition. Those commercial interests from France, Germany, and the like have been replaced by the commercial interests of the US (Halliburton was there before the war too, supporting Saddam, of course) such as Halliburton, Brown and Root, Blackwater, and Wackenhut.

Put simply: you are not the enemy. I know war sometimes is necessary. I am not a pacifist. Sometimes, you need to fight for what's right.

This war is not one of those times. And if I had my way, there would be executions for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Tony, I appologize firstly if I came off as addressing you in each of the things I said. I made no such presumption. However:

The Clinton whitehouse had war plans drawn on Iraq as well. It is what they do... determine threats with the best intelligence available and strategize a war plan. Don't make it out to be more than what it is.

As to it being a sham war on terrorism... Al Zarquawi ring any bells? Where do you suppose that the "insurgants" were trained to blow these civilians up? Do you know how to create high yield explosive devices? Where to aquire the materials for them? Do you believe that it is an organized coordinated effort from a foreign power?

Terrorism has risen across Europe, parts of Africa, the Middle East... Not North America, and WE are the enemy. That is far from coincidental.

I did not mention the argument, I mentioned the intelligence. Intel from nations that were categorically against our invasion supported the belief with regards to Atomic fissile materials... with regards to Anthrax and other biological agents... nobody disagreed with that... not even the needfully reviled UN inspectors... in fact the reason we know it was still in posession was due to their documenting of it. It didn't vanish, it is somewhere.

As to speaking to Iraqis, yes. My girlfriends family. I also speak with soldiers on the ground daily. They are some of whom I get my information from. How about you?

I disagree with you on this topic, I didn't mean to categorically lump you in with those I normally debate with. By thinking we were the enemy, I meant that you believe we are wrong to be where we are, for wrong reasons, doing wrong things. I don't think you actually think our military, nor those who support them, are the enemy. I think that your beliefs are not blind emotional reflux, but very convincing and intelligently sourced. I simply do not see things the same way.

As a side note, to clear up presumptions that could be drawn about me...

I am not a republican.
I am not a christian.
I do not blindly support anything that comes from the Bush whitehouse.
I am not anti-muslim (or anti-semitic).
I am not pro-israel.


And what are you talking about with regards to haliburton supporting Saddam? That one was completely lost on me.

I think there is nothing that would ever cause you to change your views. Just as some people will never stop rooting for the Bills NFL team, because they are Bills fans, you are a Replublican or a 'Conservative'* and cannot and will not question your team affiliation.

I won't bother pointing anything out in an attempt to sway you, or educate you, because if after all this time you still don't see things differently than you currently do, then you never will.**



*I quoted that because Bush is not very conservative in practice.
** I don't believe you. I guess that's my problem.

ummm shito?... again...

I am not a Republican... I am not a "Bushite". The need to file me as such demonstrates YOUR need to polarize those who do not agree with you into a given philum in order to subconsciously disregard an opinion that does not agree with your own.

Abhorant wrote:

As a side note, to clear up presumptions that could be drawn about me... I am not a republican. I am not a christian. I do not blindly support anything that comes from the Bush whitehouse. I am not anti-muslim (or anti-semitic). I am not pro-israel. And what are you talking about with regards to haliburton supporting Saddam? That one was completely lost on me.

Halliburton subsidiaries were directly involved in the oil for food effort. While American companies were banned from involvement with Saddam's regime, no such restriction fell upon wholly-owned foreign subsidiaries of American companies.

We're never going to agree on this one, so I will stop here. I will say only this: some of my info comes from soldiers in Iraq, some from soldiers home from Iraq, some from Iraqi bloggers, some from the NSA (I have a relative working there who, while she will not reveal much, will reveal enough to be clear that she and many other operatives are disgusted with the Bush Administration's lying and subterfuge, and the misuse of and downright falsification of information. Her husband resigned as a result).

We both look at our sources, and see what we want. There's no point in point counterpoint on this.

Just know that I will not forget, or forgive, the blasphemy of Bush invoking 9/11 to justify this war, making Neilie, Tara, Linda, Susan, Christine, Robin, and Lisa the bloody scalps used to raise anger and fear.

I knew those women, I worked side by side with those women, and Iraq did not avenge them or make the world safer for their children.

Again: I would support executions for high crimes and misdemeanors.

How many people die from cancer, heart attacks, car accident and violent crime in the U.S. in any given year?

How many people die from terrorism in the U.S. in a given year?

