The Veep made it through surgery ok:
Vice President Dick Cheney successfully underwent medical procedures to repair aneurysms in arteries behind both knees on Saturday, his office said.
Mr. Cheney, 64, was “awake, alert, and comfortable” after the six-hour operation and was due to be briefed on the impact of Hurricane Rita in Louisiana and Texas, as well as the federal, state and local response, according to a statement from his office.
While Dick Cheney was having the pain in his knee removed, a bunch of pain in the asses inserted themselves on the public scene once again as they marched on Washington to fight poverty/imperialism/racism/Israel/war/environmental degradation/Mumia’s shameful imprisonment/you-name it. I am sure you can get your fill of the insanity at any number of right-leaning blogs, but I simply refused to watch. There is football on, and reading the headliners of this ANSWER speaker’s list tells me all I need to know about what went on (h/t Red State):
Jessica Lange, actor
George Galloway, British Member of Parliament
Ramsey Clark, former U.S. attorney general
Cindy Sheehan
Dolores Huerta, Co-Founder, United Farm Workers of America
Malik Rahim, New Orleans community activist who survived Hurricane Katrina
Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney
Ralph Nader
Mahdi Bray, Exec. Dir., Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation
Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, attorney/co-founder, Partnership for Civil Justice, National Lawyers Guild
Elias Rashmawi, National Council of Arab Americans
Brian Becker, National Coordinator, A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition
Lynne Stewart, human rights attorney
Rev. Al Sharpton
That is so much concentrated stupid, it is like 6 months worth of the Democratic Underground on one stage. If there is anything to large groups gathering together engaging in Transcendental Meditation to lower crime, I predict this congregation will have a similar effect- the District of Columbia SAT scores will probably drop 40 points come test time.
*** Update ***
Apparently I have upset the delicate sensibilities of some of the readership by calling the aforementioned gaggle of speakers ‘concentrated stupid.’
Concentrated Stupidity at work:
George Galloway: “I said countries occupied by UK and US troops are being raped by them. Jerusalem and Baghdad are in the hands of foreigners who are doing their will.”
You know what? I was going to go through and put up a quote for the headliners. Forget it. You know who they are. You know what they have said. Some of you still idolize them.
ppGaz
Looks like the only thing they were missing was Jane Fonda and Professor Irwin Corey.
Dave Ruddell
You know, back when the Natural Law Party ran candidates in Canada I actually voted for them. Twice. I mean, they were better than the alternatives, and that transcendental meditation could have worked…
DougJ
Can you believe they had the nerve to march while Dick Cheney was undergoing a painful operation? Where’s the respect of the office of the vice-president?
Make no mistake: the insurgents are keenly aware of Dick Cheney’s medical problems. And when the far left takes pot shots at the government *while* Dick Cheney is having medical problems, well, you can bet this country starts looking mighty weak to those insurgents.
Jessica Lange and the rest might as well go to Iraq, convert to a radical form of Islam, and go around ambushing our soliders. That would have pretty much the same effect as what they’re doing in DC this weekend.
Andrei
Really John… in all seriosus, go fuck yourself.
You can be so amazingfly fucking petty it boggle the mind.
tBone
My browser made the list wrap so that it looked like Hurricane Katrina was one of the marchers. I guess she really does have it in for the Bush administration.
DougJ
Tbone, the MST (mainstream tropical storms) have been out to get president Bush since day one.
stickler
DougJ, I think it’s pretty clear that — despite your snark — the Gulf of Mexico has been pretty pissed off at somebody since late August. Might as well be the head of state.
Narvy
You guys don’t get it. If Wrong People take a Right Position, then the Right Position is Wrong. QED. Right, John?
Letting Wrong People determine whom you oppose is just as bad as letting those same people choose whom you support. If this crew came out against hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, would we have to reject an anti-hurricane position? If Cindy Sheehan mourns the loss of her son, do we have to say losing our children is a good thing? If Al Sharpton claims Tawana Brawley was raped, do we have to reject all claims of rape?
Knee-jerk reactions are equally stupid in both directions. Let me be clear: I reject the politics of most of the people and organizations on John’s list, but I do not accept the rightness of the war in Iraq. OK, now let all the cherry-picking analytical critics and deconstructionists seize on the last clause and accuse me of being in league with the muddle-headed and evil people who sponsored or spoke at the demonstrations despite my protestations to the contrary. It’s gonna happen, but I’m prepared.
DougJ
Not the whole Gulf, stickler, just a few dead enders. And we can all be thankful that hurricane season is in its last throes. Though we should also remember that throes can mean a violent period, like the throes of death.
Narvy
Yeah, but wouldn’t you think GoM would be a little less indiscriminate?
Liberal Agitator
I second the direction for John to go fuck himself.
John, you’re sounding more and more irrelevant. Too bad. I once thought you had a sharp mind but now most of what I see is flippant and petty potshots at anyone you have a beef with.
You’ll be happy to know that I’m removing you from my reading list as of tonight.
Good luck John.
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
Yeah, Lib Masturbator, because Jessica Lange and George Galloway are such forces in American politics.
Is the above list the best you can do? You couldn’t even get Dennis Kucinich. But I’m sorry, you were saying something about irrelevance.
Midshipman Enfield
There is nothing more cuntacular than some twat blog commenter declaring that they will remove someone from their reading list because they sound irrelevant. What a poon!
Huzzar, another amazingfly earnest dumbfuck poon! I love you guys. Never change!
Ancient Purple
Wow, John. So indicting.
To bad you couldn’t be bothered to take two sentences to blog on the U.S. Attorney and SEC’s little peek into the so-called “blind trust” of Sen. Bill “I can diagnose people from video tape” Frist.
Hmmm…. which is more of a threat to the Republic: a legal march on Washington or the leader of the U.S. Senate under investigation for insider trading?
I think we know where you stand, John.
Andrei
Like I care what you think. I’ve been trying to “play nice” on John own’s blog, but Cole is proving time and time again he has no desire to play by his own rules, so then I’ll refrain as well since abiding by them has proved pointless with Dear Blog Author.
Like I said, this particular post is so amazingly fucking petty it boggles the mind. Absolutely nothing contributed by this pointless rant except to be mean spirited. So I’m calling John on it. He can either ban me or deal with it because I refuse to sit idly by and not exercise my freedom of speech. Tripe like this cannot be allowed to go on without a rebuttal.
And it really is tripe.
M. Scott Eiland
Dear Blog Author
Speaking of retarded. . .it’s asinine enough when lefties smugly compare GWB or some other hated righty leader to Kim Jong-Il, but when some clever soul decides to extend that particular species of lameness to bloggers, I’m quite sure the average IQ of all lefty blog commentators just dropped a perceptible amount.
M. Scott Eiland
George Galloway, British Member of Parliament
Lynne Stewart, human rights attorney
These two “guests” of Moonbatstock ’05 remind me of the famous insult by Billy Martin directed at Reggie Jackson and George Steinbrenner, which I will adapt for the occasion:
“One’s a born traitor–the other one’s convicted.”
Seal Pool
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
donald
Andrei,
He just spoke the truth baby. I mean, re-read that list. Truth can hurt sometime, but think of it as the opportunity to begin thinking.
John Cole
The ‘war’ in Iraq is over. What you are proposing right now is a withdrawal from the reconstruction efforts. What you are proposing is to make sure that the region descends into a BLOODY, BLOODY civil war.
What these folks want isn’t peace.
slide aka Joe Albanese
John Cole demonstrating what a complete moron he is:
Question to the regulars around here who have been reading John a lot longer than I have, He is pulling our leg right? This is one of those posts to get everyone all riled up? To increase traffic? He really can’t be serious can he? Can the professor really say with a straight face that “The ‘war’ in Iraq is over? He can’t be that totally clueless. And HE is talking about “concentrated stupid”?
Just for the other morons that might think John has a good debating point here that the war is over we’re just “reconstructing” Iraq at this stage, I suggest you read some of the recent stories that make it quite clear that the structure of the insurgency was put into place before our invasion of Iraq. This was part of the plan of Saddam and his people to counter an expected US “victory” over their conventional forces. What we won when Baghdad fell was a battle. One battle. The war in Iraq is hardly over. And everyone knows that. Well, everyone except “concentrated stupid” John.
Is that what happens when one watches too much football?
John Cole
Joe- The war is over. What we are fighting now is an insurgency that includes some Baathist holdovers,some radical Shi’ites, some members of the Sunni minority, a whole slew of different foreign fighters fighting for different reasons, and I am sure I am missing some.
But it isn’t a ‘war.’ There is no one to negotiate a peace treaty with. The ‘war’ won’t end if the US leaves.
I am right, you are wrong. And since Andrei sets the rules around here, apparently, Go Fuck Yourself.
Oh, and include your fucking biography so I can make assholish comments like “Can the professor really say with a straight face that “The ‘war’ in Iraq is over?”
I would dearly love to include your professional occupation in my ad hominems. Fucktard.
Andrew Reeves
John,If you really feel tempted to respond to someone who takes offense when you say that Al Sharpton and George Galloway are fools, you ought to keep in mind the old saying that you should never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
slide aka Joe Albanese
the Professor:
Why John, its never stopped you before from attacking anyone that you disagree with. But if you must know I have been in law enforcement for the past 20+ years.
the Professor:
From Time Magazine’s Cover story:
the Professor:
The insurgency just doesn’t have some Baathist holdovers, it was set up by the Baathists to continue to fight the WAR against an invading foreign army. Again from the same Time article:
So the regime that we went into Iraq to replace organized and finance the “insurgency”. The end of a War to me means you have defeated the enemy – that the enemy has surrendered, handed over their sword. If the enemy is instead still fighting, in whatever form it finds effective, I think it is just absurd to suggest that the war is over.
Anyone that reads this would be hard pressed to say that we ended the WAR in Iraq the day Saddam’s statue was knocked down:
Yeah John, the war is clearly over.
John Cole
Wow, Joe. I claim we are fighting an insurgency where there is no one who we can turn to for peace, and also note that should we leave, a bloody civil ‘war’ will break out, and to refute my point, you post a Time magazine article that SAYS THE SAME DAMNED THING.
Well done. Go have a doughnut (see- I can say stupid unrelated shit about your occupation, too!)
I simply do not understand people who think withdrawal of US troops will end ‘war.’ It won’t. It will consign the region to an actual war, rather than the struggling insurgency that is now a hindrance to the reconstruction efforts.
Geek, Esq.
ANSWER is to the US what the BNP is to the UK.
vietnam vet
hahaha
just checking in to see how the conservative side is doing on John’s site.
My my…. such anger. Of course football is more important than real life john.
I wouldn’t have expected anything less of you all.
donald
John,
My only question is, and as strongly as I feel in the rightness of the US course of action, is the best possible out come, a division of Iraq into 3 autonomous zones? My only sinking feeling is this is probably the best outcome. Otherwise, yes, we are in a never ending global war with animals.
slide aka Joe Albanese
Cole:
Nice try but that is not what you had said. You said the war was over and we are in some “reconstruction phase”. That is just rubbish. We are still fighting the war that we have not won and which many in the military now say is “unwinable”.
And just so I don’t get attacked for positions I don’t’ have, I never said we should just pull out tomorrow. I agree it would be a disaster if we do and would very likely create the very situation we ostensibly went to war to prevent. That is why I am so outraged by this blunder of a war. It has painted us into a corner where there is no good outcome. That the bozos that got us into this mess didn’t foresee this outcome is stunning in its naivety. They didn’t have to search far to see that many, including General Skowcroft, told us exactly what we would likely run into if we went into Iraq. But they ignored all the warnings in their ideological zeal to “remake the Middle East”. Remake the middle east? Jesus these guys are completely delusional.
That being said, I don’t’ think we can “stay the course”. Staying the course is a recipe for QUAGMIRE (your favorite description of the war) and will further inflame the vast Muslim world. And if it takes 150,000 people marching on Washington to put pressure on this administration to start thinking of alternative strategies then they have done this country a service despite your disparaging comments to the contrary.
jobiuspublius
So, it’s “Vietnam” 2.o without the NVA? How to win this fight against the insurgancy?
docG
A agree with John, what is happening currently in Iraq is not a war. For the reason cited, and others, the “War on Terror” is also not a war and it is disingenuous to use the term war. Wars are conducted between states, and terrorists are organized as non-state entities. Terrorism also cannot be ended through sheer military strength – ask Israel for a history lesson.
Our problems with terrorism are intelligence and law enforcement problems. Infiltrating and spying on terrorist cells and organizations (military intelligence plays a vital role here), to learn of terrorists acts being planned is vital. Active intervention to stop planned terrorist acts is the job of law enforcement, (police, FBI, border security, etc.) sometimes augmented by overt military action, typically of a special forces type operation.
Terrorism and the political forces driving it can only be managed, not defeated in a standard “war” sense, with a surrender and a declaration of the end of hostilities. Attacking Iran militarily to deal with terrorism was an example of using the wrong tool for the problem, a major issue every time a problem is mislabeled. Calling a clogged toilet the “War on Plumbing” and responding militarily with a hand grenade in the commode would cause a lot of collateral damage and do nothing to improve the plumbing situation.
It is vital to be extremely aggressive with terrorists and President Bush is to be commended for recognizing this fact. Directing that aggression toward invading Iraq was a severe mistake and the unmanagable insurgency is but one result. The truly sad part is if we occupy Iraq for another decade, the civil war will still happen when we leave, and we will have not diminished the threat of terrorist acts occuring in the United States one whit.
docG
oops, make that Iraq, Dr. Freud.
demimondian
Cole, you’ve forgotten your own nation’s history.
Here’s a quick question for you: how many battles did George Washington win during the course of his military career? I’m sure that you do know, but, for the benefit of others, two: Princeton and Yorktown. During that time, the British frequently complained that there was no one authority with whom they could negotiate…in fact, the rhetoric was surprisingly similar.
They even predicted a bloody and destructive civil war if the insurgents won. They were right, sort of.
You’re being wilfully blind, John. The current insurgency is the continuation of the war by other means. This isn’t a war that we like, no, but it’s a war. And it’s one we haven’t figured out how to fight.
jobiuspublius
Exactly and that is the important point.
jobiuspublius
CRAP, wrong spot again!!!!!
Narvy
John slaps Narvy upside the head with
I guess being so busy posting pictures of cats and all you missed my post in the Worker’s World thread where I responded to another’s post of “I advocate for withdrawal” with
We’re stuck in the aftermath of a war, if you prefer, that we had no legitimate reason to start. My statement that
does not propose a withdrawal from the ‘reconstruction’ efforts or a descent into bloody, bloody civil war. It is an ethical and moral belief.
