Viva Romance!
March 14th, 2008 - 4:13 am
“I must say, I’m a little envious,” Bush said. “If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy [Afghanistan] succeed.”
“It must be exciting for you … in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You’re really making history, and thanks,” Bush said.
Romantic? Really? Only someone who has apparently formulated everything they know about fighting a war in a desert from watching Lawrence of Arabia would even begin to describe the conflict and societal problems in Afghanistan as romantic.
Why did he not rush in to enjoy the romance of Vietnam when he had the opportunity? There was plenty of exciting danger to face over there. It would have been so romantic! Really, it would have been! 
2 Responses to “Viva Romance!”
An amalgam of GreatWhiteHunterism and Ididn’thavearealdaddyism, the latter part expounded on in great length by Susan Faludi.
It reminds me of people who wax all romantic about the Civil War and how cool it would have been to be there. No, it would not be cool. It would be awful. Life in early America sucked even before we all start shooting at each other. None of it was any sort of happy-go-lucky day in the park just because interesting clothing was worn and history was being made. The making of history is usually a bloody awful mess.
Neither is the crap going on in Afghanistan or Iraq romantic, exciting or cool. It’s awful. I have friends there and friends who have come back from there. I’m pretty sure “romantic” isn’t one of the words they would use to describe the experience. I haven’t even heard any of them say it was in any way exciting. Stressful, awful, scary, tiring, dreadful, sickening, hot as hell? Yes, and worse. Romantic and exciting? Not so much.
War is not romantic. Period. Bush is an idiot. Period.
Had to look up Susan Faludi. Her new book looks interesting. I might have to get it at the library.