Do the math.

I think the money being spent in Iraq would have been better spent securing our own borders, paying down the national debt, perhaps finishing the job in Afghanistan and increasing spending on education.

Rather than a war on Terrorism, a war on poverty and a push for Civil liberties in countries that lack them (Saudi Arabia, anyone?) would have saved so many more U.S. lives and reduced terrorism in the process.

(I moved this to the politics thread so as to not stink up the poetry board)

Anyone else feel like Iran is on it's way to being the next country Bush decides to take on? LOL I shouldn't post I know.. ( being Canadian and all)

I hate Canadians! You guys even think you're Americans!

Ahem. I'm just kidding!

You can post and have any opinion you want. So can Abhorant.

Thanks... a lot of folks don't like it very much usually if someone from another country starts talking about their politics...Kind of a touchy subject and all.

hotstuff wrote:

Thanks... a lot of folks don't like it very much usually if someone from another country starts talking about their politics...Kind of a touchy subject and all.

It's a global issue. It involves everyone.

I came very close to moving to Canada last year...a job offer almost got me to Toronto a couple of times. Perhaps again...

Canada is lovely And we have free healthcare (for now) come on over! LOL

i'm feeling overwhelmed.

gotpoety wrote:

How many people die from cancer, heart attacks, car accident and violent crime in the U.S. in any given year? How many people die from terrorism in the U.S. in a given year? Do the math. I think the money being spent in Iraq would have been better spent securing our own borders, paying down the national debt, perhaps finishing the job in Afghanistan and increasing spending on education.

My suggestion is that had we not brought the fight to them (spent money on war) they would have come to us (death from terrorism). So I do not see how you can look to the expected result and suggest that it was ill spent. We are still in Afghanistan.

gotpoety wrote:

Rather than a war on Terrorism, a war on poverty and a push for Civil liberties in countries that lack them (Saudi Arabia, anyone?) would have saved so many more U.S. lives and reduced terrorism in the process.

What about Iraqi lives? Worth saving? It is not the job of the government to ensure you are wealthy, it is the job of the government to ensure the opportunity to do whatever you want to do. As to pushing our concept of liberty on sovereign nations... hmmm... Im sorry can you start again, I am confused as to which side you are on...

gotpoety wrote:

(I moved this to the politics thread so as to not stink up the poetry board)

So you think my poetry stinks? Don't answer that. Yeah... I had meant to suggest it get moved to here, but forgot.

Tony wrote:

Halliburton subsidiaries were directly involved in the oil for food effort.

Oh that. Yeah... halliburton is evil. I don't think this administration shows them favor... every president since I have been alive has had no bid contracts with them, I don't know why people act like this is a novelty. They sort of have a monopoly on nation building. They are a one stop shop. They are fucking evil though. Cheney is fucking evil too. Im glad he is on our side.

Time will tell if Iraq has made the world safer. I have a lot of family in intel. Some like, some dislike the administration. They all hate his father... lol. Politics is an ugly ugly business, and the nature of the beast requires that support is rallied through anger and fear. If Saddams people had not been misinforming him as to the status of programs, if Saddam had not boasted about capabilities he did not have, if all available intel had been valid and we had disrupted a nuclear program... would it have been ok then?

I dont know about fabrication... our intel suggested something different than MI6 over the yellow cake situation in Nigeria, and Bush went with MI6. What was specifically worded in the report was that "There is no corroboration from other sources that such an agreement was reached or that uranium was transferred." and that "information on the alleged contract lacks crucial details". What IS undisputed is that Nigerian leaders met with Saddam Hussain 9 times over the 4 years prior to the fall of his regime brokering a deal for something. Do you know the second most valuable export resource Nigeria has to Uranium? Goats. Perhaps Saddam forsaw a drastic goat shortage, I dunno... but I know that the agency said that it was unable to be corroborated... and I know Bush credited another agency with the allegation, without mentioning that our intel disagreed with it... and I call that misleading, and a lie by omission, but legally without wrongdoing. I don't know if you are referring to Powells addressing the UN when you say fabrication... but I would like some clarification.

