This made me laugh:
The bitter Democratic Senate primary in Connecticut erupted in fresh controversy Wednesday over a doctored photo of Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.) in blackface that was posted by a blogger who has been an influential promoter of challenger Ned Lamont.
Lieberman angrily demanded that Lamont denounce the action and sever all ties with Jane Hamsher, the founder of the Web log Firedoglake, who posted the photo on another blog, HuffingtonPost.com. She travels with the campaign along with other bloggers. She is not on the campaign staff but has actively promoted Lamont’s candidacy and helped raise money for him through her blog.
The photo, showing former president Bill Clinton in dark glasses and Lieberman in blackface, appeared early Wednesday, accompanied by a dispatch attacking Lieberman, his supporters and some news organizations. There was no mention of the photo in the dispatch, and the photo later was removed. But the two campaigns heatedly traded charges as the day progressed.
I think we are now to the point where activists on either side of the political aisle can be an impediment to campaigns. While many of you support whatever vicious attacks you launch against the political enemy, the mainstream of the country doesn’t really look at the grenade-chuckers in both parties very favorably. It is not surprising that Jane is the center of thiscontroversy, as I have noted before (amidst being shout down, her entire schtick is that she is a ‘fighting Dem’ who has built her entire audience around making inflammatory comments.
On a side note, I wonder why the party that worked so hard to move towards racial equality now has so many residents that jump on the chance to do overt race-baiting every chance they get. This is, to my knowledge, the second or third time liberal bloggers have been involved in a “black face” controversy involving an election.
BTW- Do I get special bonus points for writing this whole post without using the phrase the “Jane Hamsher’s of the left.”
Steve
You almost got bonus points, John, but then you blew it.
Andrew
Man, I stopped looking at FDL a while ago, but I popped in to see the comments on her apology post. Wow. What morons. The Jane Hamsher-ites of the left are a bunch of useless, suck up yes men.
Par R
I thought her “non-apology apology” was quite good.
demimondian
I hope that Lamont throws her off the train. It’s the smart thing to do.
I don’t know the answer to your question about equality and race-baiting, John, and it intrigues me as well. It seems utterly bizarre to me that the Dems, who’ve spent so much effort trying to make things better on so many fronts would then stub their toes so badly with the labor unions, gay men and lesbians, and the like. Does “the left wing elite” genuinely believe that we own those votes?
Tom
The roar of condemnation from Jesse L. Jackson and Al Sharpton is deafening.
Punchy
That may just be the biggest strawman in the history of Men of Straw.
Googled, I found that the estimate of between 60-100 MILLION blogs on The Internets. Let’s see…3 of 60 MILLION is 0.000005%. Jesus, what an idiotic statement. You’ve outdone yourself this time.
Nutcutter
The “mainstream of the country” doesn’t pay that much attention to this stuff.
Most people are not as obsessively self-referential as those of us who inhabit the blahsphere.
Nutcutter
Let’s get a ruling from Alfalfa Darrell, their king.
Par R
The NUT is probably right when he opines that the mainstream doesn’t pay much attention to this sort of stuff. However, events like this do offer up opportunities such as the following from Ace:
Mr Furious
Just as I wouldn’t ask George Bush to “denounce” Ann Coulter, it is ridiculous to demand Lamont “denounce” Hamsher.
What Hamsher did is fucking stupid. By all accounts Lamont is more than holding his own, and the primary is in a week. Why stir up some bullshit that could only possibly help Lieberman? No one that reads firedoglake needs help forming an opinion on Lieberman. And no one that doesn’t know who to vote for is going to your blog, Jane. Putting Joe in blackface had only one possible outcome , and it is unfolding now. Nice fucking work.
What Lieberman is doing is more offensive to me, implying that Lamont has anything to do with this, has control over Hamsher or that Hamsher represents him is straight-up dishonest. More reason why he deserves to go.
Jack Roy
Dude, John, you can’t use an apostraphe like that! Whatever bonus points you might have had coming are forfeited. [/grammarnazi]
I don’t think this tar-by-association is exactly new. Think of, say, the NAACP and the American Communist Party. So I wouldn’t have said we are only now to the point that…. This is a lamentable aspect of American politics that’s endemic, or at least has been around a long time. It’s intellectually dishonest and vapid, but that’s never been a disqualifier for a political tactic.
But, ahem, if I were inclined to engage in a little bit of it myself, I might criticize certain conservative bloggers who got kind of preachy about Online Integrity but haven’t had much to say about certain other conservative bloggers who have been a little naughty recently. And I’m not even talking about Jeff Goldstein.
srv
I’m still trying to figure out who the hell Deb Frisch is and why I should care. Maybe it’s because Tim didn’t write something furious about it.
Jim Allen
What’s your point? That we are still trying to catch up with your party in that department? Freely admitted, then — we have one hell of a long way to go before we do as much overt race-baiting as your side. For samples, you need only check out your good friend Darrell in “The New Patriotism”.
Mr Furious
Steve Gilliard does shit like this all the time too. Stupid.
Putting Dick Cheney in Yul Brynner-face? Brilliant.
Par R
Jack Roy, another would-be blogger trolling for hits.
feral1
Hamsher made a mistake with the graphic. She has quickly admitted her misktake and is moving on. The fact is she and Christy Smith have created a hugely successful blog with FDL, that is actually having an impact on U.S. politics by energizing a community of activists that put their money and time where the ideals are.
Mr Furious
The fact that Jane Hamsher is caught up in this makes me think you did more than laugh…
Ahem.
SeesThroughIt
The lesson? Hardcore partisans are stewpit.
GOP4Me
Don’t poke fun, those Straw-Men vote. How else do you think he got into the Senate?
Par R
Ned Lamont and his campaign haven’t exactly covered themselves with glory in the way in which they have handled this, denying that Hamsher had anything to do with their campaign, etc. Here, for example, is what a local Connecticut paper had to say about a recent campaign appearance by Lamont:
Additionally, Hamsher has acknowledged directing television commercials and ads for the Lamont campaign.
Krista
John’s drunk on schadenfreudenberry wine.
The Other Steve
Interesting that Michelle Malkin is working for the Liberman campaign.
That’s where this “controversy” originated at, the Malkin blog.
What with Lieberman hiring College Republicans to campaign for him in CT, and Malkin and the other wingnutters campaigning for him. You really do have to question. Is Joe a Republican, or is he a Democrat?
Geek, Esq.
Forget the offensiveness. How fucking stupid is she? This reminds me of the flap with Gilliard and Tim Kaine.
The Other Steve
Oh, and I don’t know what Hamsher was thinking. The picture is stupid. Not stupid from a political oops sense, but it’s just a dumb picture that’s not even funny or anything.
Meanwhile in real news… Conrad Burns up in Montana has been telling out of state fire fighters to fuck off.
The Other Steve
Actually, the big complaint from Malkin, and I notice it is being played here for us by her puppy Par R, is that Hamsher is listened to by these campaigns.
