Help | About | Suggestions | Alms | Chat [0] | Users [0] | Log In | Join
 Search:
Poem: Submit | Random | Best | Worst | Recent | Comments   

Alternatives (Free verse) by Dovina
Let the war go on three more brutal years. Double our losses, double theirs too. It’s worth the cost if during that time technologists come to our cure for a sickness we all endure. If by then the carnage persists, admit we’re defeated, sit down with the winners. Save what we can of all we admire, And give them their wishes, as much as we must to stop the killings and grant us some peace. So, you with the math, the physics, the code, we give you three years of our blood and our souls. Go into battle with all of your heart, Root out the evil, force them to stop, because you, my friends, are all that we’ve got.

Down the ladder: The Golden Rule

You must be logged in to leave comments. Vote:

Votes: (green: user, blue: anonymous)
 GraphVotes
10  .. 00
.. 11
.. 00
.. 00
.. 00
.. 10
.. 00
.. 00
.. 00
.. 00
.. 10

Arithmetic Mean: 5.75
Weighted score: 5.089402
Overall Rank: 6318
Posted: January 28, 2007 5:33 AM PST; Last modified: January 28, 2007 5:33 AM PST
View voting details
Comments:
[n/a] Dental Panic @ 84.27.81.27 | 28-Jan-07/1:53 PM | Reply
The de-baathification, forcing their armed forces to go underground, was an incredibly stupid move - you really think them with the math can heal that kind of stupidity? Use a guy like Rumsfeld as guinea pig, see what happens.
[n/a] Dovina @ 208.127.72.242 > Dental Panic | 28-Jan-07/2:29 PM | Reply
The military has tried for three years to figure out the enemy and has so far failed. All I am suggesting is that if scientists and technologists cannot get into the battle and do better, we might as well admit defeat, and try to negotiate as Japan did after WWII.
[5] Stephen Robins @ 213.146.148.199 > Dovina | 29-Jan-07/8:36 AM | Reply
WOW!
[n/a] ecargo @ 167.219.88.140 > Dovina | 30-Jan-07/7:15 AM | Reply
Who knew we had so many military minds here at the 'ranker? Better technology, you say--but that was Rumsfeld's vision from the start. He was going to transform the military--make it faster, stronger, more mobile by harnessing the power of cutting-edge technology to win the war "in weeks," remember? It was going to be a "cakewalk" by dint of our technological/scientific superiority. Your "solution" was smashed to pieces long, long ago. So you not only fail, you fail retroactively.

[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > ecargo | 30-Jan-07/7:21 AM | Reply
I've said many times: the solution is to send all our football hooligans over to Muslimland with a few crates of Stella and a brick each. Two birds with one stone.
[n/a] Dovina @ 75.82.94.71 > ecargo | 30-Jan-07/2:02 PM | Reply
It sounds like you’re saying that because technological/scientific efforts have failed, we should not support them as much as we have. Because they have failed, anyone from the Ranker who suggests those methods might be our best hope is bonkers, is that it? You surely don’t mean that. Some of these people might have in their minds at this moment the seed of a breakthrough, the only good way out of this. It seems we should support them.
[n/a] ecargo @ 167.219.88.140 > Dovina | 31-Jan-07/8:12 AM | Reply
Now, now--you're extrapolating an awful lot from what I actually said. Who are the "them" I'm not supporting--your imaginary, self-sacrificing, magical technologists? I said YOU failed, which I meant in the Poemranker comment context of "failed" (an amusing, site-specific device, much like "bow'ls"). (Yes, certainly, Rumsfeld--and his vision of technological sugarplums--failed, which is not to suggest that I'm "anti-technology" in some blanket way.) And no one said anything about bonkers. I do think you're bonkers (and a little too fond of the Southern Comfort), but that belief far predated this exchange--and, for what it's worth, I think we're all pretty much loony here, so you're in good company. I'm not sure if the pastel blue poetry site is cause of or magnet for lunacy (perhaps both), but here we are. However, I don't think any alternatives we might offer in limping rhythms and flat end rhymes are going to "solve" Iraq. If it were just a matter of building a better mousetrap, our feckless leaders would come up with a better plan than throwing a few more troops into the mix (who won't even have the benefit of the necessary armor and Humvees according to news reports). It's very easy to talk about "sacrifices" when they're always someone else's sacrifices, innit?

I applaud your efforts here though! Well done! Very proactive!
[n/a] Dovina @ 208.127.72.168 > ecargo | 31-Jan-07/9:14 PM | Reply
I know as much about this war as Bill Bryson knows about topography and the measurement of mountains. I’m reading his Short History of Nearly Everything and chuckle at his depiction of Charles Hutton “inventing contours.” It’s the difference between a good writer of generalities and the subject of a specialist. In the current discussion, I wear a lesser hat than Bill and spout generalities of less accuracy on a complicated issue.