Despite what you believe, despite what I am being told again and again... I base my opinions first on facts, then on logical beliefs derived from facts. If facts I am unaware of are brought to my attention, I will not debate them blindly, as there is no debating fact, only opinion... and my opinions are derived from the facts I can assertain. They are loyal to no one.

hotstuff wrote:

Anyone else feel like Iran is on it's way to being the next country Bush decides to take on? LOL I shouldn't post I know.. ( being Canadian and all)

I think it is a great question, and of course you have every right to post opinion and question... the only thing that bothers me is armchair internet aliens telling us HOW to run our country. That drives me nuts. I do not believe it is in the United States best interest to bomb Iran. I think that the rest of the world will eventually get to the point where they ask us to do it though, and I think we will, begrudgingly. Either that or they will come to their senses and broker a deal. Keeping Iran afraid of us, but not hostile (as in armed conflict) serves a number of our needs. We will be slow to war with them... that is just my take.

hotstuff wrote:

Canada is lovely And we have free healthcare (for now) come on over! LOL

Canada is lovely, but we have a capitalist system which promotes good healthcare and medical innovation... so quit waiting in line and come buy stuff!

LOL yes...you can wait some time. But actually, not as long as you'd think. If you go to the ER room you can expect to wait probably about 3 hrs (unless you have something that will kill you) But other than that, not too bad Surgeries and whatnot are probably a little slower than yours. I can't really say from experience as I've only had my tonsils out and thats not major LOL

Abhorant wrote:

My suggestion is that had we not brought the fight to them (spent money on war) they would have come to us (death from terrorism). So I do not see how you can look to the expected result and suggest that it was ill spent. We are still in Afghanistan.

Ahh. The old we're bringing the fight to them argument. Some would say we're creating the terrorists to fight over there.

Abhorant wrote:

What about Iraqi lives? Worth saving? It is not the job of the government to ensure you are wealthy, it is the job of the government to ensure the opportunity to do whatever you want to do. As to pushing our concept of liberty on sovereign nations... hmmm... Im sorry can you start again, I am confused as to which side you are on...

Wealthy? You seriously think that when I wrote -- a war on poverty -- I was suggesting the goverment should make everyone wealthy?
Not being in POVERTY. Is not being WEALTHY. It is being able to feed your children as well as yourself, have everyone in your family go to the doctor and then perhaps save up enough money to not have to work until you are 70.

Abhorant wrote:

Im sorry can you start again, I am confused as to which side you are on...

I thought you were the one a few posts back complaining that people were making you take sides... making you either be a democrat or a republican so to speak.

With that, I'm done because while I believe in free speech on this site, I suspect that if I keep trying to go around and around this with you, you'll end up insulting me again and I'll just ban you and be done with it.

I've never done it and I really don't want to start.

Well... jumped a couple of rungs there don't you think? I am not much of an ass kisser, so let me try and be clearer.

I said wealthy to illustrate a point. You have the opportunity to be anything you want in this country. People come from nothing, people come to this country with nothing, often not even the language, and become successful. It isn't all happenstance. It is that way by design. I don't beleive in socialism, while some social programs are necessary. I believe that it devalues individualism. I believe rewarding failure is counterproductive. Education is the only tool by which to battle poverty without redistribution of wealth. Our education system is deplorable... and, I might point out, socialist. I do not believe that is coincidence.

By side, I meant side of the argument. It was funny. If you don't want to continue the discussion then so be it. I think you are being a bit oversensitive. I will not walk on eggshells around you for an ill-perceived insult, nor a thinly veiled threat. I have always been respectful to you. It has not changed today. If you were disrespectful towards me, or someone I like, then it would. That is just how I am. I hope that makes things clearer.

OK, everybody, chill.

None of us are going to change our positions, all of us can quote our sources, and we all can defend ourselves. We ain't getting no where.

I'll pursue my activism off of this site, as I always have. No more of this argument for me.

Abhorant: regardless of my feeling toward the topic matter, the poem was well done.

tony wrote:

Again: I would support executions for high crimes and misdemeanors.

abberrant, um, I mean abhorrent, um, I mean, abhorant, I THINK TONY MAY MEAN YOU. um, just kidding.

*pstt* no, really, you should get out now, abhorant. Just look at tony's pic, man. He's out to get you!

Abhor-ant: You said we had to spend money on the war to prevent deaths here at home from terrorism. I went through this frame of mind too for about five minutes, where I thought that we had to get them before they got us...

Then I realized I was watching '24'.

Sure, intellegence keeps us alert and safer, and sure Iraq is a mecca for Islamic Fundamentalism and has been for a ve-he-he-he-ry long time. But "taking it to them", that's just plain good-ol-boy-PROPOGANDA...



.

I'm glad to see debate here, though. i think it's refreshing