Have you ever heard of a Republican campaign listening to a nutter blog? When has Malkin been called to find out her opinion? Never.
It’s interesting, because it’s obvious that they are jealous of this relationship.
neil
I think there have been a lot of chances to whip out the minstrel-gear a lot more tempting than this one. It sort of game out of left field.
Blue Neponset
I am done defending Jane Hamsher. I am sure she isn’t a racist but she is as stupid as stupid can get. What kind of an idiot gives ammo like this to the John Coles and Leon Wolfs of the Right*? My answer…a wickied big idiot with blonde hair.
*I actually like John and Leon but they both seem to have it out for Jane and I wanted to use the “of the” Right comment.
Andrew
Careful, that’s DougJ’s imaginary girlfriend you’re talking about.
D. Mason
That’s what I thought when I saw it. What was going on in that womans head that made her decide that was a good idea? On any level. If it had been rip roaring hilarious then I could see how she might err on the side of comedy. And I would probably even agree with her decision.
Also, I would like to know exactly what message the image was meant to convey. Or even what message she thought she was sending with it. Generally speaking, I just don’t get it.
Nutcutter
Yes.
But mainly, he’s a Liebocrat. His main interest is in maintaining his membership in the exclusive club. Petty things like party, or even country, pale by comparison to his self interest.
Sirkowski
Great, John Cole has gone PC now…
VidaLoca
TOSteve —
Doesn’t Malkin appear from time to time on Fox News? (I ask out of ignorance, I don’t watch FN).
My only point about this, if it’s true, is that Malkin plays a different role than Jane Hamsher seeks to play; I realize that your original point may have been more narrowly addressed toward political campaigns.
Justin Slotman
If this ends up costing Lamont the victory (and it’s exactly the sort of thing veteran sleazeball Holy Joe will jump all over) I think John will throw a victory parade.
Steve
Yeah, but setting aside the whole question of whether it’s different because Gilliard is black, an important difference is that Gilliard had zero to do with the Kaine campaign (Kaine just happened to be running an ad on his blog) and the offensive image related to an entirely different race in another state. It just so happened that the timing was bad for Kaine, but it’s not like Gilliard should have realized he’d be making Kaine’s life difficult by showing it. Of course, he scotched that later when he made a big scene by calling Kaine a coward, etc.
With Hamsher, you get the double whammy, because she should have realized BOTH that it was a totally inappropriate image and that it was a politically stupid thing to do. I don’t think she is a stupid person but there doesn’t seem to be much of a filtering process between her brain and her mouth, a phenomenon aided in part by her cheerleading echo chamber that she creates by deleting opposing viewpoints.
I thought Lieberman’s attempt to insinuate that Lamont is a racist was complete hackery, but it takes a special kind of stupid to believe THIS was the way to hit back.
DougJ
You know nothing about politics, obviously. The grenade-chuckers serve a very useful purpose — why else would all the ones on the right be on some form of wingnut welfare?
tBone
There, that’s better.
Still, I agree it was a stupid and offensive move by Hamsher. Really, what the hell was she thinking?
DougJ
And that whole controversey’s really hurting the Lamont campaign — he’s on 13 points up in the polls know.
For the record, I’m for grenade-throwing on both sides of the aisle. I don’t like it when those on the right smear war heros’ war records or advocate genocide against arabs, but if the crux of what they’re saying is true, then I say let it rip.
John S.
Wow.
What few post we see from Cole as of late are of such stunning caliber. I mean, with all that’s going on in the world right now, I can see that one would only see fit to comment about the Steelers, tax evaders and Lieberman in black face.
Oh, that’s right…this is Balloon Juice – home of Hot Air
and Ill-Informed Banter. Sorry, John. I see you’re just keeping it real and taking this blog back to its old school roots.
DougJ
Sorry for the barrage, but I do hate these ginned up controversies. Remember the Trent Lott-Strom Thurmond one? That’s what made the video doctor the head of the Senate. That way madness lies.
Jim Allen
Careful. Doug. John is very sensitive to cracks about Pajamas Media.
The Other Steve
WAIT WAIT! Via TPM… Comedy Gold for the day! Screw you and your Jane Hamshers of the left… we’ve got The National Review!
The Mark Levin Blog on National Review
THE TRUTH IS OUT! PRISONERS HELD AT GUANTANAMO HAVE BEEN TORTURING THE PRISON GUARDS!
Mark Levin has collected evidence of Al Qaeda prisoners singing Russian prison tunes in three part harmony.
The Other Steve
The interesting thing about Mellon-Scaife is he doesn’t go around broadcasting that he gives money to Malkin, etc.
Another one is the Stalinist David Koch.
Ancient Purple
Sometimes, I wonder if Mr. Cole saves up these things so that he can use them to justify why, after all his hand-wringing, he voted for the GOP anyway.
Just wondering.
Slide
Lamont 54%
Lieberman 41%
Methinks Jane and her fellow liberal bloggers are not such an impediment to Lamont’s campaign.
Steve
TOS is late to the party.
Slide
nah.. John is just still smarting from the thumping Jane gave him here on his own blog a few months back.
The Other Steve
Oh man. I stopped reading that thread the fifth time Darrell accused Hezbollah of faking the Canan bombing.
DougJ
This topic bores me. I have a better one: you all saw the Vanity Fair article on what really happened with NORAD on 911. Does anyone have Woodward’s book about 911 and its aftermath? I don’t know the title — it’s something like “How George Bush Saved America” or “George Bush’s Taint: Sweet Like Honey”.
It would be interesting to compare the lies Woodward repeated in the context of what we now know happened (complete chaos).
Andrew
Come on guys, Cole is doing a great moderate-center spoof here. Give him some credit.
tBone
If you’re allergic to honey, you hate freedom.
tBone
Don’t stop reading yet, you’re missing out on some prime comedy there. It got really good towards the end.
SeesThroughIt
Well, to be fair, it is both delicious and powerful.
Meanwhile, that Mark Levin piece is both absurd and hilarious.
Daniel DiRito
Read a satirical critique of the battle being waged amongst Democrats in the Lieberman v. Lamont Senate race coined “The Hatfield’s & McCoy’s”…here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com
Nutcutter
That is just a great, great line.
Nutcutter
Okay, there’s a minute of my life I can never have back.
This, from your article:
No other line in the piece need be read. That one is succinct. You don’t, indeed, get it.
tBone
If you get drunk on schadenfreudenberry wine, does someone else get the hangover?
bobzilla
In possibly related news, firedoglake.com appears to be offline at the moment, although it could be my internet connection from work…
srv
Generals think there might be a civil war
Go figure. You can’t pay these guys enough:
I really don’t remember love being a requirement before the invasion. Perhaps someone could send me the NRO or PNAC link on that.
Alas, we brought them freedom(tm), but we couldn’t bring them the love(R).