I failed to open my discourse with some implication of Bush as a bloated idiot, and failed again by not pointing out the war’s sordid history. Then I failed to post a poem having metaphor, image, clever wording . . . . Without these openings, any suggestions regarding courses of action in the war fall on ears of ire. Oh, I tingle with the last verse of my ditty, but the first two are just spouting.

My little learning about what I’m calling the Islamic mindset, referring to the common people of Iraq, comes mostly from a Bengali Muslim who thinks America’s greatest failing in Iraq is our resistance to taking their mindset seriously—the old “know your enemy” maxim.

If my uninformed support for technology as our “best hope” raises eyebrows, then my only sacrifice to the cause is a little ridicule. I wish a greater sacrifice for the folks with knowledge and brains—hard work and risk of their jobs. And for the soldiers who are buying them time, I wish fewer losses.

Anybody out there, Q-cleared, with a clue on the whereabouts of Weber’s magic bullets of Der Freischutz, the kind that hit whatever you shoot at, Go for it and forget the bosses! You’re our best hope.
[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > ecargo | 30-Jan-07/3:57 PM | Reply
'The war' was won in weeks, if you assume that a war has to be fought between two definable forces. We took out Saddam's military pretty quickly. I think this is Dark Angel's point (in a very simplistic way of saying it). What we're fighting can't, I don't think, be called a war. At best it's a fight between one visible form of idiocy and multiple other forms.
[n/a] Dovina @ 75.82.94.71 > Ranger | 30-Jan-07/4:03 PM | Reply
Call it "police action" as we did in Korea, then. Hopefully, it ends better.
[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > Dovina | 30-Jan-07/4:07 PM | Reply
I call it an almighty administrative cock-up. If we'd genuinely committed to repairing and building the infrastructure of resources and social amenities in the more secure regions of Iraq (Afghanistan is, I think, a different bottle of whiskey altogether), do you really think the world of Islams would direct so many of their woes against us?
[n/a] Dovina @ 75.82.94.71 > Ranger | 30-Jan-07/4:11 PM | Reply
Humanitarian aid, while it has done in many ways, if done in some huge way, might have helped with our image. I hardly think that's a good reason to do it. The radicals would probably be unphased by such "nonsense."
[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > Dovina | 30-Jan-07/4:18 PM | Reply
Why even bother with sending them packages of aid (or even AIDS. Actually, spreading AIDS through the Middle East might liven things up a little)? They don't need freebie food, they need reliable sources of energy and water, and working hospitals and other social focal points. It doesn't take a genius to work this out, so why don't we seem to have even started actually trying to make life better for the natives? Image is nothing, which is good news for me because if I keep on coming out with this pimply logic I'm going to need some super-industrial facewash.

Admittedly, it's not as though the English can talk about having effective hospitals.
[n/a] Dovina @ 75.82.94.71 > Ranger | 30-Jan-07/4:27 PM | Reply
Some hospital help has been sent, so I hear on NPR. And some help with road repair. More could be done, but do you really think it would prsuade some cleric gang leader to give in to a rival cleric gang leader?
[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > Dovina | 30-Jan-07/4:36 PM | Reply
Maybe not, but it might persuade people to stop signing up to the gang ethos. I mean, if you're a small Iraqi child and you see a bunch of Americans come into town and leave you with a nice shiny school, you're surely going to be less likely to grow up wanting to bomb the shit out of anything unbrown. Unite the population behind your cause, and the rebels are going to find themselves swiftly running out of people willing to strap dynamite to their faces.
[n/a] Dovina @ 75.82.94.71 > Ranger | 30-Jan-07/4:47 PM | Reply
It makes sense in a Western sort of way. But an upbringing in Islam saw the collapse of a great Infadel, the Soviet Union as a result of their defeat of Russia in Afghanistan. Today, they see America as weak and fearful, the one remainder of a formerly two-infidel world. They have dealt triumphantly with one of them, now it’s the turn of the other. The United States has become degenerate, in their minds, debouched, and easily frightened and defeated. Decadence and decay within America have made it ready to be toppled. Such signs of concilliation might simply reinforce these ingrained beliefs.
[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > Dovina | 30-Jan-07/4:54 PM | Reply
Do you really think that the average Muslim on the streets of Baghdad really cares that much about what's going on in America? It doesn't matter about one's religious leanings; once you make peoples' lives comfortable, the majority are not going to want to get off their backsides because another bunch of people are decadent. You might still get a zealot or two, but in a world of billions that is totally unavoidable.