But that’s OK, John. I sometimes draw incorrect inferences from what you post because I don’t read everything here either.
jobiuspublius
Hehe, I goofed, never mind. I’m posting half heartedly anyway.
Narvy
John says:
This is true. There is no one to negotiate a treaty with and there is no metric for victory; if we make peace with somebody it won’t be with everybody; and the ‘war’ won’t end if the US stays, but at least no American soldiers will be killed and we won’t be squandering the Treasury on the ‘war’.
jobiuspublius
Look! Fighting over there so we don’t have to fight them over here really does work.
Narvy
As I understand it, one of the zones will have little or no oil to sell and its citizens, or at least their leaders, will not agree to an equal geographic division. I think it’s another recipe for civil war, maybe with Turkish intervention in the Kurdish zone.
Serious request: I would like to know why you feel the US course is right.
ppGaz
Your point is valid. As far as it goes. It fails to deal with the elephant outside the tent, John, which is: People who think, and who started this war because, insertion of those troops would end, or abate, terrorism. It won’t.
And so what you have now is basically a shouting match between people who agree with what I just said, and people who either don’t agree, or won’t admit that they were wrong.
The reason why the issue creates the theater you see now is because people on “your” side of the question will not admit that they were wrong. You want Narvy to concede your simple and realistic point, but as far as I know, you will not under any circumstances discuss the even more salient point I raised here in this post (and have raised more than once in the past).
Narvy
This is an accurate observation, and I agree with what you say. And since Congress has not issued a declaration of war, it can’t legally be a war. But referring to “war” in discussion is convenient shorthand — “Korean War” is easier to talk about than “Korean Police Action” — and regardless of whether the action in Iraq is called “war” or not, people are still being shot and getting blown up.
However, it’s nice to know I’m not the only pedantic nit-picker on this site. (Please, no chiding about the differences between the Korean unpleasantness in the fifties and the Iraq mess. I’m just trying to make a point.)
jobiuspublius
From the above posted Time Magazine link:
Anybody who thinks I’m going to risk my life at the puppet end of King-Crony-Cluster-Fuck’s strings needs to have their LSD glands removed.
Bullshit. I don’t believe that crap at all and I don’t appreciate the binary false choice that Klien provides. The mideast has always been divided and full of tyrany. It will continue to be. Al-Qeada will piss off plenty of mid-east people. Iraq was a horror show before we got there. Now it has a chance at self determination. Unfortunately, it seems to me, we are not in a position to help them at the moment.
Narvy
It would have been more commendable had he thrown the resources that went into Iraq into hunting down the terrorists in Afghanistan.
I liked your post, DocG, but doesn’t making clear, intelligent argument make you feel out of place here?
jobiuspublius
Nelson Muntz
John, you’re right. It’s not a war. A war has to be declared by Congress. This is an illegal act committed by the President of the United States.
Apart from that Professor, I’d say “Doughnut” Joe completely pwned you. Go Joe!
Ha Ha!
Narvy
Uh, pp, Narvy agrees with John’s simple and realistic point (if you’re talking about the consequences of withdrawal). Narvy feels the situation is hopeless and we will either be in Iraq for decades or throwing weapons and money at surrogates, if we can find any, for decades, without improving anti-terrorist defenses at home, mostly because we won’t be able to afford to.
Dunno if that’s a concession or not, but this part of the discussion grew out of someone (John in this case) attributing to me a position that I don’t hold, which has never before happened on this site.
jobiuspublius
Some days I feel so lost I can barely get out of bed and I wonder why am I the only Homo sapien alive?
demimondian
I keep reminding people of the US Revolutionary War — which, according to Narvy and others, also wasn’t a war. (And, in fact, was not so-called in the British press at the time.)
The quip about war being the extension of diplomacy by other means applies here. It is true that there is not just one voice speaking in Iraq. It is equally true that the individual organizations which make up the “Iraqi Insurgency” don’t have a coherent ideology or organizing factor beyond a widely held desire for the United States to leave. It’s even true that the Turks, who have been loyal allies for years, have good reason to resist the formation of an independent Kurdistan on their Eastern border.
None of these things matter. Here is what I think matters — I’m interested in what other people think.
We are fighting a war in Iraq.In order to “win” that war, we would need to completely eliminate violent opposition. (First law of guerilla warfare — the guerillas only have to avoid losing.)We have no reasonable prospect of completely eliminating violent opposition, as that would require wholesale slaughter of the Sunni population in central Iraq.From this, I conclude that we are fighting a war we cannot win. That’s stupid. We must either redefine what it means to win or we will lose. I suggest that we work out what winning would mean, thus changing the nature of the war, rather than spending time fighting the war our enemies want us to fight.
Narvy
Actually, Congress gave Bush carte blanche without actually declaring war. This is legal and is the very definition of pusillanimity.
Nelson Muntz
See Narvy, that’s the problem with posting after reading all of the comments, but not reloading to read ALL of the comments. I bow to your accuracy.
Regardless the Professor was pwned in a legal action by Donut Joe.
Narvy
Not too sure why I’m being cited here since I was only agreeing with somebody else, but there certainly are similarities between the Brits in the 1700’s and the Americans in the 2000’s.
As for the rest of your post, working out a new definition of winning is an interesting idea, but for some reason I keep having visions of George Orwell.
demimondian
Sorry, Jobius, but I think that’s accurate.
The problem with losing is that it makes everybody who resisted you a hero. In this case, Al Zarqawi (I don’t speak Arabic, so I’m not going to use the particle/dash spelling) will come out a hero, at least in the Faluja triangle. He will wind up with a base of operations which is both more central and more populous, nt to mention richer, than Afghanistan. And he will be able to maintain a sanctuary there.
That, more than anything else, is why we must redefine “winning”. It might be that redefining winning to “withdrawing the troops in Baghdad, leaving that city in the hands of the Shiite militia, and transferring the US troops to the Sunni areas in the center of the country, making those areas hell-holes for the guerillas and residents alike” would suffice. Unlike Narvy, and I suspect you, I’m cynical enough to be willing to accept that.
But I’m not a moral being, just interested in peace and stability in the Middle East.
demimondian
Yeah, you were agreeing with Cole, I know. The point is, you were the one who most recently put forward the thesis that we’re not fighting a war in Iraq. I was disagreeing with that statement — I say we are, and that we are losing.
You should. I’m making a fundamentally Orwellian argument, and I will gladly acknowledge that. If we can’t win with everyone in Iraq, then we need to pick a group with whom we can win, and win there. That requires we decide that war is peace — and probably that ignorance is strength. However, in the long run, if we don’t belong in Iraq, then we need to take that fact at face value and ask how we get out without losing worse.
(And, yes, if you want to call me a defeatist, you’re right. Sorry. I’m a realist, and I don’t believe in pretending when the odds are against me.)
ppGaz
Great, as do I. However, MY point was something else entirely.
Namely, that John’s-Narvy’s-ppG’s agreed-on point is trumped by a larger point, one which John WILL NOT discuss (at least up to now) and one which the righties in general don’t want to discuss, which is that the original premises upon which the decision to go to war were as flawed, if not more flawed, than the “withdrawal = peace” premise is now.
The reason why people are not running to pat John on the back for his not-very-original “withdrawal peace” assertion is that the other point blots it out. It’s the same problem that Bush has. Support for the war is going to hang on my point, not John’s point. People are not going to give the same government that was wrong about starting the war, carte blanche to continue fighting it indefinitely.
Like it or not, that’s just the way it is, and the knee-jerk right has no answer for this dillemma because they can’t even acknowledge it without admitting that they were wrong in the first place …. which as we all know, they absolutely will never do.
Narvy
The first time I’ve ever been called less cynical than someone else.
Your proposal might be the best way out, I really don’t know, but it has a vague aroma of Vietnam about it, withdraw and declare a win, the difference being that we really stay. Unless I’m misunderstanding you.
This is not the position of a cynic. This is the dream of one who wishes that a couple of thousand years of bloody animosity could be overcome by good will.
Narvy
Don’t forget forming the Anti-Sex League.
Sorry, but I think we need a brief levity break at this point.
Digital Amish
I was going to make a comment invisioning an equivalent gathering of right wing groups and personalities and the treasure trove of ludicrous quotes that would be available. But as I was reading the comment thread I came accross this:
and all of a sudden all I can say is “Jesus H. Christ on a crutch!”
Narvy
Yeah, that’s kind of gotten lost. The thread started out about the anti-war rally in DC and seems to have been hijacked to another topic, like that never happens.
In my defense, if one is needed, my squabble/agreement with John grew out of his disagreeably phrased disagreement with my assertion that, even though I did not accept the politics of the organizers and speakers of the march, I did not believe in the “rightness” of the war that is not really a war and which was right anyway.
DougJ
Look, following on ppgaz’s post, I agree that John’s point about withdrawl not meaning peace is correct, but it is too subtle and sophisticated to hold up long in the public debate.
Here’s the thing. The Bushies got Americans behind the war by treating them like idiots: using Saddam and 9/11 in the same sentence over and over again, saying you can’t bargain with a madman (despite our efforts to bargain with Kim Il-Jong), talking about how we would be greeted as liberators (okay, they believed that themselves, but in retrospect, it was an idiotic idea and it seemed one to knowledgeable observers at the time).
Now the Bushies want the public to have a sophisticated understanding of what’s going on there, that the Shiites and Sunnis may have a civil war if we leave, that the Shiite part of the country is likely to become a client state of Iran if we leave, and so on. Much of which is true, though they can’t help salting it with dubious assertions along the lines of “we’re fighting them there so we don’t have to fight them here.”
You can’t have it both ways. You can’t expect the public to be so dumb that it believes two avowed enemies (bin Laden and Hussein) put aside their differences to fight the United States as a sort of terrorist “We Are The World” gesture and then expect them to grasp all the nuances of Iraqi politics and ethnic division.
As long as we’re there, we’re at war, as far as the public is concerned. You live by reductionism, you die by reductionism.
If the Bushies don’t want the public to think we’re at war in Iraq, they should at least stop linking Iraq with the *war on terror*. Don’t you think?
DougJ
And, yes, laugh all you want to, but I think renaming the War on Terror as the Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism would have helped. It’s easy to mock it (and I myself did) but it would have been a good way of communicating our current mission in Iraq to the public.
demimondian
You know, I think we probably agree on more than we disagree on.
So, voters, here are some theses. Upon which do we have consensus?
(a) We are no longer fighting an organized army in Iraq.
(b) We are not fighting a single entity in Iraq.
(c) The entities with which we are fighting have divergent goals.
(d) The entities with which we are fighting in Iraq have donflicting goals.
(e) The entities with which we are fighting in Iraq are heavily armed, and are likely to fight with one another once we leave.
Demi “Give peace a chace” Mondian
Rick
That is so much concentrated stupid, it is like 6 months worth of the Democratic Underground on one stage.
Tell it, John! Speak Truth to Power! Or at least, Truth to Knuckleheaded Impotence.
Cordially…
ppGaz
The entire post, well stated. Kudos.
As for reductionism, at BJ, we have John’s relentless reductio ad absurdum as a substitute for frank discussion, and then we get whipsawed by faux complaints that we are not having a serious discussion. It’s a shrewd tightrope that John walks, and you have to give him his props, he walks it well.
ppGaz
Apparently somebody put a quarter in Rick’s slot.
Narvy
demimondian —
Boy that’s a tough one. How about “All of the above.”
DougJ —
If we need a name for fighting the Middle Eastern Anti-US Collective (MEA-USC) it should be short and punchy (no, the other meaning of punchy). GSAVE ain’t. Struggle Aginst Terrorism would do but its acronym is taken, and anyway “struggle” sounds sort of communistic. What the administration needs to do is outsource the naming to one of the slicker ad agencies.
I like your other post about “subtle and sophisticated” debate, but I don’t think the presentation of anything subtle will work. The only thing that gets public support for a venture like Iraq is capital-F Fear, and subtlety and sophistication are confusing rather than frightening. The simplistic sloganeering in the beginning worked because it was not s&s, and now the citizenry sees through the charade (well, the citizens with eyes, ears, and brains). But
are too hard to get one’s head around in CNN/Fox soundbytes, and I don’t believe that such an approach would accomplish anything. Maybe what we need is something along the lines of “We have to stay to protect our right to drive oversize SUVs.” That’s easily understood and God knows it would strike fear in the hearts of suburbanites.
Narvy
Well that didn’t work. John, could you delete that post?
What I was trying for was
Yes! And this is a good time to break with tradition and start Speaking Truth, although I doubt very much that Power reads this blog.
DougJ
Part of what I like about GSAVE is that it isn’t that punchy. Instead, it is an honest attempt at an accurate description of what our anti-terror policy should be. One of the reasons I can’t quite bring myself to dislike Rumsfeld is that every now and then he tries to do something honest that is truly in the best interests of the country. Of course, his suggestions are immediately shot down by Bush, but I respect him a little for trying.
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
Right on the money here:
“I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force – if necessary – to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” — John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
“Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
Yep, those damn Bushies!
Narvy
Sheesh! So many possible responses to this.
1. Are we talking about the same Rumsfeld, you know, the Secretary of Defense Abroad?
2. How do you get postings from your parallel universe over to here?
3. Gee, I must have blinked and missed the honest part.
4. Etc…
DougJ —
You are a person of sterling character, great wit, good sense, and intelligent analysis, not to mention awe-inspiring snarkiness. How a person with these characteristics can like R even a teeny bit baffles me. Rumsfeld is a member of the cabal that got us into this mess, and he is responsible for the lean, mean, fighting machine that was so lean it couldn’t actually win or occupy or whatever they were supposed to do after the Iraqis stopped pelting them with rose petals. Rumsfeld is third in my detestation list, after Bush and Cheney, who are tied for first.
demimondian
Oh,Boy.Stupidity:
You know, I’m glad that you feel validated by an administration that lied to the Congress in order to get a vote passed to support a war, ObL. It gives me faith in the wisdom of the American Right, and in its ability to continue to hold on to power.
Remember…
War is peaceLove is hate(And Randall Terry is a one-man Anti-Sex League, Narvy.)
Narvy
The aptly named Oh,Boy.Stupidity! can’t seem to tell the difference between reponsibility and pandering.
Kerry and Edwards were trying desperately to paint themselves as Capital-P Patriotic, on the not-inaccurate assumption that declaring support would resonate with the populace. They did not set policy, nor did they initiate any military action.
Anyway, this thread is not about Kerry and Edwards, who are so 2004. Back on topic please.