SeesThroughIt
That’s because we couldn’t negotiate a love-rental price structure with Hallmark.
VidaLoca
You can’t get love on a cost-plus no-bid contract.
Darrell
Except I never said such thing. I said “let’s wait” until the facts come in, as Hezbollah is not the most reliable news source… whereas leftwingnut extremists like Steve were comparing that measured wait-and-see reaction with “9/11 was a government conspiracy” type moonbats whom he says populate DKos.
Regarding the topic of this thread, did everyone catch how Lamont lied his fucking ass off telling a news reporter “I don’t know anything about the blogs”, when Jane Hamsher directed campaign commercials for him and did campaign fundraising.. Then it turns out Lamont was photgraphed posing with Kos, and Lamont has his his own blog too..
“B-b-b-but I don’t know anything about blogs”… “you gotta believe me!”
tBone
I bet they have books coming out. Stupid unhinged Leftist whackjobs.
jg
You only get points because this time Jane Hamsher is actually who you are talking about.
Oh is that the point you were making then?
She did something stupid and apologized. At least John is the bigger man here and isn’t just looking for a gotcha to Jane after their last dust up.
Darrell
Meanwhile, liberals will continue to ignore this news coming out of Iran.. or they will Blame Bush(TM)
The ahole met with Hugo Chavez a day or two back too, probably trying to engineer Cuban missile crisis II. I think the leftists solution to blame Bush is a real bedrock foundation for our foreign policy, wouldn’t you agree?
tBone
The news reporter who delivered this mangled quote, you mean?
That’s one of the worst-written news articles I’ve ever seen. Someone should tell the writer that an article != unedited transcription of hastily-scribbled notes.
Pooh
I don’t begrudge John the chance to take a good clean shot at Jane – this is NFL football, play to the whistle, Jane.
And moving beyond the facile ‘oh John is just trolling’ response and you’ll find there is a lot of truth to what John is saying. There are many positions which I would find pretty compelling if I didn’t find the advocates of those positions to be on average pretty loathsome. FWIW, I think John, in general, takes it to ridiculous extremes (“I’d vote for him a third time just to piss the M00nb4tz off!”)
Darrell
Well, in the context of the moonbat comments which provoked that reaction, there was nothing “extreme” at all about John’s reaction.
John S.
Indeed.
I’m working on a “Blogger Ethics” primer, based on John’s blogging. So far I have determined:
– Jane Hamshers of the left are controversial when they Photoshop people
– Jeff Goldsteins of the right are witty when they cockslap people
I think it’s going to be a bestseller.
Ancient Purple
Wow, Darrell. I see you are learning your tricks from Powerline. Let’s read the whole quote from Lamont:
Quite different when read in context.
Next up: Darrell insists Rep. Dingel never condemned Hezbollah.
srv
It’s all about love(R). Who would have thought Democracy(tm) was easy, but love(R) was so hard?
Ancient Purple
Darrell spews:
This is news? Ahmadinejad says this on a daily basis and has been since taking office.
Wow, you truly are one of the most ignorant people on the planet, Darrell.
John S.
From the desk of Confucious:
If Darrell keeps screaming about lefties and nobody cares, does he make a sound?
Steve
That’s me, baby! The most extremistest lefty ever!
And that’s you! “Measured wait-and-see reaction” Darrell!
And in fact, my entire POINT was that the 9/11 idiots use the exact same passive-aggressive phrasing as you employed… “oh, we just want to see a full investigation” “we’re just noting these inconsistencies that should be explored” and my favorite “oh, so you’re saying those guys would never lie about anything?”
It’s amazing how a few days before every election, you guys always find something to take completely out of context. Yeah, like, remember how John Kerry said terrorism was just a nuisance?
In context, it’s obvious that Lamont was saying he had no idea what people are writing on the blogs and has no control over them, not that he had never heard of this strange entity called a “blog.” But I encourage you to run with your interpretation. That will really get voters to the polls… “Ned Lamont lied when he said he had never heard of a blog!” Yeah, you really have a silver bullet there.
jg
But Bush has been in charge for 6 years and his action have contributed to the current situation. I think the neocon solution of acting like everybody but Bush is to blame is a real bedrock foundation for our foreign policy.
The problem is that you hear the left criticise Bush and think the left feels Bush is entirely to blame and the only one to blame. The real issue is he has had a hand in this and since he’s our leader he’s the one we criticise because we want him to do differently. He can maybe fix this if he would stop believeing he should stay the course and let history judge him. But he won’t and you guys on the right won’t let any real criticism reach him, its all blown off as lefty mouth breathing. YOU are the problem.
John Steven
Why did the WaPo article not even mention the impetus for the doctored photo – Lieberman’s race-baiting flyers being distributed at black churches? The article completely leaves out the context behind what happened.
Darrell
Not at all, as he clearly stated “I don’t know anything about the blogs”.. this, when he was working hand in hand with Jane Hamsher and Markos “screw them” Moulitsos, or at a minimum, actively courting their support. What’s more, he has his own fucking blog, yet he’s lying his ass off about his familiarity with blogs
Pooh
I imagine it’s sounds similar to a large balloon with a small leak…
Darrell
Tell us then, what are, and what were the liberal recommendations in dealing with Iran, and N. Korea for that matter, besides appeasement?
Perry Como
Fixed that for you.
Steve
I trust Bush to come up with the right plan for Iran… because everything he’s touched in the Middle East has turned to gold so far, that’s for sure.
This was the lead-in to a CNN story which Darrell linked. Compare the CNN headline with the Reuters headline (h/t Andrew Sullivan) for the exact same story:
The actual quote?
I report, you decide. Heh.
srv
There’s just no way that Bush statements like “Axis-of-Evil” or screwing the pooch in Iraq could have possibly had any impact on Iranian or North Korean policies. Anyone who thinks that must just be totally crazy. Everything happening in the Bush terms is happening in a vacuum. It is the only explanation that could possibly be valid.
jg
Sorry. Won’t particpate in your thread jack. Even if I thought you were serious and not looking for a new jackalope to chase I wouldn’t bother. I’m not qualified to discuss it. Suffice it to say that N. Korea was disarmed, the nuke material was locked up and secured by UN inspectors. This was negotiated while gettting a blowjob in the oval office. Not bad huh?
John S.
Darrell-
Tell us then, what are, and what were the conservative recommendations in dealing with Iran, and N. Korea for that matter, besides wars without sufficient planning that we cannot win?
Pooh
Amazing how the seasons change but the calendar stays stuck at 1939…
Darrell
Our fair and balanced media. The same Iran story I linked to upthread, had the title in the NY Times, “Iran Leads Islamic Nations in Demanding End to Mideast War”, ignoring the real story quoted “Although the main cure (to the situation) is the elimination of the Zionist regime“
The President of Iran (again) calls for the elimination of Israel, but the NY Times headline reads that Iran is leading the charge in bringing an end to the war. Unbelievable, until you begin to understand how detached from reality most liberals truly are.
