Well, it looks as though I’ve received my first comment from a troll. For those of you unclear on the lingo, a “troll” is someone who seeks to deliberately incite anger, arguments, and disorder. My First Troll™ manifested himself in the comments section of a short post I made some time ago mentioning some concerns I have about the impending war against Iraq in the form of a short tongue-in-cheek “open letter” to President Bush.
The original post is here. The troll wrote his comment in the voice of President Bush (you can read his entire post in the “comments” section), and brought up some very relevant and debatable points. However, these arguments are presented in a very condescending manner, rife with ad hominem attacks and intimations that I am unqualified to carry the opinions I do about the matter. Loathe as I am to feed a troll, seeing as how our anonymous visitor spent so much time typing up this little attack, I will give at least the courtesy of one rebuttal. So here it is. The comment text will be italicized, and my responses will be in bolded text.
1. Where is Osama bin Laden?
Great question - I wish *I* knew - sure could use the reward money. 
But the point you are getting at - I believe - is that issues need to be dealt with in a serial fashion. This may be hard for you to believe - but we have *lots* of folks looking for him - there are a few guys we have not sent to Iraq! Did you notice we collared up on arch-scumbag Khalid Shaikh Muhammed last week? You see Justis - while it will be nice to take a long piss on Mr. Bin Laden’s grave - keeping him on the run and hiding under a rock is just as effective at preventing terror attacks. How many of the ‘new waves of terror’ that we keep hearing about have actually happened since 9/11 ? Oh - none. Don’t worry though - we can make *lots* of mistakes - Mr. Bin Laden can make only *one* - his day will be here soon - I assure you.
First of all, I am not so linearly-minded as to assume that any international chain of events must occur in a “serial fashion”. My point remains simply this: Where is Osama bin Laden? When the Bush administration declared “War on Terror”, it was all about Al Qaida and the capture or death of Osama bin Laden. Once that began to fade from inevitability to possibility, the focus then became Iraq. I am not saying that Iraq is a non-issue. I suggest that Iraq is a bait-and-switch tactic. We have not captured Osama, so the administration is focusing our anger on Hussein instead. Hey, it’s in the same general geographic region right? Why not?!
2. Who was behind the Anthrax mailings of Autumn 2001?
Another good question. You *do* realize that investigations take time? It took *decades* to find the Uni-bomber. Chill - it was alomst certainly a domestic right wing nutball - if and when he comes up for air - he will get nabbed. Are you really *this* scared about the subject? Yipes - I bet you are opening your mail with gloves.
The first ad hominem attack - attempting to make a point by suggesting that my question was motivated by fear. My motivation, dear visitor, is merely that there is yet another facet to this “War on Terror” that has been all but abandoned. If the anthrax mailer is merely “a domestic right wing nutball” he ought to be comparatively easy to find, right? And if we can’t find some “nutball” within the borders of our own nation, how am I supposed to believe your assertion that bin Laden’s “day will be here soon”?
3. Why are we more worried about Iraq, a nation that may have an emerging nuclear program, than we are about North Korea
Whew - this is an easy one! I’ll clue you in.
1. Iraq *lost* a war way back in 1991 - now - you might not have been around for this - but they *started* this war by invading a country called Kuwait. Yup - hard to believe - but true. Anyway - as part of the ‘peace’ accord they signed - they had eight (8) days to turn over all their nuclear material. Funny thing - alomst 8 YEARS later some of the bumbling UN inspectors tripped over the makings of a gas centrifuge. Yipes! Add to this the materials (the infamous aluminum tubes) that keep turning up - well - seems like naughty stuff to me. Anyway a condition of the surrender of Iraq was they would not do stuff like this.
Thanks for the “clue”, dear visitor. The second ad hominem attack comes here with the suggestion that I am too young to remember the events leading up to Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. Ignoring that trite bit of drivel, I am well aware of the UN resolutions resulting from Desert Storm, as well as the tenets of said resolutions. I will emphasize the following point, so as to make my position more clear.
My position has never been that war in Iraq is baseless or otherwise without merit. However, I suggest that the administration’s obsession with Iraq stems from its inability to dismantle Al Qaida in a timely manner.
Iraq has a responsibility to live up to the tenets of their agreement with the UN. Noncompliance should have consequences. My point is, why were these consequences not served four years ago when the UN inspectors were forced to leave Iraq? If you wish, you may blame the American administration at the time. But, under this reasoning, why was war with Iraq never mentioned during the Bush presidency until after 9/11/01?
2. Iraq has something that NK does not - money. Lot’s of it. NK is just about to implode - give them another winter without food or oil and we’ll see how much of a fight’n mood they are in. Let’s face it - you can’t eat a bomb. (unless its one of those choclate ones they make here for dessert sometimes - yum!)
Perhaps you’ve forgotten the number one reason for wars throughout human history - lack of resources. When you are the leader of a nation that spends it’s entire GDP on its military, you end up in the position of having no food and lots and lots of guns. North Korea is a starving dog. It’s not going to roll over and wait for someone to feed it. When it gets hungry enough, it will bite.
3. NK *may* have a nuclear bomb - small correction for you there - but they have not tested a ‘bomb’ ever. So while they may have ONE - it may not work. Yes - I know you think building such things are easy - but it is *just* a tiny bit harder then you think. Second - they have to get it here - and as you might guess - popping test shots over Japan is a bit less complex the getting a ICBM to come down in my backyard.