Besides, we used to say* that the Irish would never be reconciled, and look at the progress there.

*okay, so *I* never actually said that, but the people who were alive and fighting then did.
[n/a] Dovina @ 75.82.94.71 > Ranger | 30-Jan-07/4:59 PM | Reply
You assume the people in Iraq think beyond their Islamic teachings. I hear they do not. Our worst misjudgement has been that they want freedom, democracy, a better life - when they want the approving glance of Allah, as understood by their clerics.
[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > Dovina | 30-Jan-07/5:05 PM | Reply
Offer them schools, hospitals and clean water in place of bombs and cholera, and I'll bet you anything that Allah suddenly takes a more relaxed view of life.
[n/a] Dovina @ 75.82.94.71 > Ranger | 30-Jan-07/5:08 PM | Reply
I agree that providing these things will make them happier. But if the reports of their committment to Allah are correct, few of them would sacrifice Isalm, as interpreted by whichever cleric they adhere to.
[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > Dovina | 30-Jan-07/5:13 PM | Reply
Yes, but they're less likely to adhere to those clerics who preach against the literacy-promoting, disease-eliminating, smile-and-hand-shaking Americans than they are right now.
[n/a] Dovina @ 75.82.94.71 > Ranger | 30-Jan-07/5:17 PM | Reply
Neither of us know the Islamic mindset. We talk from modernity of which they accept virtually nothing.
[n/a] ecargo @ 167.219.88.140 > Dovina | 31-Jan-07/8:16 AM | Reply
Your lack of knowledge of the "Islamist mindset" doesn't stop you from spouting all sorts of generalizations. FWIW, Iraq was not a particularly fundie country.
[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > ecargo | 31-Jan-07/8:20 AM | Reply
I know the Islamist mindset perfectly well; someone I was acquainted with is an Islam, and he beat up a nightclub bouncer for saying 'No Pakis in here mate'. If that's not irrational violence, I don't know what is.
[9] deleted user @ 64.140.227.22 | 28-Jan-07/4:12 PM | Reply
In the eyes of the world we're already standing at precipice of defeat.
[n/a] Dovina @ 208.127.72.242 > deleted user | 28-Jan-07/4:16 PM | Reply
But defeat is so disasterous that I think we should give it three more years, double our losses if necessary, giving scientific and technological methods a chance. It's a high price, and demands high motivation of capable people.
[n/a] horus8 @ 76.170.36.27 | 29-Jan-07/12:28 AM | Reply
I love how, overall, your position bobs as perfectly still as a cut and clear turd in a tsunami. So what you're saying is if we win we'd be right, and if we lose we can still say "I'm sorry, how's about a hug abdhula", and still be sort of okay sort of like maybe. okay in forgiveness, and just, well chatting about our issues.
Like for one: America is babylon, the new atlantis, so you fucking rags and negroes, and wild eyed gooks have best understand, we will get your trees, your oil, your jewels and the little girls, so play ball ball, or possibly die, or be hugged.
[n/a] richa @ 81.179.135.216 | 29-Jan-07/1:01 PM | Reply
Who do we admit defeat to. The other side resembles the volcano God. We placate it by being sufficiently beastly to the Jewish people and crossing our fingers that it will not erupt. We can't actually talk to it. And what is this technology? Is it a humane way of wasting people? The free range chicken method of genocide. We can only hope.
[n/a] -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. @ 75.214.77.62 > richa | 29-Jan-07/1:14 PM | Reply
Exactly. There is no such thing as a single, unified "other side" anyway. It's barely coherent enough to call it a volcano God. A myriad of factions, all fighting each other, united, perhaps, by a hatred of America, but divided by far too many other things to ever co-operate. People see the headlines: SCORES KILLED IN BAGHDAD. They put their thinking caps on: Gosh what an evil man Bush is for going in there and killing all those civilians. Perhaps if they'd read beyond the first paragraph, they'd know it wasn't that simple. That it was muslim vs muslim now. It's muslim vs hindu in the semis, then muslim vs Jesu in the final.

Operation Enduring Freedom wins, or everybody loses.
[n/a] ecargo @ 167.219.88.140 > -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. | 30-Jan-07/7:20 AM | Reply
"Operation Enduring Freedom"--how pleased David Frum would be that you used the proper name. I think it was he who coined the term before going off to save duckies and bunnies. I always suspected there was a bit of irony in the moniker, but, hey, I'm just a little cynical.