DougJ
I realize this is a little off-topic, but I wanted to bring things back to what this war really demonstrates: the stunning incompetence of the Bush administration. It is almost unfair to some in the neocon pro-nation-building press to judge the idea of neocon nation-building by the mission in Iraq. All kidding aside, I’m not sure anyone could have ancitipated how poorly run this mission would be. It’s just as well that this gives nation-building a bad name, because philosophically I think it is something that should only be done when all else fails.
But what I think is going to happen as a result of the Bush administration’s incompetence is that a whole flotilla of conservative ideas — many of them good — are going to be dismissed as failures, because this administration is too incompetent to do anything right. They’ll probably try all sorts of innovative privatization ideas out in the Gulf Coast — vouchers, enterprise zones, etc. I predict that they will all fail, not because they aren’t good ideas, but because there will be so much corruption and incompetence. The whole thing came very close to being overseen by a criminal (Safavian) and a failed head of a horse assocation (Brown). No idea is so good as to overcome the “leadership” of people like that.
I have friends who still believe in communism (one day, I’m sure they’ll be neocons, ha ha). They claim that the problem in the Soviet Union was more a problem with Russian culture than with communist ideas. As evidence, they cite the disastrous 600 hundred years of Russian history preceeding 1917 and the almost as disastrous 15 years since 1991. I wonder if some day proponents of many conservative ideas will be saying the same thing about the Bush administration. That the fault lay not in the ideas themselves, but in their stars.
ppGaz
Yes, you think this is about partisanship, and so you will lead with some partisan baiting. Predictable.
But the real issue is not about partisanship. I don’t care who said it, Kerry, Bush, Clinton, Satan, or Jesus H. Fucking Christ himself ….. it was wrong.
That’s what counts. Whether it was right, or wrong.
Not who said it.
Call back when you want to have that conversation.
DougJ
Well, Narvy, thank you for the compliments. Let me point out that Seymour Hersh also says he can’t bring himself to hate Rumsfeld. He claims that the pre-Iraq Rumsfeld was an intelligent, reasonble person. He admits the current Rumsfeld often sounds like a lunatic.
Yes, Rummy’s plan for a lean, mean, fighting machine was catastrophic. But that was a failure of judgement, not character. So if you ask me, should Rumsfeld resign and go down in history with Robert McNamara as one of the worst Defense Secretaries ever? Yes. Should he rot in hell with Dick Cheney and Karl Rove? No.
Nelson Muntz
I’m not sure anyone could have ancitipated how poorly run this mission would be.
Ooh, bad statement. Sounds too much like, “who could have anticipated the levees would be breached?” and “who could have anticipated that wackos would fly airplanes into buildings?” and “who could have anticipated that a land war in asia would go badly?”
In fact, lots of folks anticipated these things, and many folks even anticipated all three. I still have an email I sent to Paul Krugman in early 2002 expressing why I was anti-war-in-Iraq, and the number one reason was that I felt the administration was too incompetent.
I didn’t anticipate the Spanish Inquisition, however.
ppGaz
Stories “from the time” were that Rumsfeld was countering the advice given him by the generals.
That’s not judgement, that IS character, and ego.
He sounds like a lunatic because he is a lunatic. Sometimes the simple explanation is the right one. Occam, and all that.
Narvy
Right! I should have glommed onto the Terry/Reed/Dobson/Schlafly/etc. Virginity Protection League.
Nelson Muntz
My only problem with your analysis DougJ re: Dumsfeld, is that to me, Dumsfeld seems smart enough to understand that regardless of W’s wishes, he needs to step aside and let someone else handle the situation. That after his disastrous misteps, and with his disastrous reputation, there is no way he is the best person for the job.
I truly don’t understand why Dumsfeld, poet, Korean War Vet, relatively charming old guy doesn’t resign or eat his gun. Better and Lesser folks would have by now.
DougJ
That was deliberate. But I don’t think anyone in the general public could have had any idea of how poorly this thing would be run. It certainly took me by surprise, I’ll say that.
And yes, to tie two things together, Rumsfeld is largely to blame for the poor planning.
Rick
… break with tradition and start Speaking Truth, although I doubt very much that Power reads this blog.
Oh, Power might read it in order to cackle at the “reality-based” commentariat. I mean, “hyena laugh.”
Cordially…
DougJ
Nelson, Robert McNamara is a thousand times smarter than anyone in the Bush administration and look what he did. I can’t explain what was going on in Rumsfeld’s head, but I don’t think it was “this will help us politically” (Rove) or “this will be good for oil companies, good for Halliburton, and make me feel like a man again” (Cheney). Maybe that’s not quite what Cheney was thinking; I can’t figure that guy out and I’m not sure I want to. You know, when you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares into you, and all that.
demimondian
I’m going to call this one statement out, DougJ, because it explains a lot of things — among others, why I can bring myself to hate Don Rumsfeld.
Back in the ’90s, before it was fashionable, I was one of the folk who was pushing the Army to transform itself. We have a huge problem with our infantry soldiers — we care about them. That means we need to get kill ratios for them which are as good or better than those which the Air Force and Navy get. That, in turn, makes it harder to recruit soldiers, and makes those we have recruited even more precious.
Rumsfeld’s vision of an army with a tiny cadre of utterly lethal fighters is the only one that can work in the long term for our nation.
*Unfortunately*, it has this…problem. It’s generally considered poor form to go around killing civilians in droves. To keep peace in an occupied region, you don’t need a tiny band of super-killers. You need a huge force of policemen. Contrary to what people think, policement are no easier to train than commandos — it’s just a lot less glorious to be trained that way. Before Iraq, we had not seriously considered how we get both of these out of the same Army.
I hate Don Rumsfeld because he didn’t listen to his advisors when they told him that. He let a grand vision get in the way of the good of his nation, at least in part because he was hoping that his grand vision would establish his star in the heavens with Grant, Sherman, Patton, and Marshall. He put himself ahead of the soldiers — and I can’t forgive that in any politician. (Yes, even Clinton.)
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
That’s hilarious. So was Congress lying or pandering when it unanimously passed Regime Change for Iraq back in 1998?
Sorry, but if you don’t see the threat that Saddam posed to the long-term security of the US, then forget it. Why bother? Surely, Saddam never funded terror or would have been happy to sit idly by while Afghanistan became democratized or would have been a willing partner in rounding up terrorists.
I can’t wait for his trial to see how much stuff comes out.
DougJ: Please explain how Iraq has been handled incompetently. Sure, plenty of mistakes had been made, but free elections, a Constitution, transfer of power all on time. This is incompetent, during an undertaking that has never been tried before? Only 2K soldiers dead. That’s a far cry from the Left’s shouts of 10,000s US soldiers dead. Where’s the gross incompetence? Or in short: what should Iraq look like today if the war was done competently?
As for the “lies”: everyone in the world thought Saddam had WMDs, even his Arab neighbors.
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
How about Afghanistan? Incompetent handled or not? Didn’t they just have a second round of elections?
DougJ
Okay, I see your point. Still, it’s hard for me lump him in with Cheney. Rumsfeld looks uncomfortable when his lying. That suggests he isn’t a sociopath (unlike Cheney and Rove) and that he is in some cases acquainted with the truth (unlike Bush). That doesn’t make him a good person, obviously.
I’ve come to see the White House as a delusional Kim Il Jong type leader surrounded by cynical, sociopathic advisors. When you come at things from that direction, Rummy doesn’t seem that bad.
DougJ
Good point, stupidity. Yes, it was incompetent in some ways. They should have caught Mullah Omar and Osama, for example.
Parts of the war in Afghanistan were handled well. But it was an easier fight for the “hearts and minds” since the Taliban was essentially a foreign occupying force. Don’t forget, most of the Taliban soldiers were Al Qaeda members who didn’t speak the local language. It’s easier to be greeted as liberators when you actually are liberating people from a foreign occupying force.
ppGaz
This is the phase where o.b.stupid will insist on blaming Kerry and Edwards for the war.
Bush, then is just trying to save us from their bad judgement.
Get it?
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
Riiiiiiiiiiiight, dude. But your mental health is completely in tact, ain’t it?
demimondian
I would say that anyone around here at this hour of a Sunday morning (PDT) is serious short of tact.
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
I’m not blaming them. I thank them for their support. It was the right thing to do. History will bear that out.
ppGaz
Fall 2001: “Wanted, Dead or Alive”
Spring 2002: “I am really not that concerned about him.”
You fucking tell me, incompetant, or not?
ppGaz
Not so far. What will change it? What model or scenario brings that about?
If “history” is your guide, what history reading in 2002 would have predicted a good outcome here?
This one?
The First Iraq Debacle
Narvy
DougJ —
Wow! I can’t (pant, pant) keep up (wheeze, wheeze) with you. Let’s stop for a moment and sprawl under this tree and review.
Check!
Check! Don’t forget Uniter-Not-A-Divider Candidate Bush’s statements opposing the idea of nation-building.
Not too sure about this. The nominally conservative ideas about Social Security, health care, indiscriminate tax cuts favoring the wealthy (yeah, that phrase has become a cliché, but I can’t think of another), repudiation of many years of environmental protection in the interests of private development … I’m getting winded again.
Redundant, but Check!
As far as the historical argument is concerned (here I get to ride my favorite hobby horse), to think that a governmental model developed by people steeped in the tradition of the Western European Enlightenment can be dropped like rose petals (or a bomb) on a society that is steeped in the traditions of a very strict religion and a couple of thousand years of tribal warfare is indescribably stupid. This has been empirically tested by the British and there is no reason to think we will fare any better than they did.
Bonus snark: The Bush administration’s attitude towards science and religion is threatening to bring about an American Endarkenment.
There, I’m all rested, we can go on.
Narvy
Pandering. And they thought it was safe.
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
And they should have razed Falluja, too. Okay, I got where you’re coming from. I thought you were gonna start carping about museums being looted or something.
Oh, no, Ppgaz, Bush was just pandering when he said that. Are we sure these quotes aren’t taken out of context? I’m sure I could dredge up some quotes from Vince Lombardi saying how much he hated football or something.
Yeah, Osama should have been caught and so should Zarquawi. (Though I think Osama may be dead) But again, mistakes, yes. Total incompetence? Come on. Be reasonable. Hitler had to off himself. The allies never got to him. WW2–incompetent?
demimondian
Oh, boy! Hobby horse poker! OK, I’ll see your Arab tribal warfare and raise you one Japanese Samurai culture. (And, next round, I’m going to raise you one Korean Imperial culture and one Mexican history of tribal opression, so I’m not played out. And I’ve still got Indian democracy tucked up my sleeve, if my cards look weak later on.)
I’m not a big buyer of Western exceptionalism, nor of non-Western barbarism. Yes, it takes a certain amount of practice to keep the peace in a democratic society. But Japan and Korea show you that you can impose democracy on societies with long and unending histories of totalitarianism.
ppGaz
Taken out of context?
Not unless every single thing he has said in six years has been taken out of context.
You’re done, obs. Take yourself off the grill.
Narvy
I can’t keep up with Oh,Boy.Stupidity! either. I’m giving up on trying to answer his far-from-reality-based assertions. I hope we all live long enough to see Afghani elections that don’t require armed patrols to keep voters from being killed (a well-known measure of success),
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
1) everyone got a tax cut. the rich pay more in taxes, so they get more back. Please feel free to read any mainstream economist (no, not Krugman) to find out how the tax cuts stimulated the economy.
2) Oh, no, private development. Can you please tell me who owns more polluted land than anyone in america? The fed. govt. Private ownership actually helps environs because the owners have a vested interest in making sure the land is either sellable to the highest bidder or usable. Govt. control of land fosters irresponsibility because those in charge of it have no vested interest.
Regardless, the Bush Enviro policy is identical to Clinton’s and others in the past. But let’s hear what you got….
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
Yeah, because no elections are always preferably to limited free elections. And doesn’t the fact that voters have to be protected while voting tell you something more about the terrorists than those of us opposing them. 10% of Afghans on the ballot were women. Women couldn’t vote before.
You don’t see the progress? Good luck!
Narvy
demimondian —
That’s all true, but, aside from dropping two atomic bombs on Japan, how many of these democratic Romes were built in a day? Are you promoting the cakewalk theory of history? And I didn’t think I was talking about Western exceptionalism, I thought I was talking about Middle Eastern exceptionalism. And I did not use the word “barbarism”.
tBone
What color are the “Clear Skies” in your world?
Narvy
Ah, of course, this explains strip mining and deforestation.
Narvy
Oh,Boy.Stupidity! —
How many years of study did it take for you to become as ill-informed as you are?
demimondian
Let’s start with the last: no, you didn’t, and I shouldn’t have used it either. I was trying to find a word that carried a little more weight than “commonality” as a balance for exceptionalism. Either way, I’m sorry.
I tend to think that arguments about exceptionalism are generally flawed. People are people, no matter what, and *in the mass*, have enough diplomats and politicians to make almost any governmental system work. As evidence, look at the Axis powers, none of which had ever had anything which you or I would have recognized as a democratic history. (And, no, the Weimar Republic doesn’t count.)
Reid
I’ve skipped about half this thread, and surely no one is reading any longer. But … “The ‘war’ in Iraq is over”???
When less than 200 in uniform were killed during what you define as “war,” and over 1700 in uniform have been killed since, I think you may need to reconsider your definition of war.
Because I think if you ask anyone in the Army or Marines stationed in Iraq, or most of the citizens in Iraq (whose death rate has grown exponentially since what you call “war” supposedly ended), they’d argue you’re playing a semantic game.
More people on both sides are being killed now than in April/May, 2003, so, who exactly is the war over for?
Narvy
I agree, but people also think and act in conformity with their cultural norms, and cultures can (and do) differ big time.
demimondian — We seem to be having a gentlemanly debate. Do you think we’ll be banned?
ppGaz
Yes, Americans will rally to support a war without end, anywhere, as long as it takes care of the right of women to vote in that foreign land.
ppGaz
Doh!
Narvy
ppGaz — Give it up Dude. He’s not worth the wear and tear on your keyboard.
Narvy
I hope that was a signifier of approval.
ppGaz
Under the NGDSGU rule, which is the foundation of BJ’s social order, yes.
[ No Good Deed Shall Go Unpunished ]
ppGaz
My secret microphone at o.b.s’s location picked it up …..
ppGaz
Politicians, and blog onwers, largely.
Narvy
Dude, you are so naive. o.b.s never says “Doh!”, it’s the response to a realization.
ppGaz
Well, it could have come from his tv set.
Or maybe he just realized that his foray here was futile.
Perhaps the phrase “Ass Whipping” flashed before his eyes ….
