Bush: History to prove Iraq war worth it

I am using the same title as the article that I read today.

When I read articles like this I usually have a commentary running in my mind that is contrary to what the written piece says.

In this piece they write: "The ideals and interests that led America to help the Japanese turn defeat into democracy are the same that lead us to remain engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq," Bush said in advance excerpts of a Wednesday speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

"The defense strategy that refused to hand the South Koreans over to a totalitarian neighbor helped raise up an Asian Tiger that is a model for developing countries across the world, including the Middle East," Bush said.

Meanwhile, in my mind he's hoping that in the future history will show that by his actions we have secured a long-term, stable source of oil for the United States.

I don't believe at all that he cares about spreading Democracy to either Afghanistan or Iraq. These are both God-forsaken countries and Afghanistan was only used as a stepping-stone to get to Iraq. If it hadn't been for the oil we wouldn't be there. Look at Sudan, and the issues in the Darfur region. Did we intervene there? Look at Rwanda. Did we intervene there?

It's all about the oil and he's hoping that we thank him in the future for lying, and misleading us in the present for our future happiness.

Minnesota Bridge Collapse - some perspective...

Two days ago a main traffic artery in Minneapolis collapsed into the river with bumper-to-bumper traffic on it. So far the death toll is at five and the news sources issued an audible sigh of disappointment when authorities lowered the number of missing estimate from thirty to eight.
The morbid media wants the big death count. They want human suffering because that's what people want. People have a morbid curiousity not too deep in their subconscious that gets satisfied by such big events like this.
I remember when the planes hit the towers and the media proclaimed that 50,000 people worked in those towers. Final deathcount: 3000+-
When Katrina hit New Orleans they were expecting 10,000 dead. Final deathcount: 2000+-.
They will never error on the low side because their estimates are always inflated five-fold or more.
After the event, there is always the "Are we at risk for another similar disaster?" related story followed by the "Who's to blame?" story that continues for years.
It's easy reporting. It's even lazy reporting.
Contrast this with the daily suicide bombings and sectarian violence in Iraq that kill scores or people on a daily basis. This is real devastation. Real people getting blown up. Real people grieving at the loss of family members. Real people leaving with nothing but the shirts on their backs in order to only find a place that is peaceful.
The US media has grown bored covering these stories because they are the same everyday. The faces all look the same. They literally could show film from events from last year and no one would know.
The US citizen doesn't want to see them either out of a collective shame that we feel for having caused it and now being able to do nothing about it.
So why are we getting 48 (going on 72) straight hours of bridge-collapse coverage? Very simply, it's a distraction from the misery going on in other parts of the world. It's a way for people to say "See, it happens here too."
Unfortunately, in the end, we will be disatisfied because of the disproportionate coverage given to such a small incident comparative to world-affairs.