Ancient Purple
And Darrell continues to peddle a falsehood by taking the quote out of context.
For his next trick, Darrell morphs into Powerline and smears Rep. Dingel.
Popcorn is available at the concession stand.
Sherard
Hey srv – this would be mildly amusing / ironic, if it weren’t so awfully sad, pathetic, and true, and hadn’t been that way for 50 years. What’s truly disturbing is that you see those 3 comments as amusing and not sad.
Perry Como
He won’t answer. There is no plan to deal with Iran and North Korea. Darrell will sputter on for 20 or 30 posts about appeasement and ignore any point you bring up about the Bush administration flat out ignoring that there’s even a problem.
And some how, if Iran gets a nuclear weapon, it will be Clinton’s fault.
Steve
There seems to be a lot of factual support for this suggestion… we should probably nuke both of them just to be sure.
Darrell
Yeah, Clinton’s trust in the N. Koreans was a real “success” by liberal standards, huh? Keep telling yourself that the N. Koreans didn’t really play Clinton for a dupe while forging ahead with their nuclear program. Such a ‘reality based’ perspective
Darrell
John, it’s never a good idea to take military action, or the credible threat of it, off the table as you suggest. Our enemies understandably see that as a sign of weakness and act (or don’t act) accordingly.
Ancient Purple
Fixed that for you, Darrell.
jg
Keep telling yourself that N. Korea wasn’t getting exactly what they wanted, exactly what a backwards ass country expects when it agrees to forgo nuke processing, until Bush labelled them an axis of evil. You can’t deny that until then NK had nuke material but not nukes. Now they have nukes and you blame Clinton. And you say I have a loose grip on reality?
N. Korea wanted respect, Clinton gave them respect. Thats what nukes do for a country, they give you a seat at the big boys table.
Pooh
What is the Senator’s plan for North Korea? If there is none, will the Senator yield?
Perry Como
I think Bush’s strategy with North Korea has been brilliant. Talk tough and do absolutely nothing while North Korea churns out the fissile material for nukes. Brilliant!
John S.
Answer the fucking question.
What is the conservative plan for dealing with Iran and North Korea?
Try not to hand us some more of your mealy-mouthed bullshit.
SeesThroughIt
Well, duh. He got a blowjob! While in office! While actually in the Oval Office! Of course it’s Clinton’s fault! Anything even remotely negative that happens under Republican rule for at least the next 20 years is, by definition, Clinton’s fault. Clueless moonbat. Why can’t you love America enough to hate its ex-President and blame him for everything?
Darrell
You see, this is the problem with liberals – even now, after it’s been made clear that N. Korea broke their promises, they still cling to belief that N. Korea had foregone their nuclear ambitions.
Only after Bush labeled them part of the axis of evil, did they “suddenly” change. N. Korea may want respect, but the reality is, they’re untrustworthy and batshit crazy
Pooh
Darrell, showing his usual comprehension skills, gets from point A:
to B:
How credible is our military threat right now, big D? Oh you mean dropping nukes! That’s sure to win friends. Good thinking, Slim.
jaime
Darrell’s strategy for victory…at Civ 4.
DougJ
And Jeff also photo-shopped the cheetoh stains off said cock in many of his website’s pictures.
jg
It kind of is but there’s blame for the republicans too. According to Ben Stein lots of bad shit happened in souteast asia because impeachment hamstrung Nixon. (Yes he actually said that). I guess the same could be said of Clinton. If he wasn’t impeached he might have done more agaisnt OBL in the 90’s, we might not be here now. See how disuptive sex not for the purpose of procreation can be?
Darrell
With N. Korea, “chimp” Bush has the rightwingnut crazy idea that China, a key enabler of N. Korea, might want to avoid a nuclear war in their back yard, prevailing winds being what they are… Bush has this batshit insane idea, that China ‘might’ be key in pressuring N. Korea to put a lid on their nuclear program and missile testing. I have my doubts, but it’s a better solution than the direct one-on-one negotiations being advocated by liberals.
But if China’s pressure doesn’t work, any aggressive military action on the part of N. Korea will have to be responded to militarily IMO. Fortunately, we have S. Korea, as well as Japan and Australia in the region available to shoulder some of the burden
Steve
Conversely, constantly rattling the sabers simply helps hardliners get elected and solidify their power by exploiting anti-American sentiment.
Bush has a credibility problem in that, because of Iraq, he can’t open his mouth without the people of the world hearing an implied threat of war. It’s too late now to start building bridges. Hopefully the next President, Republican or Democrat, can restore some of the lost trust, because we simply can’t solve the problems of this new age without cooperation from the world community.
jg
You say they broke their promise but you don’t say why or when. You blame it on Clinton but he did his job, he got NK to stop processing. All the shit with N. Korea happened after Bush took office and was a reaction to his policies. You can’t blame Clinton anymore. Even if you say he only appeased what the fuck had Bush done that was better. NK has built weapons on his watch and you let him shirk responsibilty by blaming his predecessor. Wow.
Een if youtake the position that Clinton could have done more or simply appeased hoping the next guy would do better, the next guy hasn’t, and that ain’t Clintons fault. Its not Clintons fault how badly Bush handled the situation he was left with.
Kimmitt
QOTD.
Anyways, I had really kind of hoped that Cole would play against type and ignore this thing — or at least say something interesting about it. Ah, well.
srv
Sherard, I suggest you try a little prayer and introspection while wiping that blackface off.
Darrell
The Europeans then, who so vocally opposed Bush in Iraq, and who are Iran’s largest trading partner, should have credibility in “building bridges” with Iran. How’s their brige building been working out there? Or do you blame Bush for that too.
Par R
This whole Jane Hamsher ruckus arose when she attempted to take the edge and spotlight off Lamont’s hypocrisy about finally resigning from a country club with a questionable past. If you read the WaPo, among other papers, you will recall that Lamont belonged to a Connecticut club suspected of racism and antisemitism in its membership decisions. He only quit the club when he became a politician.
Now, as Ace put it, “…this is not necessarily a disqualifying factor; Lord knows many politicians have had country-club problems. But it is an issue that has to be responded to seriously.” Instead, Hamsher puts up that outrageous photoshopped picture.
LITBMueller
Apparently, our enemies are the Klingons.
jg
No chance that Iran can’t afford to listen to Europe because Iran knows Europe doesn’t have any control over Bushs actions?
Darrell
jg, Clinton/Albright policy with N. Korea was a mistake. You were the one who raised it as an example of Clinton’s “success”, and I merely pointed out the obvious.
Clinton agreed to provide them with two light water nuclear reactors for chrissakes. Then what was it, 2 years later N. Korea was lobbing missiles over Japan? Get a grip on reality man
Perry Como
How’s that working out? North Korea stop enriching material yet? Stopped building missiles? Stopped firing those missiles into the Sea of Japan? Is North Korea less of a threat now?
jg
Some might take it as a sign of progress. Could you seriously have a good faith negotiation with someone who is more powerful than you and won’t rule out kicking your ass if you don’t do what they want?