DougJ
I meant the vouchers (housing and schools) and enterprise zones. What you describe aren’t ideas per se but examples of corruption.
Narvy
I have serious reservations about school vouchers. The voucher plan implicitly assumes that schools are like stores, and that any one can and will accommodate an arbitrarily large number of customers. In fact, private school capacities are limited, and schools can pick and choose their students. When I was a lad back in the Pleistocene, competent tax-funded public schools open to all were the norm. I think trying to return to that model is better than a voucher plan.
Enterprise zones are a fine idea, but unless they are scrupulously watched (is that a conservative thing?) they are low-hanging fruit for the greedy and corrupt.
And I differ with you in your classifying SS and health care as not ideas per se. The proposed SS change is an old idea dressed up in new clothes, and the health care situation is a morass of really bad ideas.
DougJ
You’re right about the SS. It is an idea. It’s really the environmental stuff that is simply corruption.
I think that a lot of the voucher stuff is worth trying.
demimondian
I dunno about vouchers, DougJ. The private schools people think of when they think of vouchers are places which cost “a new car every year”. Those are great schools, but vouchers aren’t going to open them to the kids who need them. Vouchers are going to create a few decent schools, and a ton of money mills.
Now, of course, you can prevent that. You can regulate teacher qualification, and mandate testing, and hold individuals responsible for failing to meet standards, and, and, and…and suddenly, you look up, and realize that you’ve just recreated the public schools.
Maybe the conservative movement should look back at why we have the public school infrastructure in place, and recognize that a lot of it is there for good reason. Yeah, private schools won’t have teachers’ unions — but, trust me, guy, that will be a short-lived phenomenon.
DougJ
Good Time article on Bush cronyism.
If you’re not horrified, you’re not paying attention.
Nash
There was a period there where I thought Cole and Rick Moran weren’t the exact same person.
But the coincidences in subject choice (predictable, boring) and reasoning skills (not) are too many to ignore the truth anymore.
John/Rick, you really should close up one of the blogs and stick to the other. Pretend schizophrenia swiftly becomes the real thing. It may be too late already.
Oh, and I hope the Steelers take it in the rear. That’s another thing I’m tired of hearing out of you.
all the best.
demimondian
I can’t argue with that. I offer as evidence that the differences are less than you think the on-going democratic development in South Africa. Despite a long a divisive history of tribalism, and a revolutionary party led by a bunch of communists, South Africa has had a series of elections and has a stable government. I believe that sometime in the next fifty years, the government will start changing hands. (Recall that it took 30+ years for the US to have a change of party. Half a century isn’t a lnog time.)
I kind of hope so. I do so enjoy being a troll, and I’m starting to have withdrawal symptoms.
Narvy
Yet another thought about school vouchers. De facto racial segregation in housing exists (consider Los Angeles), and kids from minority neighborhoods may not/are likely not to have daily transportation from where they live to the school they manage to get into. I know the mantra, entrepreneurs will open schools in such neighborhoods… I doubt that will happen, because there are few to no families in those areas with the money to make up the difference between the voucher value and what it takes per student to turn a profit. The entrepreneurs will flock to wealthy areas and leave the minority kids to a more depleted public school system.
The educational stratification that would result makes me think of Huxley’s Brave New World.
ppGaz
Well, it’s basically the dismantling of Social Security, dressed up in the same clothes designed for the campaign many years ago. The clothes are “new” to us only because we weren’t paying attention heretofore.
Cato Institute “Lenin Strategy” 1983
Narvy
Sure you can, if you put your mind to it. Or you’re Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
But seriously, there are big cultural impediments to achieving a democratic Middle East, and I think the Bush administration was criminally stupid to think that it could achieved quickly, i.e., on the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld timetable, without a lot of planning, an adequate American force to keep the peace, a plan to counter a political and religious stew of opposition, and a workable way to bring the Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds into harmony (which may not be possible).
ppGaz
Even with such a “plan” the thing would have been a boondoggle. That’s because there is no historical or empirical basis for drawing up such a plan. It can only be based on speculation.
In other words, the thing was, and remains, a grand experiment, for which there is no preexisting data to provide guidance.
A grand experiment, out of control from the first day.
It is in that grand experiment that our friends on the right have placed their blind faith, and on that blind faith on which they base their knee-jerk reaction to anything that challenges the assumptions. Further, these people, the very same ones who preached Small Government only a decade ago, now cling to Magical All Powerful Government as the basis for their blind trust in our ability to carry out the Grand Experiment. Magical, All Powerful Government run by these goddamned potatoheads.
And so, here we are.
Enjoy!
Narvy
ppGaz —
Excellent exposition. But you insult potatoes.
demimondian
Hey! I resemble that remark!
ppGaz
I know, and they have such thin skins.
jobiuspublius
Worst-POTUS-Ever is uniter not a divider?
skip
John says: “But it isn’t a ‘war.’ There is no one to negotiate a peace treaty with. The ‘war’ won’t end if the US leaves.”
Hmm, is he describing the war in Iraq or the “War on Terror?” Oops, I forgot. Bush says the war in Iraq IS the war on terror.
In that case, our corporate media will only declare an end to the war of terror when Eretz Israel extends the wailing wall into a noose around the oil fields in Kuwait.
As for the ocassional nut cases at the demonstration, so what? The Republicans have such glitterati as Pat Boone and Ben Stein, plus the towering intellects of Franklin Graham, Pat Robertson and the rest of the moonbeam artist televangelicals.
Me, I need a nap. Give me another double-jig shooter of sanctifying grace.
davebo
Shorter Perfessor Cole..
Check it out! These folks look sillier protesting the war than I do defending it!
Well, isn’t that special…
ppGaz
Precisely, exactly, perfect description.
demimondian
Get a clue, dude. Jew-baiting is not ok, and, at least anyplace I have a say, not going to go unchallenged.
That’s crap.
davebo
ppGaz
Perhaps with Cole’s new ad contract we can expect the fundraiser for rebuilding Iraq to go up to 700 bucks.
Narvy
demimondian —
Ignore him. He doesn’t know the difference between the wailing wall and Sharon’s perimeter wall.
Ray
Ah everyone ran scaird from the other thread I see and showed up here to do some good old Bush/Rummy bashing. Right at the core of your being I see. And since you failed to go back to other thread my points from last night have been scored and I have come to collect. And I won’t mention any names as I’m kind and honorable like that.
Back on topic:
Two choices? Or three?
Once choice is that we stay in Iraq for the for the short term, 3-5 years, no matter what the “war” or “non-war” looks like throughout that period. Only to do the right thing and avoid more destabiliztion in the broader ME.
Another choice is to leave in 6 months which the anti-war crowd has proposed yesterday with their 6 month “ultimatum” given by them. This could be done but the human cost would be much more than I think even the left or right in this country could stand. Think Dunkirk here although Kuwait still wants us around, thanks Kuwait.
Third choice which I don’t like and we already have been doing this for the past 15 years anyway is to have those “permanent” military bases all over Iraq and we end up having our new Fulda Gap, only this time the gap comes not from the East but it encompasses a full 360 front.
I’d have to pick choice number one myself and I and I’m sure many people here left/right/kooky would agree. We would even have some other world leaders on board.
The only two wildcards in all of this really are: Syria and Iran. Syria can wait but the Iranian issue has to be resolved. I don’t mean that as a “hawk” in the classical sense, but the nuke issue needs to run it’s course with the IAEA and UNSC and fast otherwise this gets bad fast. Imagine if you will from the Med to the Kush a Beirut circa the 1980’s.
One good point in all of this is who holds the ground and the sea and the air? but also and more importantly who holds the hearts and minds?
(Flame Suit on)
Or is there a fourth choice? Which is “we” actually succeed.
Narvy
Ignore Ray, too. I had hoped to get away from him by leaving the other thread, but like a truffle-sniffing pig, he found us all. Judging from the way he writes, he’s probably a teenager.
DougJ
Ray, you’re a very interesting troll. You go back and forth between being a complete jack ass who barely speaks English and someone who speaks pretty clearly, between being someone who doesn’t know how to embed links and someone who searches old Balloon Juice threads to trap ppgaz in contradictions.
You’re not quite believable, but you’re a master of misdirection.
Ray
Narvy
See again you attack the person and not the points. I came onto this thread in peace and this is what I get. So now threat from yesterday will surely stand. I’ll be a regular here more often or until I piss John off. You got me on the pig part, I asked the old lady to cook some Polish Sausage and Spanish rice for tonight. Hmm hmm good.
Ray
DougJ
Ok fair enough critique on the posting links part of your post but just because my points fail to meet your emotional needs of Bush/Rummy/Globalization does not warrant your assualt on my points in the post. Attack them, not me.
DougJ
Ray, I’m very in favor of globalization. And I spent a lot of this thread defending Rummy. I don’t understand your posts. You refer to a lot of things I’m not familiar with like “360 Front.” I’m not that up on popular music, though, so for all I know they could be the greatest thing since the Beatles.
Ray
DougJ
Ok fine. Have you heard of the Fulda Gap? That’s the context I was trying to put into one of those choices in my post above.
Sorry Wiki link:
ppGaz
Let’s be precise, DougJ. “Tried to” trap me. There were no contradictions.
My Iraq positions haven’t changed noticeably in 15 years.
He was probably mistaking my call for staying in Iraq in order to stave off civil war for being supportive of the war. I am not supportive of the war, and I am not supportive of an immediate pullout. Two stupid moves do not equal one smart one. Well, to Ray they probably do.
Also keep in mind that he was drunk out of his fucking mind last night and couldn’t put three words together.
Ray
Oops http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulda_Gap
Ray
ppGaz
Buzzed, one hand tied behind the back, blindfolded, low crawling through a mile of broken glass, just to see you type that. You got busted and that’s all there is to it.
ppGaz
How’s that?
ppGaz
C’mon Ray, I figure you got two hours before you get into the Coors Lite again and then another hour before you go incoherent. So don’t waste precious time.
You think I contradicted myself?
Where, and how? Bring it.
Ray
ppGaz
I don’t have to drag that out here. Anybody that followed that thread saw what was posted. If for clarity, you say:
I’ll take your word on that. Since we only had a one night stand last night. (Note to readers that’s an inside joke)
Here though is what I mean whey you say this ppGaz:
Now after looking over what was posted last night I’d have to say, dang, they stand pretty good. I’ll also add my posts today we’re right off the charts today also.
Ray
ppGaz
Lol. Your funny already on the first one waiting on that good pig-sniffing meal meine frau will bring Ich.
Check my above post on your “bring it” comment. Your lucky dimmi’s not around or she’d be all on you over using: it.
ppGaz
LOL. Okay, sure. Apparently that’s the new protocol around here. Say any absurd, ridiculous thing that pops into your head.
Hey, it works for George Bush …. why not you?
Go away, kid, you are interrupting the grownups here.
Narvy
Must … ignore … troll … Must … ignore … troll …
DougJ, I think you’re right. There are two Rays, the one I tried to run away from and the one who uses words like “critique” and “does not warrant” in complete, grammatical, coherent sentences.
Re globalization: I was for it before I was against it. I used to favor unrestricted free trade until I realized that it’s not fair trade as long as there is a significant disparity in the pay and labor standards between workers in different countries. This makes the competition for jobs an uneven playing field. If every country we trade with had pay scales and labor laws similar to ours, I’d say let ‘er rip, but until that happens, I’m against it.
I’m afraid I’m not going to have time today to debate the significance of pay vs. cost of living parity, government subsidization, and all the other frills that make the topic interesting, but fire away anyway.
ppGaz
Hey, Rayline, here’s the thing: Last night you were drunk and completely stupid, and I gave you a pass, and suggested you come back today and try again.
That was several exits ago. That door is now closed. If this high-school-kid-and-a-sixpack routine is all you got, then I think we are done. You might get the others to interact with you, but not me.
Narvy
Jeebus (to quote our host) pp, all somebody has to do is drag a string past your face and you follow it anywhere until you drop from exhaustion. This is called Silly Kitten syndrome and I believe it’s treatable, but you have to want to be cured.
Ray
ppGaz and Scurvy
It’s funny. When people(sheeple)come back through and read your rants and deflection and misdirection disinformation you spew daily. I’m wondering where you really sit? In the US? South of the border? Across the big pond? It sure ain’t Kansas.
You can shout troll, troll, troll all you want. Never of you have even attempted, although DougJ has, to attack my post and not me.
That’s what seperates you and I. You are part of the “problem” and not the solution when you keep up with this tactic of attacking people personally and not the post or the content of the post. It’s obvious to anybody that will read this here.
And for what’s it worth, your not getting useful information out of me. Just name, my personal view and a lot of comes back your useless arguements that try and sound all grown up. How’s that post-college thing going for you guys? Is working out really well? You get that six-figure yet? Tenure? Full seat on the board over at DU? Curous minds want to know.
I’ll be here from now on. I’m amused here. End of story.
ppGaz
Do you think because we share a grade school and some email that you can talk to me that way, narv? Because if you do, you are mistaken.
demimondian
Well, OK, but he’s offered a strategy. Why three to five years, Ray? I don’t buy six months, but only because it’s too short a time to mak a difference; as far as Iraq is concerned six months is today.
What is the purpose in staying three to five years? What goals would be achieved by staying through that time? What are the mileposts that, in your opinion, are “stable enough to leave”?
I’m not saying that I agree or disagree, because I genuinely don’t have an answer to my questions. I’m just curious why three to five years.
(That is, except that it will mean a Democratic president is the one who gets the blame for pulling us out of Iraq. That part I arleady got.)
Ray
demimondian
Good post. I say the 3-5 years gives “us” a better shot at solving the Iran issue at the same time while finishing off helping Iraq get off the ground and be successful. I’m not of the “failure” crowd and I don’t want to loose anymore good people than we have to but the end game is Iran. We know it. They know it. The EU knows it. And our dear friends Russia/China know it.
Not to jump off topic: but did you notice IAEA vote break down yesterday? The lines are sort of drawn now. My rough math puts 2.2 Billion in the undecided column and 1.9 billion(good guys) in the Yes column who want Iran to give up it’s nuclear ambitions of what part of the problem in Iraq right now is all about. Yes there is some nationalist fighters,terrorist, bathist die-hards but some of us do beleive there is more with the Iranian/Syrian connection going on.
Narvy
Apparently you took this as some sort of insult. If so, I apologize. I intended it to be a joking reference to your pursuit of rational discourse with someone who appears to be a troll.
And we share a high school, too. Don’t forget that.
ppGaz
I know he’s a troll, narv. I’ve been doing Usenet for ten years. Sorry if I misread your post, but between Ray and a cat that wants to eat grass and then come in and throw up on my office carpet, right where I’d step in it, I’m in a testy mood.