You are correct, I should not have said “nuclear weapons”, but rather “nuclear weapons program”. However, I never said NK had an ICBM. It is fact, however, that NK does possess missles capable of reaching other countries and delivering a nuclear payload. See, there are two components to a “nuclear bomb”: the rocket, and the warhead. It’s not terribly difficult, once one has the necessary components, to put the two together.
Anyway - while this was before your time - there once was a country called the USSR that had thousands (!) of missles (that worked) aimed at us. We managed to live though that - so don’t soil your drawers now OK ? It’s not as scary as it seems.
Again with the ad hominem attacks. Again I am apparently too young and uninformed to remember the Cold War. Dear visitor, I urge you to review your history and realize that my age of 26 years is well within the timeline of the former Soviet Union. Again, if we should not be worried about Weapons of Mass Destruction if they are possessed by a country that cannot reach us with them, then why are we so concerned with Iraq having them? They don’t even have missles that will leave their own country!
4. Why are we more concerned about Iraq, a nation that may have links to Al Qaida, than we are about countries like Eqypt, Syria, and Saudi Arabia who are known to have links to Al Qaida?
Boy - for someone who has never even been outside the US - you really seem to know a lot! Well - first - let’s be clear - Iraq *does* have links to Al Qaida. I know you don’t belive this - and there is not real way to prove it - but its there.
This is my favorite part of your comment. It begins with another personal attack. This time, I am unqualified to hold my opinion because I am not a world traveller. And I suppose you, dear visitor, have travelled all over Egypt, Syria, and Saudi Arabia? While I may not have yet had an opportunity for international travel (we aren’t all made of money, you know), while you were snapping photos of Paris and Rome with mumsey, I was probably in school or reading a newspaper. So, yeah, I know a thing or two.
Your best argument is “Iraq *does* have links to Al Qaida. I know you don’t belive this - and there is not real way to prove it”?! You come to my site like a master debater (or at least something that rhymes with that) and present that load of tripe as a pivotal argument?
Prove it.
Second - what makes you so sure some of these other countries aren’t on the list? You are darn right - these places *are* swamps that need draining - but let’s just wrap up Iraq first shall we?
Well let’s see the list then. And do you really believe that the US is going to engage in military action with Eqypt or Saudi Arabia? Whatever.
Last - and again you might be too un-informed or isolated to know this - but Iraq has done some *really* naughty things. Like gassing (with mustard and nerve gas) several *hundred* thousand people in Iraq. Like using torture - mass executions - and rape as regular tools of everyday life. You see Justis - as hard as if may be for you to understand - sometimes you need to take a scumbag like Saddam out ‘just becasue’.
Again - having probably never faced anything more dangerous in your own life then your favorite TV show being cancelled - its hard for you to understand the fear, the horror, that the people of Iraq live with everyday. So this point is no doubt lost on you. However - hopefully - in time - your world will expand to realize there *is* more the what you see on TV or read on the Internet. Perhaps you will understand. In the meantime - the grown-ups have to take care of stuff like this.
More of the same personal attacks. I understand that Hussein has an abysmal human rights record. But so do North Korea, Saudi Arabia, China, Burma, Turkmenistan, Belarus… Should I go on, old chap? Don’t try to make this into a moral issue to liberate the poor oppressed people of Iraq when the Bush administration is ignoring countless human rights abusers worldwide. How much poking and prodding did the UN have to do before the US finally went into Bosnia to help stop the “ethnic cleansing” under Milosevic?
Well - I have to go now - but since you are *so* smart - maybe you could post answers to these questions on your little web site.
1. If not war - what exactly should we do with Iraq? After 12 years of inspections - 17 UN sanctions and one war (in 91) I’d like to hear your thoughts on the subject. Please educate us on *your* solution.
Iraq needs to be dealt with. But it should be an international intervention. Again, I never said we should never go to war with Iraq. My point is that I believe that the focus on Iraq under the guise of the “War on Terror” is irresponsible. This is not War on Terror. This is War on Iraq.
2. What is the ’solution’ to North Korea (note - since they already violated the oil/food for no nukes treaty the UN/clinton signed 3 years ago you have to tell me how you plan to prevent them doing the same thing again if the solution you propose is ‘more talks’)
I feel that the international community should take notice of the situation and discuss the possibilities. While I do not have the answer you demand, I do have the mental capacity to realize that ignoring this won’t make it go away.
3. What do *you* think should be the punishment for a regiem that has killed over a million of its own citizens ? If now is *not* the time for action - let us all know what the line in the sand is that does make it OK to stop genocide.
I believe that all such regimes should face international pressure and face consequences for their reprehensible behavior. While you pretend to weep for the Iraqi people, I fear for the safety of people being quietly tortured and unfairly imprisoned in parts of the world you couldn’t even point to on a map.
If you could get back to *me* in the next few weeks - that would be great.
Done.
God Bless
George W.
BTW - I spoke to Einsatzgruppenfurher Ashcroft - he does *not* have a file on you *yet*
He did mention you better straighten up and fly right or you could end up in a diffrent kind of summer ‘camp’ soon though.
GW
Cute. Whatever.
Maybe next time you come here, you can manage to scrape up the courage to identify yourself.
Bye for now.