Darrell
Well at least we know what they’re up to, instead of pretending that N. Korea was “contained”. Seems they were firing off missiles in the 1990’s under clinton too.
Tell us Perry, what would you have the US do differently with Korea?
jg
It was a success. They stopped processing nuclear material. I never said Clinton stopped them from testing missile technology.
Key point you keep ignoring. They stopeed processing nuclear material until Bush came along.
jg
Anyone got a gun. We’ve let this jackaolpe roam free for a half hour, thats long enough. Someone Cheney it.
srv
Yes, it makes no sense to negotiate with the actual country at hand. And like Hezbollah/etc, N. Korea is just an actor for another state… right.
Faux News
Amusing? No.
Pollyannish and sanctimonious? Yes.
Steve
Well, there was the plan to provide Iran with enriched uranium for nuclear power so that it wouldn’t have an excuse to enrich uranium itself… a plan that was ridiculed as dangerously irresponsible by the Bush campaign when Kerry brought it up. Then after the election, guess what, Bush decided it was a good idea after all.
But it seems to have worked out… I only wish Bush hadn’t delayed U.S. approval of this idea for political reasons, pretending it was a terrible idea when it wasn’t.
Darrell
Clinton provided the N. Korean with nuclear reactors which can produce nuclear bombs, at a cost of billions to US taxpayers along with almost a billion dollars a yr. in free oil shipments to help finance their operations. N. Korea did not stop pursuing their nuclear weapons program under Clinton. I’m not sure what your point is.
Perry Como
Absolutely nothing. Like I said, Bush’s name-calling-foreign-policy is brilliant. Bush utters phrases like “axis of evil” and North Korea keeps producing nuclear material. It’s cunning.
srv
This silver bullet will never wear out:
Punchy
Darrell–
What military are you planning on using? Would you advocate taking troops out of Iraq–most assuredly putting that country into full-out civil war–for this N. Korea attack? Next, what if–and there’s plenty of good reason to believe they dont–those countries don’t want to participate? Does the US attempt this strike alone?
The prob with your plan, and every righty’s plan, is that they use this blanket statement “we’ll use our military”, as if an additional 200K troops will just magically appear out of nowhere. Unless you wish to destroy whatever progress is happening in Iraq, one CANNOT attack N. Korea (or Iran, FWIW). Comments?
jg
More revisionist history put forth by the Ministry of Truth.
Pooh
So W. is in favor of appeasement? Why does the president hate America?
John S.
Darrell’s conservative solution to N. Korea:
So we let China – North Korea’s ally – do all the leg work for us. If it fails, we convince Japan and Australia to go to war with us on North Korea.
BRILLIANT!
Now how about part two, what is the conservative solution to dealing with Iran?
Darrell
Steve, let us examine your definition of having “worked out”. From the article:
So in other words, the Bush admin. agreed to such a program, if and only if the Iranians would submit to a veriable dismantling of their own uranium enrichment program.. which they have not done.
But according to you, the main problem was the Bush administration’s “delay” in considering this option, which otherwise would have been a wonderful solution except for the minor detail about Iran’s vow to never abandon their own nuclear ambitions. You really believe that’s a ‘reality based’ solution?
srv
The Box Turtles will take care of Iran.
Darrell
Because if Bush hadn’t called them names, their nuclear program would still be “contained”, right? I think that’s a really shrewd, intelligent position for you to hold.
Jimmah Carter, posting under Perry Como’s alias
Zifnab
Seriously, that’s news to me and I’d love to see a link. From what I understood, the only foreign aid we offered N. Korea was in the form of food and oil. What’s more, I was under the impression that our two biggest charity cases sucking from the American teet are Isreal and Turkey (at $3 billion and $1 billion respectively), both vital to American military interests in the Middle East and both with a number of military bases as part of the deal.
That Clinton ever gave nuclear reactors to N. Korea, much less $1 billion worth of aid is something I’d like to see in print.
Krista
Well, there’s always the draft. I’m sure that, given Darrell’s enthusiasm for war, he’d be all for it. There might be that little problem of Americans rioting in the streets about it, but that’s nothing a little tear gas can’t solve.
Perry Como
The same way they deal with North Korea:
“You guys are a bunch of poopy heads!”
Strong. Smart. Savvy.
srv
The Axis-of-Darrells will no doubt try to confuse y’all about the NK weapons pre-Axis of Evil.
Plutonium stocks
Note that almost all of this activity happened on George Sr’s watch.
jg
So Bush’s talk that they are a world evil had nothing to do with them arming themselves? Especially after we invaded one of the three countries on the same list? You can ignore that possibility and at the sametime insult other peoples intelligence?
Darrell
Here you go:
Oops, looks like that prediction wasn’t so ‘reality based’
Perry Como
The agreement was in 2000, iirc. Guess who was on the board of the company selling the reactors to North Korea?
:drumroll:
Donald Rumsfeld!
What Darrell doesn’t mention is that it is difficult to use light water reactors for weapons grade enrichment. But we all know the best solution is to call people names. The “North Korea smells like cat breath!” school of foreign policy.
John S.
So, by transitive axiom, the conservative plan for dealing with Iran is:
But if Saudi Arabia’s pressure doesn’t work, any aggressive military action on the part of Iran will have to be responded to militarily IMO. Fortunately, we have Iraq, as well as Israel and Afghanistan in the region available to shoulder some of the burden.
Is this correct, Senator?
SeesThroughIt
Send in a couple squads of troops. They topple the government. The Iranian people, overjoyed that we have come to liberate them, will take it from there.
Darrell
Well Krista, other than rioting in the streets over the possibility of a military response to N. Korea, really what is your idea? Please tell us. Because if we do nothing, the North Koreans continue to develop and perfect nuclear weapons, with the additional threat of them selling nuclear weapons and technology to our enemies in order to raise money.
Perry Como
Candy and flowers. Don’t discount the power of candy and flowers.
bbiab with some fun information about Bush, Khan, Saudi Arabia and North Korea. You’ll love this bit of foreign policy genius, Darrell.
srv
Yes, we did not provide them the LWR reactors by 2003.
Perry Como
That’s why we need to stay the course. If we keep calling North Korea names, the country will eventually have a nervous breakdown and start crying. Brilliant!
Darrell
I believe that’s true. Bill Clinton and Jimmah Carter implemented the policy and told us that we could trust the North Koreans to abandon their nuclear weapons aspirations.. so not to worry with building those light water reactors
SeesThroughIt
Don’t you think North Korea got fat? I mean, look at its cankles, for fuck’s sake! And it’s such a whore!
Krista
Do you honestly believe that those are the only options available? Military action, or nothing?