I’m sure all of my detractors will enjoy the thought of me stepping barefooted into cat puke. Well, those people shall go to a special hell, where every breath fills their nostrils with cat hair, and they are eternally constipated.
slide aka Joe Albanese
Back to the topic at hand. I think this take has it about right:
.
Ray
Sorry missed that part. 3-5 years meets a couple of needs and for me I didn’t think of it that way. I don’t want anymore people dieing anymore than most of us do, I think we can all agree on that point, it’s a given, but why give up ground we have already taken? Now I’m mean this in the short term, not forever, colonization etc. This goes back to the Iran portion of the equation which is Iraq.
Narvy
I disavow all responsibility for your cat’s digestive quirks. And have you thought of wearing shoes? Just a suggestion, it’s been known to work for some.
Ray
slide aka Joe Albanese
A.N.S.W.E.R is a non issue? You agree with this? Since you bolded that part? I’m asking and politely I might add. Ask anyone who knows me. Except for scuvy because he just ate his cat.
ppGaz
Arrggghhhh.
It’s Arizona. It’s 100 degrees here.
100 friggin degrees right now
That does it. The cats are on their way to your house.
Narvy
Once upon a time, in a post far, far away, I tried to make the point that sharing opinions on the war and the administration with politically unsavory characters did not mean that people shared their (the characters’) views on anything else. The assumption that strange bedfellows on one issue must be bedfellows on all used to be called Guilt By Association. Apparently it’s still in vogue.
Narvy
Yeah, but it’s only 38 Celsius degrees. I looked at the 5-day forecast, “Near record highs 102 to 107”. Global warming is for wusses. Real men move to Arizona.
demimondian
OK, I’ll buy that 3-5 years meets a couple of needs. I want to understand those needs. What are the goals of staying. Totally without snark, is one of them that you don’t like the idea of cutting and running? I get a feeling, when I press a lot of people who do hold out for a longer stay, that they really don’t want to cut and run, either because they feel that pacifying Iraq is not our responsibility, or because they feel that they don’t want to be shown up in the world as cowards.
I don’t much think that Syria and Iran have a lot to do with the answer in Iraq, Ray. I think that you’re looking for villains, and I don’t think you’ll find them there. Yes, you’ll find that Iran and Syria have interfered in Iraq — but so have the Saudis, and the Turks.
Frankly, if I wanted to be cynical, I would suggest that the US should sponsor the Kurds, that Syria should sponsor the Sunni, and that Iran should sponsor the Shia in the south.
Ray
Narvy
Since you answered, oh dear, this for Joe with this:
Yes it is. A friend of my enemy is my enemy. If they were not part of any the Cindy circus anti-war movement the core group who opposes war at any cost and would gladly let their neck be exposed and we would let them. However, since aligned this group, and you make it out as trivial, which to most on the right it is not, and makes the anti-war movement shine as anti-American anti-global, we all the saw the black PJ anarchist in the pictures. There in lies the problem. Not the solution but hey I’m stil of the Pro-Victory camp not surrender and appeasment.
Ray
demimondian
Hmmm. Yep the cutting and running does not sit well at all for a lot of people, me included. Check my second reply for more info on the 3-5 years.
I don’t like the sponsorship idea at all. Heck, why don’t we just all regular forces back to Kuwait than, garrison ready to rock and roll if Syria or Iran or Turkey makes a move, and let the SOC foks have a field day without any prying eyes. You see what I’m getting at? It can be done a number of ways. And part of it, I’m afraid to use the word: patience.
Maybe some of us are being overly optimistic. I’ve just come off a reading high of two books, which I haven’t done in a very long time. I am no way connected to author or publishers etc. but check out The West’s Last Chance and/or New Glory “Peters”, he tears the hell out of Rummy in there and opens this war to the bigger picture.
demimondian
Ahh, Ray. That’s not very clear thinking.
A friend of my enemy may not be totally trustworthy, but that doesn’t make him or her my enemy. A friend of my enemy could, for instance, share a long and hard-to-defend border with my enemy. As a result of the border, the enemy’s friend might well see fit to make nice with the enemy, while still staying heutral in the conflict between me and him or her. Think Finland during the cold war — not entirely trustworthy, but not a part of the Soviet bloc.
In this case, do you really want non-combatants sacrificing soldiers in country to prove their manhood? Cause that’s what we’d be doing if we confused “setting standards for getting out” with “surrender and appeasement”.
demimondian
And it’s 311.16 kelvins, too — now *that’s* hot.
Ray
demimondian
I think I got the jist of that but my response really was for cold hand Joe up there.
I’m not sure whose manhood your talking about, the guys in the field, or the people back here calling the shots or their supporters of “staying the course”? that needs to be clarified but we may not get that information and rightly so. We need to keep a card or two up our sleeve.
demimondian
People back home, and particularly the guys back here calling the shots.
Put it this way: if you were in country, would my pride be a good reason for you to be in danger? I’m not presupposing an answer here; either one’s defensible. I just wonder what you think.
slide aka Joe Albanese
since I don’t think Ray is sincere in anything he says I feel no compelling reason to respond to his inquires but if he believes that the friend of my enemy is my enemy perhaps he should take a look at this.
Narvy
slide —
That was good but the logic is flawed. At the time those photos were taken Saddam Hussein was not “my enemy”, he was “my friend”, because the enemy of my enemy (in this case Iran) is my friend. Keeping track of who’s my friend and who’s my enemy is harder in geopolitics than it is in junior high.
demimondian
This is a more pernicious belief than the “the friend of my enemy is my enemy”. At least there’s a (weak) syllogism behind the second one. My enemy’s enemy is my friend only if there are at most two classes of entities involved.
Grr…
Demi “former logician” mondian
ppGaz
He was also the same exact fuckstain that we now have in a jail, a murdering despot and thug.
Part of the problem that the truth-benders have here is that this “friend” turned into “Hitler” just a couple years later, even though he was exactly the same guy with exactly the same values and attitudes, and exactly the same iron grip on power over his people.
One of many reasons why anyone with any interest in intellectual integrity looks at the declarations coming out of the BushOne and BushTwo governments and says, what is with these fucking people? Do they think I will believe anything?
Well, yes they do, because they have no respect for what’s true, and no respect for the people. And that’s why I have no respect for them — because I have no reason to.
Narvy
OK, Ray, you got my attention. I’m having a little difficulty parsing this
but I think you’re saying that those on the right think it’s important that one might share an opinion with someone disreputable. So, to start a discussion of this, how do you feel about Pat Buchanan? Lew Rockwell? The Libertarian Party? These are not trick questions, I want to know if you repudiate everything they stand for because they oppose the either the war in its entirety or the administration’s “staying the course”, aligned on the issue of the war with your “enemy”.
Ray
slide aka Joe Albanese
Didn’t even look sunshine as I could read the URL in the link area of my browser and it’s the famous left mantra of Rummy shaking hands with Saddam. That sort of makes everything all better with your support, or have I mis-spoken, for A.N.S.W.E.R. but hey that’s just me saying. Otherwise I know where you and I stand. I’m slowly figuring where some of the others stand.
Narvy
Oh, come on. The principle being asserted here is how one chooses positions to support and whether the bad guys’ position on some issues implies/requires all who share any one position with the bad guys to to share all positions with the bad guys, or put another way, whether if I share one position all my other positions are tainted.
If you’d like to discuss transitivity of trust and related issues we should probably start a new thread somewhere.
Ray
demimondian
Yes without hesitation or remorse or guilt. They get the war and the broader issue. Our military officers and NOC’s are not as dumb as some on the left would make them out to believe.
Narvy
pp —
The kids are the same from day to day but the friendships change in a heartbeat. Now if you’re saying the BushOne administration (and Rumsfeld in particular) were quite happy to accept monstrous behavior by an ally and were unpricipled hypocrites, who could argue?
ppGaz
Are you talking about US trust of other government? Or trust in general?
Actually, the latter, as it applies to the trust that exists between the American people and their government, is the only relevant issue here at all.
DougJ hinted at it earlier with his “live by reductionism, die by reductionism.” But that misses the true point. The true point is that if you have what purports to be a democratic system, and you have a government that plays fast and loose with its intentions and with facts and information, you end up …. exactly where we are now: People losing confidence in the leadership, doubting the wisdom of the war, either past, or future, and more and more unwilling to remain committed to a long and difficult situation.
Ray
Narvy
At present I do not sit by their campfires and share dreams and discourse. Above all I’m loyal to my country first and beer and not in that order and that’s all you get from me on that. Sorry.
demimondian
You forget, Ray, that I worked hand-in-glove with those officers and NOC’s. I know, from direct personal experience, just how smart they are.
I’m not talking smarts, guy, I’m talking guts. If you’re going to tell me the good officers don’t think with their gonads, then you’ve never met the best. Is my –demimondian, whoever demimondian is — pride — my gonads — worth spending lives on?
Narvy
And some on the left admire the fraternity, cohesion, and communitarian commitment that makes them willing to risk their lives on behalf of their buddies.
ppGaz
Misses the point. The point is not what the government will accept from another government. The point is what they tell you and me that they are doing, and why. If they spin, and twist and color the facts and make up stories or exaggerate or cherry pick pieces of information in order to keep us placated, then after a while, as we see the gap widening between what is real, and what they say …. you have the present circumstance.
Nobody in here wants to confront this reality: What happens in Iraq is a lot more about what the United States will be in the future, than about what Iraq will be. And what we will be depends a lot more on how we got here, than on where we are. We got here by being led here by people who played fast and loose with the truth going back, in this case at least, about 20 years. BushOne, Clinton, BushTwo. In my youth, it was LBJ and Nixon.
Enough of this shit is enough. We deserve governments that get things right and tell things straight.
Ray
demimondian
If I understand your Englise’ here, yes. Otherwise I’ll take it back if there is a future ruling on your misuse of the English language.
Narvy
Yup. The abstract concept of trust modeled logically or mathematically. Don’t forget, I was talking to Demi “former logician” mondian.
BTW, Demi, what made you decide to give up logic?
Narvy
I take that as a refusal to discuss Guilt By Association when the association is not on the left.
demimondian
I have this irrational affection for feeding my children. I know, I know, one is supposed to seek fulfilment in this life–but, golly, you know, I just had a hard time imagining them missing meals.
Ironically, although I’m now a part of the 4.2% of PhD’s who work “outside their field of study, principally for economic reasons”, I actually would say that I do more logic now than I did when I used to be a professor. The core part of mathematical logic is getting an intuition about looking at a problem and a solution and knowing how to ask “what’s the way to break this within the bounds of the problem”. Nowadays, that skill is the single most useful one I have.
Ray
Narvy
No, I don’t listen to them or share their views. Listen, I’m not out for conversion here, I’ve made my bones one way or another just like you have and we each have to live with it. It’s how you continue to live your “life”, and how you treat each new day and situation. The point early with Cool hand Joe A.N.S.W.E.R doesn’t cut it. Never will. Sorry it’s like watching the rapist, rape, and sit back and watch the show. Grotesque I know but I used it drive home the point. They are not welcome on our shores. Period.
demimondian
But that’s Narvy’s point, Ray. I don’t have any use for Gorgeous George or any of the others in the “anti-war” rally yesterday. But I do feel a deep antipathy for the war in Iraq, first because I, personally, need to feel that my leaders are trustworthy, and, second, because I don’t see any benefit coming out of it. I think you’ll find that ppG has been even more abusive of Galloway than I have, and none of us has a lot of use for Fonda.
My bet — and it’s only a bet, since I don’t share their campfire, and never did, even when I was an academic — is that a lot of people behind A.N.S.W.E.R. feel the same way.
Ray
demimondian
Now I understand some more. Your blinded by your PhD sometimes. I can’t relate. Sometimes over analyzing a situation tends to cause more damage than good. I’m not attacking you on your PhD, more power to you, and it’s honorable, I’m just throwing that out there to get trashed on is all.
Ray
demimondian
Nope. Sorry. I’d rather have my first born rot in prison than to have them follow that flag/cause/insert whatever you want here.
Narvy
I’m really glad that you don’t share Buchanan’s views. He is a poisonous toad. But you really ought check out the Libertarian Party and Rockwell. They are neither poisonous nor toads.
Ray
Here take a look at this crap from the AP:
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBTW0X12EE.html
Key quote:
We all love how the AP/Reuters frame their reporting. See the “war” in the classical sense is “over there” but the “war” here is just as important and even more so. To save lives “over there” the support here at home needs to be even stronger which in turn will save lives “over there.
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
What a load of crap this is. You forget that Bush is the 1st president to use fed funds for stem cell research. Science is only being thwarted in the small minds of the Bush bashers. So Bush is religious. That automatically means he hates science? And since when is it the Fed Govt.’s job to be some cheerleader for science? The Fed govt. has no business being in the science business in the first place.
If you want to see Science being trashed, go sit in on a typical inner city school and see how well science and math are taught.
As for deforestation: lack of deforestation was one of the main reasons for the Cali wildfires a few years back.
And as for this continued nonsense of having no plan: what part of every single element on the Iraqi and Afghanistan timetable being met do you not quite get? You assume that an a C+/B- result = no plan. Gosh, it must be wonderful to by Narvy and PPgaz, you guys have all the answers, don’t you?
It’s funny how PPgaz says the govt.’s been lying to us for 20 years. You guys do nothing by lie and distort to get your daily Bush bashings in.
Narvy
Your needs are not being met. You must be in agony.
Ray
Narvy
Noted.
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
I voted for Browne in 2000. The Libertarian Party has no credible sense of foreign policy, though they are anti-socialist, which is redeeming.
And as a political party, it’s a joke. No one ever gets elected running on the L ticket. Even Ron Paul had to switch to R to get elected.
ppGaz
Actually, I dinged 5 presidents, only two of whom were Bushes, and two of whom were Democrats, you lying sack of shit.
Also, I did not use the word “lying.” That’s your word.
I simply described the grotesque manipulations of these people, who feel free to say one thing today and something different next time, as if nobody were paying attention. Who invite the Shah of Iran to dine at the White House, and then tell me that Saddam Hussein, a carbon copy, is “Hitler.” Who tell me that turning Kuwait over to an oppressive and corrupt oligarchy is “liberation.” Who gin up a war to interfere in an ages-old Arabian land dispute without bothering to mention that it was all about oil, and nothing but oil.