What's winning? Is being mired there for the next god-knows-how-many decades fighting in an internal civil war "winning"? Are the Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds, in their various flavors, and anyone else with a yen for a share of wealth and power and some ancient festering grudge to avenge, going to start getting along if we drop enough bombs and fire enough rounds? Honestly, that's been one of the biggest fuck-ups of this entire war--we went in with no idea how to get out. The entire premise was bullshit, the "expert" predictions were bullshit, and the end result--where we are now--predictable and ignored. So is "winning" just "staying the course" and praying that--well, what? And I think you oversimplify how many people view the war. (Or maybe you don't.) I don't think Bush is "evil"--I think he's out of his league and ill-advised and pigheaded and determined to save his legacy at all costs. Like Dovina (apparently), he believes that the cost in blood and treasure is worth it to save him/us from "embarassment." All other things aside, there is no political or popular WILL to stay as long as we would need to stay--to spend the thousands of lives and trillions of dollars--to see any real improvement or real, measurable progress. Thus the opposition to benchmarks. Sending 20,000 additional troops is bunk. And no one else is going to step in with offers of aid at this point, because they know a losing proposition, in every sense, when they see it. There is no cavalry.

"Operation Enduring Freedom wins," you say, "or everyone loses." But I always come back to the same question--if this is, as claimed, simply a front in the global war on "terra," how, exactly, does ensuring that another several generations of Muslims hate us help us in the end?

As for "solutions," I have no fucking idea. I think we owe it to the Iraqis to help them get to some point of stability, quite honestly, but I don't know if that's even possible and I'm quite certain that neither the US nor the UK are going to commit to keeping troops there much longer (when Bush goes, so does our army, at the latest)--so where does that leave us?
[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > ecargo | 30-Jan-07/7:28 AM | Reply
SUGGESTION: Winning = control of Middle Eastern oil supplies = the ability to tell Russia where to stick it when they cut off our resources.

Oh Christ, I think I just broke out in pimples.
[n/a] ecargo @ 167.219.88.140 > Ranger | 30-Jan-07/7:42 AM | Reply
LOL--you are far too young to be so cynical, Ranger. Please, earn it like the rest of us. ;)
[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > ecargo | 30-Jan-07/7:47 AM | Reply
Excuse me, I'm off to feed some orphans.
[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > ecargo | 30-Jan-07/3:49 PM | Reply
Did you ever read/see Children of Men?
[n/a] -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. @ 75.215.178.77 > Ranger | 30-Jan-07/6:29 PM | Reply
I saw it a couple of weeks back in NYC. Thought it was ace.
[n/a] Ranger @ 62.252.32.15 > -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. | 31-Jan-07/4:48 AM | Reply
It was, although I told my dad about it and he thought the idea of a world without children was heaven.
[n/a] -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. @ 80.47.120.22 > Ranger | 14-Jul-07/6:28 AM | Reply
No, he's thinking of a world without ethnics. So was Lenon.

Imagine there's no muslims.
It's easy if you dare.
No need for duncely prayer matts,
Or unsightly facial hair.
Imagine all the normals
Living for today...

You may say I'm a racist
But it's just a point of view.
And I hope someday you'll join me
Unless you're ethnic too.
[n/a] Dovina @ 75.82.94.71 > richa | 29-Jan-07/4:58 PM | Reply
If we want to tell them something like, “You win. Lets meet and discuss the terms of our surrender,” it’s simple—just put Bush on television and have him say it. I hope we win this mess and save ourselves the embarrassment and chaos, but at the rate we’re going, who knows.

Technologists just might, for example, develop a super-sniffer to tell us where the bombs are, or where they make them, or how they distribute them. We might learn to track their movements, their meetings, where they sleep, with a badguy-resonance-gizmo. I’m trying to kick technology butt here, and show how much we depend on them.

Ok, kicking butt isn’t the way to do it, you say. Suggest something else then.
[5] Stephen Robins @ 213.146.148.199 | 31-Jan-07/5:26 AM | Reply
Why do you get so many comments on your poems? they are veritable common rooms for 'rankers. And, in much the same way as a common room is an empty vessel waiting for the chatter of a bunch of "know it all" spotty drug addicts with amusingly grown facial hair, the appearance of the room is of little import in connection with conversations had therein.
[n/a] Dovina @ 208.127.72.168 > Stephen Robins | 31-Jan-07/9:25 PM | Reply
Is it because I'm beautiful, provocative conversationalist, lovable humanitarian, or irresistible logician? You decide, and step right in, let your hair down.
242 view(s)




Track and Plan your submissions ; Read some Comics ; Get Paid for your Poetry
PoemRanker Copyright © 2001 - 2024 - kaolin fire - All Rights Reserved
All poems Copyright © their respective authors
An internet tradition since June 9, 2001