How quickly the Left crumbles under the weight of repetition.

Mark Fiore, cartoonist and critic from the Left, lampoons the Bush administration in “OppositeLand” that “Inspections worked” and “Sanctions worked”. But one must ask, worked to achieve what?

Inspections worked to make Hussein get rid of the weapons which we gave him the money to buy or supplied him with outright. He was our friend against the Communists but when he wants to keep a nationalized oil program, he’s not our buddy anymore. Democrats and Republicans agree: nationalizing a resource the US can either use or make money from is worth going to war over.

Under Clinton alone, the Iraqi sanctions killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, over 500,000 of them children. Is that progress? Is that beneficial to the US or is it justifiable on the grounds of living an ethical life? I don’t think so.

But apparently in the fever to tell us how much of a threat to human life President George W. Bush is, some on the Left are willing to endorse a policy that killed far more people than Bush’s invasion and occupation of Iraq.

This kind of analysis completely leaves out that we shouldn’t have done this in the first place and that we should indeed leave immediately (including the corporate occupation). Who steps in to clean up the mess we’ve made? I’m not exactly sure, but I’m sure that the US is screwing it up and therefore they must go.

In another Fiore cartoon, “The Treason Hunters”, Fiore points to a number of people on the Right who criticized the war and/or the occupation and, therefore, contradict White House doctrine. Fiore shows this in order to illustrate that the Left isn’t alone, that they were right all along, and now they get their moment to gloat.

Unfortunately their moment in the sun is spent criticizing according to how well the war is being fought, not that it should not have been fought at all.

Those ABB supporters tell us the marches against the war will pick up again after November 2, 2004 (US election day). I look forward to the day when members from a variety of political backgrounds work together again to march against the war. Unfortunately, they’ll risk the validity of their entire message by doing so after a majority of them vote for a war supporter (Kerry).

Here’s betting if anyone dares to raise the conflict between who they voted for and what policy change they endorse, that person will be drummed out of the so-called peace marches and excuses will be made for how Bush’s war must be opposed at the ballot box but Kerry’s war must be voted for.