If you want to sit back and let corrupt governments tell you what to think, that’s up to you. The end result is …. you, a person who can’t utter a sentence in here without sounding like a parody of himself. I don’t need a daddy government to tell me what to think or what the reality of the world is. If you do, fine, but kindly leave me alone.
ppGaz
Some people in here can’t tell the difference between their country, and their government. Being loyal to your government is just stupid. Governments come and go with the wind. To be loyal to them, your principles have to come and go with the same wind.
Ray
ppGaz
Good post.
Ray
Hey Joe were’d you go? Go take hit on this post:
http://wizbangblog.com/archives/007171.php
Read all the way and than come back and report. Otherwise I can help you with how to book airline tickets in case you need any help. I’m nice like that Joe, really I am.
Ray
Here go Joe read some more about your “friends” Joe:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/09/25/lebanon.journalist/index.html
Mike
“slide aka Joe Albanese Says:
Back to the topic at hand. I think this take has it about right:
The striking thing about the crowd was the diversity. No single picture could capture it. You had the usual suspects among left groups, but you also had lots of kids, college students, old folks, and families. Saw a guy with “Free Speech” and a picture of Howard Stern on his shirt, and “Freeskiers against Bush.” I have no idea what those are. As above, the president and vice-president made a surprise appearance.
The jingoists will try to make a big deal about the co-sponsorship of A.N.S.W.E.R. I’ve written about it before. It’s a total non-issue. The crowd couldn’t have cared less about sponsors, speakers, or sects. The focus was an incompetent president and an unjust war.
My favorite signs:
The best was “Send the twins,” not remarkable in and of itself, but it was written in magic marker on a young lady’s breasts. Personally I was shocked. Damned if she went by too fast for a picture.
Patch worn by a vet: “Tonkin Gulf Yacht Club.”
“Make levees not war.”
“Homeland security; fighting terrorism since 1942.”
“If you’re not for peace I’ll kill you.”
“John 3:16—Bush Sux”
“So many right-wing Christians, so few lions.”
“Ex-Republican; ask me why.”
“Is you Hummer worth it, Bitches?”
“Arbeit Macht Fries” (under picture of Golden Arches)
Thanks for reminding us why these people are idiots.
So what exactly do they want to accomplish? The complete surrender of the US to the terrorists?
Oh wait, that is exactly what they want to accomplish.
slide aka Joe Albanese
Stupidity said:
Stupid (you don’t mind my using an abbreviated form of your screename do you?) you DO realize that stem cell research only came into being during Bush’s term so no other President could have logically funded said research?
More Stupidity:
No, his thinking “the jury is still out on evolution” and his still undecided on global warming tell me his love of science somewhat suspect.
And for our final piece of Stupidity:
Do you really believe that? That the Federal government should be funding scientific research? No federally funded cancer research? No NASA? No Centers for Disease Control? Let the private sector do it? lol… God help us all from the neo-Luddites.
demimondian
Ooh! Fresh meat!
Mike say–
And here, folks, we have one of the other forms of Troglodytes vulgaris: T. vulgaris tertium non datur. Tv Tnd, as it’s commonly known, is most distinguished by the fact that there’s a gap between its left and right shoulders. (That’s the excluded middle part.)
Unfortunately, this gap includes the creature’s head. Now, as you already know, specimens of genus Troglodytes are typically not very bright to begin with — but tv tnd is “special”, even as trolls go.
ppGaz
You forget that Bush is the first president to remind us to remember the lessons of 9-11.
slide aka Joe Albanese
Mike said:
Mike, Mike, Mike. Such a tiresome argument not even worth refuting. Yes Mike, if it makes you fell better you can think that all of us that oppose the war in Iraq are secretly rooting for Bin Laden and his merry band of Islamic facists. Moron.
Listen, reasonable people can debate if the Iraq war is helping or huring our GWOT. Reasonable people can debate if an immediate pullout of our troops in Iraq is in our best long term interests. Reasonable people can suggest different approaches to combating the very real threat we face from Islamic Fundamentalism. What I can’t tolerate is asswipes like you trying to paint those that you disagree with as “supporting” the terrorists or surrending to the terrorists, etc. etc. Go fuck yourself. I don’t have to prove to you or anyone else my love of this country and my desire to combat the Bin Ladens of the world.
Narvy
Oh,Boy.Stupidity! defends Bush agains anti-science claims. Let’s see how well he defends.
According to CNN
and ABC reported
He goes on to say
Not necessarily, but he is allowing government positions in science to be influenced by his religious base: stem cell research, Intelligent Design as a counterweight to evolution, and “abstinence-only sex-education programs, in which the White House has made policies that defy widely accepted scientific opinion”
His next point is
Presumably he means the small minds of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and the publications Nature, Scientific American, Science, and The Lancet, etc., etc. etc., all of which have expressed serious concern about this. (It’s all over the web if you care to look.)
He goes on to say
This will come as news to NASA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (which really did invent the Internet), Sandia National Laboratory (which, among other things, does research into next-generation computer and communication technologies deemed essential to the Departments of Defense and Energy), etc., etc., etc.
And the last of the litany is
Actually, it was failure to clear dead trees and brush, a perennial issue in Southern California, although deforestation would certainly have worked. But he must be joking, for who would advocate denuding the land of trees to prevent brush fires?
And now for something completely different: He ends his post with
I can’t speak for ppGaz, but I can’t find the post where I said this, perhaps because I haven’t talked about this issue.
And he concludes with
That’s only because we are trying to match your record for accuracy.
Y’know, it was a lot of work researching all these refutations. I don’t think I want to do it again, so please don’t post any more unsubstantiatable ravings.
Please note that not once in this post have I called you any names, like “moron”, “idiot”, or “fool”. That’s because I’m very polite and they are not sufficiently descriptive.
jobiuspublius
Ray
demimondian
There you got sticking your PhD out again. Just saying. Keep it simple and maybe you’ll catch some more fish. Otherwise your scarying them off.
slide aka Joe Albanese
And as for you Joe go FRACK yourself also if you going to stick up for ANSWER you POS. Stroke yourself all night long on with your anti-war Sheehan circus. More power to you. And I like how you ignored my post that’s kewl and all I’m not out for your conversion or your ear or soul or anything I’m just out to put down ANSWER anyway I can and if has to be through your thick fkn head to understand that. Thans so be it.
Narvy
John –
Do we have limits on posts? My response to OhBoyStupidity is marked as awaiting moderation. Is that because of its length, too many block quotes, what?
anon
The Steelers lost today. You’ve been banned.
Andrei
That really has to be the stupidest fucking thing I’ve heard on this board yet.
Really… Stupidest. Fucking. Thing. Yet.
Yeah John gets to play semantic games while some 130,000 men and women fight and and lay their lives on the line for… something that’s not a “war.” It’s… it’s an “occupation,” yes! They are insurgents, not soldiers, so technically then it’s not a “war.” They might die, but let’s be clear: the “war” (be sure to not miss the quotes people!) is over.
Honestly? I was being snide when I said go fuck yourself, but I didn’t expect you to make a complete ass out of yourself on the record, so now I mean it.
jobiuspublius
slide aka Joe Albanese
pretentious Ray prattles on in his extremely annoying writing style:
Actually, I am not anti-war – not in the slightest. I am not a pacifist, I can promise you. Actually I am quite a belligerent guy at times. No Kumbaya singing for me. I was all for going into Afghanistan and would have wished we had finished the job rather than outsource the capturing/killing of Bin Laden in Tora Bora. (so much for wanted dead or alive… and he can run but he can’t hide… )
No, my stylistically challenged Ray, I am against the Iraq war because it was/is not in the self-interest of the USA not because I am against using military force. The war in Iraq has HELPED the terrorists. Let me repeat. It has HELPED Bin Laden. It has made MORE terrorists. It has helped Bin Laden’s RECRUITMENT. It has pissed off our allies. It has drained our resources. It is a BLUNDER of huge proportions, the consequences of which we have yet to fully realize. So little Ray why don’t you go stroke yourself by reading your very witty posts and imagine yourself as someone that people take seriously.
Ray
slide aka Joe Albanese
Ah, he finally takes a bite. You can be all against the war all fkn day long. Stand out in front of the White House all day long with your “No blood for oil” sign. I don’t care, more power to you but DISTANCE yourself from ANSWER and defending them as a “resource” to help fund the anti-war movement which turns into a anti-American movement you dumbass.
This crap here give you away.
And this little diddy here. You WASTE a fkn resource which is YOU!!! the deal has been fkn done, we are in this fkn bed now sunshine, so get over it. If your not going to offer a plausible fkn solution like some others have than STFU and leave your hard on for ANSWER alone. It’s that simple. Your drivel here is not appreciated, even as your free words are written with our precious blood from Iraq. You don’t understand your betrayl when you side with and DEFEND ANSWER as a source to support your movement.
The problem here is you do: your are A.N.S.W.E.R’s bitch.
slide aka Joe Albanese
right ray whatever you say.
This counter-demonstration in Washington was pretty impressive:
Wow. the Freepers expected 20,000. They were only off by 19,900.
ppGaz
Wow. I must say, I’m surprised …. I’d have thought that the potatoheads would have arranged a larger crowd. Seriously.
I can get a bigger crowd than that for a garage sale.
Narvy
I posted a response to ohboystupidity’s rant about Bush and science, but it is currently in awaiting-moderation limbo. I think it’s pretty good, but I imagine it will have sunk into the swamp of old posts by the time John clears it, if he does. You might be able to read it here anyway. Somebody please let me know if you can see it.
demimondian
Nah — WordPress is smart, and just redirects to the main comments page.
DougJ
I just hope that all of you realize that under Saddam Hussein blogging was illegal. Isn’t that all you need to know about why we’re in Iraq?
slide aka Joe Albanese
Yes, an even though under Saddam you could have gone out to get a cup of coffee, unlike today, but who would have wanted to?
anon
Nah, I can’t see it, Narvy. Everyone else’s posts are getting through. Especially the ray/joe slide Sunday night slugfest :)
Face it, posts accusing someone of being “A.N.S.W.E.R.S. bitch” are more entertaining to read than some 5000 word screed about BusHitler and science.
I mean like, who f**king cares?
Narvy
Too bad.
The Reader’s Digest version: Every assertion in his post is demonstrably wrong, and my response has the relevant facts, quotes, and URLs.
BTW, regarding the meme that stem cell research didn’t exist before Bush, we do have this:
From CNN
and from ABC
anon
Sounds good to me.
Narvy
I just hate to see really bad misinformation left unchallenged. And his post was all misinfo all the time.
ppGaz
Can you do an executive overview, or rewrite?
Narvy
jobiuspublius —
I just read the Guardian article. No comment is possible. Why aren’t these people wearing white makeup, fake red noses, and and baggy costumes?
Narvy
If John doesn’t clear it, I’ll think of something. I spent a lot of time tracking down the references that I didn’t already have, and I’d hate to see it go to waste. And I’ll tell you, worse than the nastiness of his tone and his language is the fact that every one of his assertions is demonstrably FALSE.
DougJ
You couldn’t go out for coffee in Philadelphia in 1789 either. But that didn’t stop them from writing the constitution, did it?
ppGaz
Well, if you are referring to o.b.stupid, the choir will take your word for it. And “their” side isn’t swayed by facts.
Case closed. He’s an asshole.
DougJ
How about this assertion ppgaz: Freedom is on the march? Is that false too?
anon
Yes, but they could fly kites.
Narvy
Woo hoo! Looks like I’ve passed the immigration check. Try this now.
Narvy
And they certainly could go out for a cup of tea, at least in Boston, until that unpleasant episode in Boston Harbor.
DougJ
You can fly kites in Iraq now, too. Flying kites is proud Iraqi tradition. Kites date back to ancient Babylon. For centuries, Iraqi people have prided themselves on their colorful kites made of silk. But kite-flying was banned under Saddam. A few years ago, Iraqis began flying their kites in Freedom Park (formerly Saddam Park) for the first time in nearly twenty years. It’s another example of the good news the media won’t tell you about. I saw a two-hour special about it on Fox News.
demimondian
No, no, no. DougJ, didn’t you get your magical reality decoder ring?
The left-wing media misquoted the President. What he said is “Freedom is on in March.” You will notice that he didn’t say which March, contrary to the widely disseminated slanders of the organized haters of Freedom.
DougJ
Why do so many of you hate freedom?
ppGaz
There is a troll class which basically just posts shit, for the pleasure of watching the victim do the work necessary to refute it. obs may be a member of that class.
ppGaz
It’s just another word for nothin left to lose?
DougJ
Freedom’s just another word for no other rationale to have gone to war, my friend.
anon
Geez, I think I hit a nerve, snarkboy.
Mikey Moore had scenes of Bagdhad kids kiting in his F911 thang even before Operation Free the Iraqi Bloggers even started.
DougJ
Onan, those kites were being flown in the semi-autonomous Kurdish region in the north.
narvy
The problem is once the lie/error/untruth/nonfact/meme is out there, well-intentioned people will propagate it. Consider the stem cell research funding meme. It’s never going to go away and it’s fake history.
ppGaz
Boy, they reeled you in!
See, DougJ, this is what happens when you let what you stand for be blown this way and that by the wind.
Have we run out the string on this topic?
narvy
Clearly, I need to lighten up. Anyone have any helium?
anon
Bullshit. The scenes were in Bagdhad. The Kurdish areas were a no fly/kite zone :)
ppGaz
I was only kidding when I said you had to save the world with your posts.
I swear.
narvy
ppG —
Read this
demimondian
Freedom’s just another word for nothing, Left Toulouse.
ppGaz
This party is over, kids:
The CNN story is edited slightly for brevity.
Also a secret message which instructed readers how to prepare for the End Time was disabled by removing every twentieth vowel from the text.
I may be kidding about the last part.
ppGaz
Who wants to take a bet that John Cole will do a weeklong yukk-a-thon over the “Arrest the traitors” meme at this pathetic war-support rally? We all know how he likes to poke fun at protests.
To paraphrase another poster here today:
“Look! Those morons look stupider supporting the war than yesterday’s protest against the war did!”
Yeah, uh, don’t hold your friggin breath.
Unless you are o.b.s, in which case you should hold your breath for about 2 hours.
ppGaz
Careful, some of us are in an Henri mood.
Short-tempered, even.
demimondian
You just knead to lighten up, so it’s good that it’s after leaven where you are.
But if that doesn’t work, I hear that Narv has some helium. That’ll surely lift your spirits.
anon
ppGaz,
That’s all fine and well. But how come you guys always win polls, but not elections?
I gather you’ve been around for a while. Remember how well McGovern did in ’72?
I’m sure you don’t want to.
ppGaz
War Hero
George McGovern is an American war hero. What kind of America-hating traitorous coward are you?