Wow.
Darrell
Had we stayed the course, Bush never would have undone Bill Clinton’s ‘peace in our time’ agreement with the North Koreans, now would he have?
Darrell
I’ll ask you a second time, what would you have us do? Can you answer the question? You see, diplomacy hasn’t been working out so effectively with the North Koreans? even under a Dem presidency
Steve
Is North Korea the same as Nazi Germany, or is it Iran, or is it Iraq or Syria? I can’t keep track of all these new Nazi Germanys.
Pooh
That’s a good point. Why are we doing nothing? Oh wait, agit-blogging for a new round of invasions is doing something. Keep up the good work on the front lines as you stand shoulder to shoulder with Ledeen.
John S.
When I correctly identified the conservative solution to North Korea and Iran as:
Darrell blustered and wailed, wailed and blustered. Then when pressed on what their solution is, he comes up with a brilliant three-step plan:
1. Rely on a dubious “ally” to pressure them.
2. Provided #1 fails, wage war with the help of regional allies.
3. Problem solved!
And it’s the Democrats who aren’t serious about these things and don’t have a real plan?
LMAO
demimondian
We aren’t doing nothing. We’re considering putting pressure on China to think about putting pressure on North Korea to consider negotiating with third parties to not do what they’ve already successfully done.
Why do you leftists continue to lie about The President’s Foreign Policy, Pooh.
srv
NK would have the plutonium weapons they developed in the early 90’s. But now they have 5-8 more from the EU processing. But that couldn’t possibly be to GW’s policies, because everything that happened since 2001 is in a vacuum.
Perry Como
So here’s some fun info…
After Bush took office in 2001, a number of intelligence investigations were quashed. One involved AQ Khan, father of the Pakistani bomb. Why would the Bush administration stop an investigation of a Pakistani nuclear scientist? Saudi Arabia. The money trail led straight back to our Best Friends Forever.
Fast forward 6 months or so and the Guardian gets wind of a story that Khan has been selling his wares to North Korea, Libya and Saudi Arabia. Poppycock!, says the Bush administration. Using the patented Head-In-The-Sand method of intelligence analysis, the Bush administration dismisses the report. Of course, if they hadn’t scuttled the investigation of Khan Labs, perhaps they would have had a back up source for the newspaper article. Like…intelligence.
Now fast forward to early 2004 and Bush is shocked! that Khan had been selling nuclear bomb plans and materials to rogue nations (and BFF Saudi Arabia).
That’s some brilliant work. Heckuva job Bushie!
The Pirate
Speaking as a liberal I can’t stand most lefty blogs that try to be funny because generally they have the combined comic chops of the Wayans Brothers, post-“In Living Color”. Apparently Jane thought this was some kind of edgy satire but in reality it just looks really fucking lame.
The Pirate
I would like to express my amazement that during the time I opened the comment box, took a dump, made myself a sandwich, wrote the comment and posted it this thread went from a discussion of the post to a bitter foreign policy argument. Will wonders never cease?
Krista
Honestly? (I know how much you like honesty…)
I’m not a political scientist. I’m not an expert on diplomacy. So this little English major from the Maritimes is not going to be able to cough up the winning solution to the North Korea problem. Sorry.
I do, however, see that Americans tend to be growing more and more disillusioned with the conflicts in which the US is already involved. I also have heard several reports of peoples’ military stints being extended, which leads me to believe that you don’t have long lineups at the recruitment centers right now. That leads me to believe that your idea of a military solution to the North Korea issue might be tricky, due to lack of manpower.
So, if the American government feels the same way that you do, but does not have enough people in the military to actually do more than a half-assed job of it, what’s the solution? Do you try to increase recruitment? Looks like that’s being attempted now, and is only having mediocre results. For a project as big as North Korea, it seems to me that if you want to do a proper job of it, and are having problems recruiting, the only other solution is the draft. And somehow, I really, really can’t see the American populace, already weary of war, taking the notion of a draft in good humour.
So, you think that diplomacy hasn’t been working. Perhaps, perhaps not. I’m not well-versed enough to say. But, if you think that military force WOULD work, you’re going to need a lot of bite behind that bark. And right now, the bite’s lacking some teeth.
And please, I’ll ask you not to get insulting with me in regards to this. I’m answering you honestly and in good faith, and if you want to have an actual discussion on the merits of diplomacy vs. military action, I’d be happy to participate. If you want to insult me, you might as well save your energy — I’m not interested in going down that road with you today.
Darrell
Funny how you didn’t include any links to substantiate that Bush “quashed” these intelligence investigations to protect his good buddies the Saudis
Hilarous to see you leftwingnuts are still spouting Michael Moore talking points.
Krista
We’re like a family here — a lot of bitterness from previous arguments tends to spill over into new ones.
LITBMueller
Remember the good ole days, when the United States dealt with other countries they wanted to ease tensions with by signing treaties n’ stuff?
Them were good ole days…
The easy solution: the U.S. offers Iran a non-agression pact and immediate negotiations to begin normalization of trade relations in return for Iran abandoning its nuclear ambitions and support of Hezbollah.
The same offer could even be made to Syria. Two birds, one stone.
Has that been offered? Of course not. Because the administration’s hard on for “regime change” dictates that we have the E3 conduct talks. Will this work? Of course not: Iran is not developing nuclear technology because they are afraid they will be invaded by Europe – they are afraid they will be attacked by the US. Duh.
Appeasement, my ass. That’s just smart, because war just ain’t all its cracked up to be.
mrmobi
Nutcutter:
Gracias Nutman, I have been trying to figure out what the hell holy joe is. Marshall Wittman thinks he’s god incarnate.
That was a pretty stupid thing that Jane did. It could end up making a difference in the race. For myself, I don’t have a dog in that hunt, except to say that anything which challenges the assumption that incumbents are more or less automatically re-elected is a good thing. Also, silly liberal scumbag that I am, I think the people actually get to choose who their senator is. Even if they occasionally read a blog. I must be a terrorist.
Darrell: have you heard that Clinton was responsible for the attacks on 9/11? Yep, Tweetie said so on MSNBC. It must be true (even though he left office 9 months earlier). I’m disappointed that you haven’t been parroting this information. How he worked behind the scenes to suppress the evidence that an attack was being prepared. He did it all for blowjobs. Sick bastard.
One more thing, Gruppenfuhrer. Which army are we going to use when we invade Iran? The one in your pants?
Zifnab
I fail to see why this would be a problem. On the contrary, replacing North Korea’s bomb making reactors with non-bomb making reactors seems the epitomy of common sense.
So far, the Bush response to North Korea has been “let China and Russia take the lead” and since China likes North Korea and Russia doesn’t feel overly threatened, the talks don’t go far. What’s more, after the Iraq Debacle, our President’s talks of disarmorment ring rather hollow. When a country doesn’t have WMDs we invade. When a country might have WMDs we talk about invading but generally drag our feet. When a country does have WMDs we let Russia and China handle it.