You could not wipe the shoes of George McGovern.
Never mention his name in vain again, you jerk.
narvy
No, no, no, no, no! Narv was asking if anyone could give him some helium. However, if he had some helium, he would gladly share it, unless he needed it to get high.
narvy
I’ve been trying to think of a Toulouse-Lautrec joke, but I keep coming up short.
ppGaz
Well, it’s a tall order.
srv
You’re just not shreaking it loudly enough. That’s how Cindy does it. Then everyone will understand how Iraq was a threat to our freedom.
If Cindy was in Iraq, she wouldn’t be able to protest. But I thought we set them free. Now I’m really confused.
No doubt people will be offended by questioning these parents and all-american dogma. I’m sure those who do have extended Cindy the same consideration.
anon
ppGaz,
Yikes. Where did I say anything about McGovern’s record as a great WWII pilot/airman?
He just happened to be one of the most unsuccessful Democratic candidates of the last 50 years. He swung too far to the left in that campaign. That has nothing to do with his service in WWII.
That’s another problem with you Dems who post here. You are totally f**king paranoid. All is said in that previous post was that
McGovern got creamed by Tricky Dick in 1972.
That was a fact not an opinion. If you can’t tell the difference in the future, you’ll probably be as successful as the Repubs were against Clinton in 1992, 1996 and 1998/1999.
The voters aren’t as stupid as pinhead Demo/Repub partisans
wish they were.
ppGaz
Good for you, bonehead. He lost to a drunk, a man who kept wads of cash in the White House to pay burglars, and resigned from the presidency in disgrace to avoid impeachment.
A war hero loses to a sociopath, and you want to brag about it?
You have no shame. You will burn in hell for eternity.
Or, you will hang around here. Same thing.
anon
ppgaz,
Ok, “bonehead”.
I’ve obviously brought back some unpleasant memories. Good. This is fun.
OK, old boy:
WHY did “Mother McGovern” lose 48 states, including his own, to Tricky Dick?
anon
ppgaz,
BTW,
Was that 1972, or 1992, or 1996?
Regards,
Oh,Boy.Stupidity!
Bwahhahahaha. Oh, that’s rich. the UCR, Lancet etc. Hey, can I quote Rush Limbaugh or Karl Rove to prove that Bush is a great president? I think the UCR’s main push is to get Nukes banned. No political agenda here, folks. Move along, nothing to see. Oh, and Lancet, my what a wonderful group they are. 100K dead Iraqi civilians can’t be wrong, can they?
Oh, and “serious concern” was expressed. My, my, serious concern — was it serious concern about losing their unending pipeline to taxpayer money? Again, why are the Feds funding science? You see, dude, if the feds didn’t fund science, science would never get politicized to the extent that it does.
Yeah, that evolution is being banned everywhere. So Bush doesn’t mind ID being taught. And? That means that somehow evolution will be relegated to… what exactly? Again, BUSH IS THE FIRST PRES. TO USE FED MONEY TO FUND STEM CELL RESEARCH. so what the hell are you blathering about?
Oh, no, widely accepted scientific opinion!! Wow! I’m convinced. Wasn’t a flat Earth Widely Accepted Scientific Opinion once? How’s light and sound travelling through the Ether near your home? Man, how can I compete with Widely Accepted “Opinion”?
Scientists, except of course the ones who came up with ID, are never wrong.
I’m no scientist but hmm, are you telling me having sex with a condom is a better pregnancy/STD preventer than, say, oh, I don’t know, having no sex at all?
Again, why is the Fed. Govt. involved with any of this?
Nice circular logic here — because these programs are fed. funded, therefore they should be fed funded? Gosh, I guess venture capitalists and such science lovers as yourself can’t find enough money to fund non-defense related scientific research? Yep, always rely on the American taxpayer.
If you consider your nonsense, which includes little if any credible sourcing and only your opinions “a lot of work,” then might I ask: so which Post Office do you work?
Man, you really need to turn down the “ego” volume on your leftist echo chamber.
kl
I think I might actually read a ppGaz blog, if he had the wherewithal to start one. Then again, why should he bother? Cole lets you guys blog here.
Andrei
Goddamn its time to give DougJ his own blog… I love this guy.
kl
That was illegal in Iraq too.
Narvy
I hear this a lot from supporters of the war. They never explain how our rights would be threatened if the troops weren’t fighting over there. And they never explain how domestic measures like the PATRIOT Act protect our rights. Sloganeering is so much easier than actually thinking.
Tim F
Which American rights did Saddam threaten?
Defense Guy
I’ll give you 2. The right to life for pilots patrolling the no-fly zone. The right to life for Americans visiting or living in Israel.
Defense Guy
OK 1 right, with 2 examples.
kl
No Blood For Oil! Bush Lied, People Died! Free Mumia!
jobiuspublius
I suspect he his Jesus’ General.
Krista
Heaven forbid…
Narvy
Dude, are you being serious?
Narvy
Krista — Shhh!
Narvy
I doubt it, their styles are different. But it’s an interesting thought.
Defense Guy
Are you going to tell me that he wasn’t firing on our pilots or financing suicide bombers in Israel?
Krista
Narvy – Sorry, couldn’t resist the shrill sarcasm when confronted with people who think that weaponry that can destroy entire cities is a GOOD thing.
Narvy
Ignoring the point that the subject was the rights of the American people in their homeland (so I thought), you appear to be saying if we put members of the armed forces in harm’s way, we have to put more forces at risk to protect the first group’s right to life. There’s an infinite regress here, and the implicit assumption that we have a right to fly military aircraft in the airspace of a country with which we are not at war (back in the halcyon days of the no-fly zone).
I haven’t read any persuasive reports that Saddam Hussein was financing Israeli suicide bombers (if you can you provide one or two URLs to reliable sources on this, I’d appreciate it), but it isn’t up to the US to protect its citizens in foreign countries, it’s the responsibility of the host country to protect foreigners; that’s why we lodge diplomatic protests instead of launching military actions when Americans are mistreated or killed in foreign countries. This is basic in international law; if we assert a right to protect our citizens abroad, then other countries have the same right to protect their citizens in the US by the same means.
The rights of citizens in their home countries are not portable. If they were, we would not be able to deal with immigrants and foreign visitors the way we do. The US government is sufficiently powerful to do whatever it wishes regardless of the conventions of diplomacy or international law, but I don’t think that a claim of rights of US citizens, which could be made to justify any action regardless of its legality, is a valid justification.
Defense Guy
I’ll ignore it as well, as I was not under the impression that the question was going to be further restricted AFTER the question was answered. Saddam agreed to the terms of the cease fire, which included the right of the coaltion to enforce no-fly zones. You cannot expand that severe limitation to what your argument is claiming, as the right to life did become portable under the terms imposed at the cessation of hostilities. In short, under the terms of the cease fire, they had a right to expect they would not be fired upon, and they were, frequently.
As for proof of financing.
Here and Here and Here.
DougJ
Here’s another thing: in Iraq, under Saddam, there was no Union of Concerned Scientists. It was illegal to criticize Saddam’s stem cell policy. Sure, you could get a cup of coffee, but could you discuss stem cell policy at the cafe while you were drinking the coffee? Now, people are free to discuss stem cell policy in Iraq, although they are not able to go to cafes nor are they able to talk on the phone or use computers because there is no electricity or phone service in much of the country. But, if they were able to safely leave their houses, talk on the telephone, or send each other email, they would be free to discuss these things as long as none of these discussions did not violate the Islamic law that is institutionalized by the new constitution.
Freedom is on the march.
Defense Guy
DougJ
I know your doing that tongue-in-cheek, but the new constitution hardly institutionalizes Islamic law. The part that says no law may contradict Islamic law is right next to the part that says no law may contradict democratic principles.
Narvy
Thanks. Somehow I had missed it or forgotten it or something.
My memory tells me that the response to Iraqi firing on American planes at the time was to take out the missile positions, which does seem appropriate. Launching the war came later, and protecting American pilots’ right to life was never offered as a justification. I still stand by the infinite regress argument and the non-portability argument.
I don’t get this. Somebody in favor of the war talks about “our rights” and the initial assumption that she meant US citizens’ rights at home is a “further restriction” after an ANSWER? OK, well, then they are fighting to protect the rights of US citizens abroad who are in harm’s way but not to protect our rights at home. Is that right?
Narvy
Government by cognitive dissonance. There’s going to be some interesting argument in the Iraqi courts.
Defense Guy
Narvy
I must have missed the restriction of the question to mean only the rights our citizens have while they are in the country, and by extension, how anything Saddam could do would put those rights at risk.
Can we agree that Saddam was an avowed enemy of the US? Can we further agree that Saddam would take actions that would hurt the US or it’s citizens if given the chance?
Defense Guy
Yeah. I should point out that the Bill of Rights should be not necessary as the constitution already claims that the federal governments rights are limited to what is explicitly stated in the document, and therefore they would have no right to restrict what is ‘given’ in the amendments anyway. So….
Narvy
Certainly to the first, maybe to the second. The “given the chance” part is an open door to speculation. If he had suitable weaponry, if he saw no advantage to try to restore the good (diplomatic) relationship he had with the US during the Iran-Iraq war, if he thought he could get away with small aggressions, if he thought he could defend against retaliation, etc. etc. etc.
Hitler at one time envisioned a world divided between Germany and the US; who can say whether Saddam might have had a similar delusion and would have wanted to keep peace with the US? But, yeah, he was majorly hostile to any country that could interfere with his oil domination ambitions, that was friendly to Israel, that could thwart his regional domination ambitions, and the US is certainly the biggest kid on that particular block.
Darrell
Yes of course, given that Saddam tried to assassinate a sitting US President, funded terrorists, and shot at our planes, we can clearly see that was Saddam’s way of extending the olive branch
DougJ
Darrell, good point. He was a bad guy. He had to go. That’s the reason we’re also taking Kim Il Jong out.
Darrell
Saddam was a bad guy and had violated his 1991 terms of surrender countless times
Violation of terms of surrender = Full justification to resume hostilities.
And doesn’t it make a wee more sense to take out a dangerous sociopathic leader BEFORE they get nukes?
DougJ
Darrell, you’ve violated the conditions of you parole numerous times, and you’re still walking around free.
srv
DG,
I do not consider my constitutional freedoms to be bound to my gov’t when I’m outside my countries borders. When Israel applies for statehood, we can talk about that one.
There are lots of avowed enemies. You would probably say the same of Castro or Hugo. Maybe even France.
No. If he’d wanted to really hurt us, he could have. He overreached with Kuwait and couldn’t figure out how to get back to the status quo, save face and stay in power.
Darrell
1993 World trade center bombers with Iraqi passports.. Coincidence? you decide
Narvy
Yes, and Donald Rumsfeld was once Saddam’s buddy. Things change.
Narvy
Iran, anybody? Well, maybe he’s not sociopathic. How about North Korea?
Darrell
The mullahs in Iran are on the verge of obtaining nukes if they don’t have them already. What do you recommend we do about it?
srv
Yeah, he was so stupid he’d make it obvious.
There is so little real evidence about the trials that I’ve never really believed this. Sorry, I just don’t trust Saudi/Kuwaiti/Omani(?) police evidence.
Well, that happened. But since I know people who’ve played that patrol game, I know this isn’t black and white. My dad flew missions in the 60’s designed to provoke East German defenses. And they did the same. There has been a bit written about our intensifying efforts against Iraqi missile sites starting in the summer of 2002. There’s no doubt in my mind we pushed their buttons and they chose to fire at us. How far we ‘pushed’ is something we probably won’t know for a few years. It’s a game big nations have been playing for a long time.
But no, Saddams AA missiles were not a threat to my freedom.
Of course, during all that time, we managed to never bomb that known Ansar Al-Salam site. Curious.
Narvy
I have to admit that other than negotiation and offering some kind inducement to them, I don’t have a solution. But invading the country and reducing it to rubble isn’t particularly appealing, especially with the current tax base to finance it and the current draft-free military commitment in Iraq. What’s your recommendation? And what about North Korea?
Narvy
That should have been some kind of inducement. I don’t advocate kindness to the mullahs.
srv
We have a choice. Let nation states develop WMDs or let independent actors develop nukes. We knew where Iraq was. We know where Pakistan is. We know where Iran is. We don’t know where OBL II is.
It’s been too late to put the genie back into the bottle for a long, long time. You can live with it, or you can deny it.
Narvy
That was an astute post, but I don’t see this as a binary choice but rather as an inclusive ‘or’.
Narvy
srv —
What scares me is the deniers, at least those with buttons under their fingers. If they deny, then they have no rational restraints.
srv
Narvy,
It’s possible we’ll get both. But so far, we haven’t seen real evidence an actor like Khan (who I believe was acting with his leaders authority) gave real materials to AQ. Other nations, sure.
The more we destabilize the ME, and yes, ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’ will be destabilizing in the short and mid-term, the more likely a non-nation state is going to go after us by other means. The very thing we seek to contain is made more likely by our desire to control. How many SA princes do you think can fund a covert WMD program – 2? 3? 5? 20?
As bad as Saddam and the Ayatollahs and whatever are, their very presence limits the entropy of other actors.
Narvy
srv —
That’s impossible! Democracy and freedom bring stability, no matter whom we impose them on. And how dare you intimate that our Saudi allies might not have our best interests at heart.
This ends the sarcastic part of our program. Did I sound like Darrell? Or DougJ?
All I have to say to you, bub, is “More astuteness.” You have to be careful, you’re lowering the IQ here. (That stands for Idiocy Quotient.)
kl
Or…
DougJ
I just heard on Rush Limbaugh’s show that the original US Constitution made numerous references to Islamic law.
Narvy
That’s really true. Everyone knows that the Founding Fathers, because of their devotion to Christianity, adopted many Islamic legal concepts. It’s well-known that Christians were enthralled by Islam, as shown by the numerous European tourist jaunts to the Middle East between the 11th and 14th centuries. It’s the damn liberals who have prevented the relevant articles from being published.
Ray
slide aka Joe Albanese
So nothing about your hard on support for A.N.S.W.E.R?
Figures. Wow you can cut/paste. Gold star for the commie lover.
Your right though, the organziers of the Sunday protestor could have done better to get the word out for Sunday. Well it might have been better if there wasn’t so much focus from the MSM for Mother Moonbat Sheehan and her Communist traveling circus which A.N.S.W.E.R leads. So wow you got me there. 1/2 point to Slick. I’m still ahead about 4 or 5 total points because of refusal to recant/retract your overt support for C.A.N.C.E.R.
And yes jingoists definition the ” Extreme nationalism characterized especially by a belligerent foreign policy; chauvinistic patriotism.” are here to keep your ass in check C.A.N.C.E.R
Narvy
slide aka Joe Albanese —
There’s an empty post above this one.
There is nothing in the frame to reply to.
Ray
You guys, and you know who I mean, are on a full time circle-jerk with your posting here. That’s obvious. Who pays the bill? C.A.N.C.E.R? I’m betting heavy that way for one of you. The others, not so much.
Ray
Here you go Slick Joe and Narvy. Enjoy. And by the way Narvy I think Joe can or can not handle is own post. Don’tcha think?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132×2114744
menemenetekelupharsin
Whole lotta nothing going on around here.
It’s like listening to sheep bleat, and wishing some scientist would someday come along with an invention that would enable you to understand what the Hell they were saying. What do the sheep want to share with us? What great learning are they attempting to impart? Who the fuck knows? Not even the sheep themselves, apparently. Their wooly-eared wisdom will remain unknown to us all for some time to come, until scientists learn to translate for them or they learn to type in coherent English. In the meantime, sit back, and enjoy nature- in its domesticated, pre-masticated muttonous form, of course.
It probably helps you enjoy it if you’re insanely drunk off of an unholy combination of moonshine and absinthe. Or stoned, or on crack, or both. Or if you just got hit by a truck, or if your wife tried to kill you with a tire iron and only managed to lobotomize you with a freakishly lucky blow deflected through the nostrils. Shit, half the sheep aren’t in much better mental shape, and the other half just wish they had it so good. So if’n you feel the need to converse with these creatures, bash yourself in the head with a hammer 3 or 4 times, and become one with the flock.
[Any parallels with the George Orwell novel “Animal Farm” are purely accidental and are not intended in any manner to constitute trademark infringement. One only wishes the Bushites could assert the same disclaimer about their own propoganda efforts.]
Narvy
mene –
I’ve been waiting for an opportunity to respond “Four legs good, two legs bad” to some post.
Glad to see you back in the fray. Unsheath your … sword and have at it.
menemenetekelupharsin
Thanks, Narvy.
I need to stop jumping into dead threads. It’s the equivalent of bringing a keg to a party that everyone else has already passed out at. Still, it’s nice that the Bushittites not have the last word. (That’s what I meant to write, instead of Bushites. No more posting 5 minutes before unconsciousness ensues.)
kl
It’s good to have priorities.
menemenetekelupharsin
It’s good that we share them, friend.
menemenetekelupharsin
About getting in the last word, I mean. Not about sticking it to the sheep, into which flock I proudly append you. Have fun.
menemenetekelupharsin
Anyway, why am I talking to a sheep? It’s fucking retarded. It’s like asking a wall a question about Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics and expecting the wall to have an answer and a citation to the relevant portion of the text. THAT’s where my priorities get screwy, talking to sheep and other creatures with demonstrably reduced mental faculties. Talk about a waste of time.
menemenetekelupharsin
I just realized how gross that sounds. Unintentional, I assure anyone still bothering to read this far down this old-ass thread.
Ray
menemenetekelupharsin
What the heck is with this abortion of a name anyway? Can you not think of someting that is less than 10 letters to describe yourself or condition?
That’s your problem you attack the person and not the content of a post. So since you made an honest attempt to come back and try and bat clean up for your legions of pogues who claim to on high that you have “unsheathed your sword” once again. Someone once said don’t bring a knife…
Frack you. No last word and I’ll add my post again:
Touche beeatcah. And let’s have Hitch slay some of that A.N.S.W.E.R C.A.N.C.E.R hord here:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2126913/
Have a nice life minime.
kl
Er… okay…
menemenetekelupharsin
Narvy,
Another problem with the bleating sheep on this website are the many misconceptions it sometimes sounds like they are vocally, and repetitively, trying to convey to the rest of us. Here are just a few of the ones I’ve recently become aware of:
-Sheep are incapable of literacy, which makes them unable to read and comprehend neither those portions of the Holy Bible containing the phrase “Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin” nor the important section in which the Lord God Almighty ascribes dominion over them to His most beloved creation, Man. (Of course, Narvy, you and ppGaz and others also initially had trouble recalling where “mene, mene, tekel, upharsin” came from; but you folks have also repeatedly demonstrated that you possess mental agility demonstrably in excess of that scientists ascribe to kangaroo offal, thus distinguishing yourselves from illiterate domesticated varmints.)
-Sheep are incapable of understanding that an attack isn’t “at a person” if it’s directed at sheep. Humans, as distinguished from potentially existing barnyard entities like the Internet presence referred to as “Ray”, differ from Ray in that they are universally capable of outsmarting driftwood.
-Sheep are incapable of communicating in comprehensible English, preferring instead to use terminology such as “frack” and “beeatcah”- words which sound quite at home in a tongue such as Swedish, or Elvish, or that language the rabbits used to speak in “Watership Down”, but which certainly have no place in the King’s English (I’m referring to Elvis, of course, Narvy).
-Sheep sometimes attempt to argue incoherently about neo-Maoist groups whose names also spell out the only word in English they appear to be capable of spelling correctly (apart from C.A.N.C.E.R., which is presumably an acronym for Conservative Assholes Now Conning Everyone with Reaganomics). Sheep don’t seem to understand that neo-Maoist groups have nothing to do with anything; that arguments in the blogosphere are not “won” by chalking up imaginary points to onesself as if though a debate were the equivalent of masturbating and then judging onesself on the success of one’s efforts; and furthermore that arguments in the blogosphere, even if won and even if against the dastardly Commie infiltrators, would have no appreciable effect whatsoever on the real-world conflict in Iraq. The outcome of that war is being decided not by squabbles in the comments section of a semi-obscure right-wing American blog, but rather in the streets of cities like Baghdad and Ramadi by means of more convincing arguments such as airstrikes and IEDs and gunfire. Not that sheep should be expected to understand such a thing, mind you, Narvy. I speak only for your edification.
-Sheep often seem to enjoy the taste of Coors Light, seemingly unaware of the fact that its primary ingredient is fermented mountain lion urine; and sheep often attempt to flaunt their strange predilection for this substance as if though it were somehow a source of pride that they are gullibly seduced into drinking horrific swill by commercials containing large-breasted blonde women and the absurd subliminal suggestion that such women will be attracted to males who consume this heinous cat piss.
There certainly is an awful lot of bleating going on around here, though, isn’t there Narvy? If only any of it said anything meaningful, then perhaps humans could attain a greater empathy with the beasts we normally associate with winter apparel, overrated dinner cuisine, and mindless conformity with authoritarian elements. I’m still waiting for science to catch up with my aspirations, though. Meanwhile, one can dream…
menemenetekelupharsin
I have no idea why those words are crossed out. Presumably, my laptop edited that post for brevity.
My laptop is a Dell. Dells are generally Republican computers.
Fuck you, laptop. Who knew the evil computer hivemind of the future would support Dubya? Now I’ll have to view those Terminator movies in a new light.
menemenetekelupharsin
Now, now, don’t be bashful! Go forth, and frolic! Prance and skip and caper! Spawn some ewes, you!
kl
Sounds good.
Krista
Damn, I missed a good s**tstorm AGAIN!
ppGaz
What’s your address, again?
menemenetekelupharsin
Narvy,
I owe you an apology. You did, in fact, remember that “Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin” came from the Book of Daniel. My error is easily verified, just as easily as when someone else first told ppGaz he was a crack shot on the “paintball” range, then tried to backpeddle out of it by arguing that ppGaz threatened him first.
These things happen during the Fog of Flamewar. Shit gets confused, and sometimes innocent people get hurt. It’s called “collateral damage.” Sorry it happened to you, but that’s a small price to pay for freedom, isn’t it?
Freedom is on the march, my wrongly-denigrated friend.
Ray
menemenetekelupharsin
What the heck is with this abortion of a name anyway? Can you not think of someting that is less than 10 letters to describe yourself or condition?
That’s your problem you attack the person and not the content of a post. So since you made an honest attempt to come back and try and bat clean up for your legions of pogues who claim to on high that you have “unsheathed your sword” once again. Someone once said don’t bring a knife…
Frack you. No last word and I’ll add my post again:
slide aka Joe Albanese
So nothing about your hard on support for A.N.S.W.E.R?
Figures. Wow you can cut/paste. Gold star for the commie lover.
Your right though, the organziers of the Sunday protestor could have done better to get the word out for Sunday. Well it might have been better if there wasn’t so much focus from the MSM for Mother Moonbat Sheehan and her Communist traveling circus which A.N.S.W.E.R leads. So wow you got me there. 1/2 point to Slick. I’m still ahead about 4 or 5 total points because of refusal to recant/retract your overt support for C.A.N.C.E.R.
And yes jingoists definition the ” Extreme nationalism characterized especially by a belligerent foreign policy; chauvinistic patriotism.” are here to keep your ass in check C.A.N.C.E.R
Touche beeatcah. And let’s have Hitch slay some of that A.N.S.W.E.R C.A.N.C.E.R hord here:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2126913/
Have a nice life minime.
Ray
menemenetekelupharsin
What the heck is with this abortion of a name anyway? Can you not think of someting that is less than 10 letters to describe yourself or condition?
That’s your problem you attack the person and not the content of a post. So since you made an honest attempt to come back and try and bat clean up for your legions of pogues who claim to on high that you have “unsheathed your sword” once again. Someone once said don’t bring a knife…
Frack you. No last word and I’ll add my post again:
slide aka Joe Albanese
So nothing about your hard on support for A.N.S.W.E.R?
Figures. Wow you can cut/paste. Gold star for the commie lover.
Your right though, the organziers of the Sunday protestor could have done better to get the word out for Sunday. Well it might have been better if there wasn’t so much focus from the MSM for Mother Moonbat Sheehan and her Communist traveling circus which A.N.S.W.E.R leads. So wow you got me there. 1/2 point to Slick. I’m still ahead about 4 or 5 total points because of refusal to recant/retract your overt support for C.A.N.C.E.R.
And yes jingoists definition the ” Extreme nationalism characterized especially by a belligerent foreign policy; chauvinistic patriotism.” are here to keep your ass in check C.A.N.C.E.R
Touche beeatcah. And let’s have Hitch slay some of that A.N.S.W.E.R C.A.N.C.E.R hord here:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2126913/
Have a nice life minime. Twice just for you minime. See you next time.
menemenetekelupharsin
There seems to be some sort of problem with this thread. Posts keep randomly repeating themselves. It’s very strange. Does anyone have any explanation for why this might be happening?
kl
Nope.
Ray
Something must be broke than. Don’tcha think?
menemenetekelupharsin
What the heck is with this abortion of a name anyway? Can you not think of someting that is less than 10 letters to describe yourself or condition?
That’s your problem you attack the person and not the content of a post. So since you made an honest attempt to come back and try and bat clean up for your legions of pogues who claim to on high that you have “unsheathed your sword” once again. Someone once said don’t bring a knife…
Frack you. No last word and I’ll add my post again:
slide aka Joe Albanese
So nothing about your hard on support for A.N.S.W.E.R?
Figures. Wow you can cut/paste. Gold star for the commie lover.
Your right though, the organziers of the Sunday protestor could have done better to get the word out for Sunday. Well it might have been better if there wasn’t so much focus from the MSM for Mother Moonbat Sheehan and her Communist traveling circus which A.N.S.W.E.R leads. So wow you got me there. 1/2 point to Slick. I’m still ahead about 4 or 5 total points because of refusal to recant/retract your overt support for C.A.N.C.E.R.
And yes jingoists definition the ” Extreme nationalism characterized especially by a belligerent foreign policy; chauvinistic patriotism.” are here to keep your ass in check C.A.N.C.E.R
Touche beeatcah. And let’s have Hitch slay some of that A.N.S.W.E.R C.A.N.C.E.R hord here:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2126913/
Have a nice life minime. Twice just for you minime. See you next time.
Ray
menemenetekelupharsin
You come across a little bit to much like David Koresh to me. With your non stop rambling without any real point. Just and observation and something you might want to work on. Just Sayin.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/waco/davidkoresh.html
menemenetekelupharsin
Interesting thought, sheepling. Something between your shoulders, I’d venture to guess.
Just mimicking you. Pot, meet kettle.
Frankly, every time I read a post from you, I hear the word “beeatcah,” and laugh my ass off. You’ve permanently squandered any intellectual viability you might ever have had with your hilarious typos. I’m not reading any links from you though, Jehovah’s Witness, thank you anyway but life’s too God damn short.
menemenetekelupharsin
…And, as always, my only real mistake is talking to imaginary people. Like my imaginary friend Ray, or Lester, the imaginary snapping turtle that bites Ray’s balls every night when he’s sleeping and causes him to dream the hideous dreams of emasculation and loneliness which warp his imaginary personality the way they do.
Also, there’s my pet rock Dmitri, but he mostly likes to collect moss and threaten people. It’s a miracle the state hasn’t had him put down yet. I think he might’ve been bitten by a rabid squirrel, but I can’t say for sure. The doctors won’t test him, no matter how much I offer to pay. This is what keeps me up at night, a-worryin’ and a-frettin’.
kl
Well, I hope everything works out.
menemenetekelupharsin
Beeatcah. What a great word. I can’t get over it. It really spruces up a lot of English phrases that have gone somewhat stale of late.
“Fuck you, beeatcah!”
“I’ll kill that son-of-a-beeatcah.”
God bless Swedish. Or whatever the fuck language contained that word before it was imported into English.
menemenetekelupharsin
Thanks. And good luck with that flock.
kl
You’re welcome.
menemenetekelupharsin
Today is a special day. I marks the day I begin to use the word beeatcah in my ordinary conversation. Undoubtedly, this will raise a few eyebrows; but once the origins of the term have been explained, I’m optimistic that hilarity will ensue. And then others will begin to use the term, and then others; over the course of a decade or so, the English language will hopefully embrace this bizarre new term within the ever-expanding folds of its magnificent tapestry. Who knows? Perhaps even its meaning will change over time, and it will replace the f-word (fuck) as the most heinous insult available to God-fearing, whiskey-swilling Americans.
None of which would have been possible without Balloon Juice, and the ditherings in the comments sections thereof.
I thank you for your time.
kl
You’re welcome.
menemenetekelupharsin
Beeatcah was a hit, BTW. But I’m not expecting it to permeate the culture any time soon. It’ll be at least 2, 3 hundred years before dictionaries incorporate it.
We must remain patient.
kl
Agreed!
menemenetekelupharsin
Good!
kl
It certainly is.
menemenetekelupharsin
Hooray for underpants, beeatcahs!