Sounds to me like Kim Jong Il knows exactly what he’s doing. What’s more the Bush Doctrine seems to spell out to every foreign country the world over that if you want respect from the US, you better start building nukes. At this rate, I’m surprised Mexico hasn’t started going for the bomb.
Perry Como
Linky-poo
Darrell
I think the disastrous results of diplomatic efforts with North Korea are pretty well out there for all to see. Beginning in the early 1990’s (and before?), the N. Koreans have been breaking their word. I’d like to see the left admit that with some countries, especially batshit dictatorships such as North Korea and Iran (“we must eliminate the Zionists”), that diplomacy not only isn’t the ‘miracle cure’, it can be downright harmful to our national security, as it buys time for our enemies to dig in and develop and sell more weapons. In the case of Iran, they sponsor terrorism around the globe.
I am looking for some acknowledgement that diplomatic efforts with both North Korea and Iran have been failures, and that these failures are not the fault of George W. Bush. But I don’t see ANY on the left here willing to acknowledge this.
Krista
Darrell – okay. So I’ll put your question back to you. What should be done about North Korea? You feel that they cannot be negotiated with, and that diplomatic efforts have failed. Is the only alternative military action? Where will you get the resources for a project of that scope? And is there perhaps some unexplored option other than negotiations, war, or doing nothing?
Perry Como
Whereas the policy of calling a country names and going “thhhhptt!” is Strong. Smart. Successful. Savvy. Sibilance. Sibilance.
Nutcutter
Why would that be?
Could it be that the man has fucked everything he’s touched for five and half years, and never takes responsibility for anything? Could it be because you do this phony Bush-does-no-wrong act in here all the time? Could it be because you display a dismissive and insulting attitude toward the posters here? Could it be that after five and half years, it might be time to start having some accountability and fewer excuses?
Or could it be that you are posting in a place where nobody likes you, thinks you are horse’s ass, is sick of your bullshit and your act, and wouldn’t give you an inch of ground if your fucking life depended on it?
What do you think, Darrell?
Aw, never mind. Who cares what you think?
Krista
Forgot to ask:
…without resorting to the draft?
Darrell
Except North Korea never dismantled their previous nuclear weapons development. It was a one-sided deal. THAT is the point. Uncle sucker (US) helps them build nuclear facilities and gives them lots of free oil, and the North Koreans continue nuclear development behind our backs, breaking all their promises.
John S.
I am looking for a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, but I don’t see ANY on the right willing to help.
Pooh
My question is why the Senator jackaloped a topic that was actually good for him. I mean he could actually point to the Jane Hamsher’s of John Cole’s fever dreams (Schadenfreudeberry wine will do that, buddy) and say “typical leftist m00b4tz kook” and be closer to correct than at any time than (without doing any research) the last 25 threads in which he has invaded.
Nutcutter
Bush’s Iraq Adventure Falling Apart
C’mon Darrell, how about a post about how well things are going in Iraq today?
demimondian
The technical name for that particular linguistic device is “assonance”. Appropriate alternative apprehensions of the word are left as an exercise for the reader.
demimondian
Fixed.
jg
Behind our backs? The old material was under seal, watched by the UN. When he broke the seal and started reprocessing it was very much out in the open and it all happened when Bush dropped the ball passed to him from Clinton. No matter how you feel about Clintons solution it was always a stopgap and Bush screwed the pooch when it was his turn to work the problem. Under Bush 1 N. Korea starts making nukes, Clinton stops this. Its going again under Bush 2 but its Clntons fault.
A crying baby wanted a lollipop. Clinton at least gave him a pacifier, Bush says let him cry he’s evil anyway.
Nutcutter
Kevin Drum.
Andrea Mitchell’s husband, a lying, manipulative cocksucker who would stick it to the middle class to prop up his empire. Who knew that these powerful people would stoop to such things?
Anyone? Hands?
JDRhoades
Bingo. The only people who even know who Jane Hamsher or Deb Frisch are right here in blogland. And I doubt that a lot of the ones who do know even care. Frankly, I tend to just scroll right by blogger v. blogger pissing matches, whehther they be on the right or the left, and I don’t think I’m alone in this.
Hamsher “influential?” Pfft. I read a lot of blogs. I myself blog. And until this fake-outrage fiesta *I* didn’t even know who the hell she was. And even now, all I know about this Frisch person is that she said something nasty to someone and everybody got their panties in a wad, which is pretty damn rich considering what the rest of the Internet is like.
Perry Como
Quite fitting name as it’s the perfect mic test for wingnut podcasting.
jg
How could they be anyones else’s fault? He’s president now. He’s in charge. Those countries are reacting to his policies not a previous presidents. Just because we have had problems with these countries going back decades and administrations doesn’t in anyway change that they are acting now based on the situation as it is now. Clinton stopped being involved 6 years ago, its Bush now.
Perry Como
For being a Randian, Greespan loved him some money supply inflation.
Darrell
Well, there comes a point after years of talk and carrots, that a ‘reality based’ person finally needs to acknowledge “this ain’t working”. I hope we can agree that there is a time for talk and a time for action. It’s not an either/or thing.
Leftists have posted on this thread that China is North Korea’s “friend”. From what I’ve read, these leftists are wrong, in that China is fed up with supporting this particular friend. If China can be convinced to pull the plug on their support of North Korea, that would put a lot of pressure on N. Korea, as they are not self sufficient.
If that doesn’t work, then I see no other alternative other than military response (do you?), the next time N. Korea lobs missiles over Japan or toward other neighbors. Maybe even a preemptive strike to destroy nuclear development facilities. We’ve got what, 20k troops on Korean soil now backed by several hundred thousand S. Korean troops with many more in reserves (military service is mandatory in S. Korea) + Japan + other regional allies.
That would be the last choice, but not the worst outcome.
Steve
One of the fundamental disagreements at work in this thread is whether stopgap measures are a “success” or a “failure.”
Nutcutter
From the antiwar.com blog.
Just like I said. Careful, “pinpoint” targeting aimed at avoiding civilian casualties? No. Careless, shotgun targeting done without regard to civilian casualties.
Those motherfuckers have been lying to you all along.
Killing children in their sleep, and then lying to you about it. It’s a nice picture, isn’t it?
jg
Both. Success if they get teh other party to stop doing something. Failure if someone later drops the ball and everything reverts back to previous state.
Perry Como
And despite that, I think we can all agree that name calling is the best course of action. North Korea walks funny!
JDRhoades
As the American Duct Tape Council tells us: All solutions are temporary anyway.
Perry Como
Now that I think about, we should make Jeff Goldstein the ambassador to North Korea. After a few days of cock slapping and naughty place touching, North Korea will be begging to dismantle their nuclear weapons.
jg
If N. Korea collapses or we invade, they will be an enormous refugee movement from N. Korea into China. China doesn’t want that. China’s ‘friend of foe’ status wrt N. Korea is fluid.
Nutcutter
Growing “Threat” of Civil War in Iraq?
I think what they mean is, a growing threat that the news media will start calling it a civil war, which it has been for some time now.
Especially, a threat that this could happen well before election day.
Cyrus
Clearly, you’re new here. :)
Ahhh, I take that as a challenge. The linked Norbizness post was the funniest damn thing I’ve seen in months.
JDRhoades
Damn that liberal Israeli Air Force!
Nutcutter
Don Rumsfeld is now taking his talking points from Darrell.
Darrell
I know that some of the material was under seal, I don’t know how much. The North Koreans had already successfully done enrichment in the 1980’s and early 1990’s. But N. Korea was moving full steam with the missile launch delivery systems development and testing, as well as acquiring uranium enrichment equipment. I believe they also had underground development and enrichment facicilities not ‘under seal’, but I’d have to look that up to verify sources.
Krista
I do agree that there is a time for talk and a time for action. My major concern is that there may be those who are eager for action, but who are:
1. being overly optimistic when laying their plans for action.
2. not fully thinking through the possible consequences of action.
When talking “action”, we’re talking about warfare. And if more American soldiers are going to risk dying, then they deserve a hell of a lot better than some half-assed, overly optimistic plan.
That’s a big gamble. Is China fed up enough for such a dramatic move? There’s a big difference between being fed up with an ally and severing the relationship with them. Being fed up costs nothing. Severing the relationship — that’s a pretty large leap, IMHO.
(Can someone please tell me why, everytime I write IMHO, I always want to write IHOP instead? Is it an obsession with pancakes?)
Nutcutter
A foreign policy argument in which Bill Clinton is the main figure.
srv
No, cognitive assonance.
JDRhoades
More like a gang war, actually. As far as I can tell, there’s no organized objective. Everybody’s just whacking everybody else for revenge or just for being with the wrong crew.
Nutcutter
Translation: If you get sick of our bullshit after five years, and stop believing every lie we tell you, then we’ll blame you when the thing fails. We’re Republicans, that’s what we do.
Darrell
Do you have a link? Because as of 2 days ago, IAF and IDF said this:
Perry Como
On bunnies!
JDRhoades
Hey, it worked after Vietnam.
Punchy
For reasons I cannot possibly explain, I find this comment to ba absolutely hilarious. I’m having problems typing I’m laughing so much…
jg
You’re describing the game. That’s Kims way of staying in power, feeding his people, keeping someone from knocking him off. We know its a game. We used to send really smart people overseas to play it. Then we ‘elected’ Bush and he called game over. We don’t play anymore. We don’t recognize the needs and wants of other countries anymore. Our way or highway. No more diplomacy, just ultimatums. All the factors that led N. Korea to pursue nuclear technology still exist but we act like they don’t and pretend the most unlikely one is real and we can’t negotiate with someone who is evil.
Steve
I’m not sure you understand you are talking about two entirely different things.
Punchy
DAMN YOU KRISTA!! Cease with the “u”s!!!
Punchy
Dammit! I meant “o”s…I’m a dumbass.
Krista
You omitted that for the sake of brevity, right?
Right?
Pooh
Well, now that this thread has been Senatorial Darrelled into foreign polic land, I give you your secratary of defense:
Such a kidder…
Darrell
I probably don’t.. which is why I asked for a link.
Krista
/blows a raspberry at Punchy
Darrell
Yuk! but good observation. Why don’t bathroom doors all have ‘Push’ exits where you don’t have to touch the door? .. as 1/2 the people don’t wash before grabbing the handle and leaving
Jim Allen
You think the word is “humur”?
You were not a dumbass the first time.
The second time, however…..
Jim Allen
Oh, and Krista, Punchy’s right. It’s time you threw off those froofy British affectations. You drive on the right, you “sked-jool” your time, and you have your own beer. Let’s cut that cord completely, eh?
The Other Steve
I heard that it was The Easter Bunny’s fault.
mrmobi
PPgz, that’s good! Isn’t it amazing how the language being used by Administration figures sounds like Viet Nam era language? I’m going to have to go back and look up some quotes, ’cause this is like deja vu all over again.
You can all rest easy now, because I have the solution to the whole middle-east problem. We just nuke ’em!
Do like Randy Newman:
Darrell, you are kidding about a war with North Korea, right? Because the last one went so well. It would be like Iraq, but with nukes, and with millions dead. Right up your alley, Gruppenfuhrer.
Punchy
I posted, then corrected, then realized I need to re-correct the correction, as it was incorrect, but not wanting to jack the thread, I decided the correct thing was to accept my dumbass insult and go take a dump. Then wash my hands.
Darrell
I think we should tell the North Koreans in no uncertain terms that like you leftists suggest, military action on our part is completely off the table no matter what they do.
If North Korea launches nuclear missiles at Japan or into Seoul we can send them a stern letter, and with any luck, we could also get the UN to issue a condemnation over the ‘cycle of violence’ in that region. That’ll show ’em
Steve
I guess I was wrong that no one enjoys being bombed.
Nutcutter
Now that is some serious assonance.
Perry Como
How’s that working out? North Korea stop enriching material yet? Stopped building missiles? Stopped firing those missiles into the Sea of Japan? Is North Korea less of a threat now?
jg
What military options? We can’t invade, our forces are busy, S. Korea doesn’t want war and China doesn’t want all of the norths refugees. We can’t nuke’em because we’d essentially be nuking all of Korea and part of China. The only option we have is diplomacy, string Kim along until he dies or an option for removal becomes viable. You don’t turn your back on him. Thats not how grown ups handle a situation.
Pb
Well at least that would make it official–that has more or less been Bush’s North Korea policy since at least 2002.
Nutcutter
Some profoundly crazy people over there. Remember when we were shocked that people would get dressed up and board a plane for the purpose of committing mass suicide for some fanatical cause?
Is anyone still shocked? Does anyone really doubt that there are plenty-o-people on both sides over there who would gladly watch the world go up in flames if they thought that their nemesis would get singed.
Now that I think of it, that describes Darrell, too.
Pb
jg,
I’ve identified the flaw in your reasoning.
Perry Como
We need to stay the course with North Korea. By calling North Korea mean names, we will break its will. Look at how much of a success the Bush policy has been. In 2000, North Korea was world power that had the Korean peninsula teetering on the edge of war. In 2006, thanks to President Bush, North Korea no longer has any nuclear weapons, ICBMs, and pretty much just has tea parties all afternoon.
Brilliant!
Punchy
Darrell absolutely refuses to acknowledge this point. He refuses to answer it, refuses to admit it…just coninues, as ALL RIGHTIES DO, to keep repeating, parrot-style, “we’ll use our military”, as if we have an additional 500K guys in fatigues just standing around with guns on their shoulders bored to tears….
Come on Darrell, for the love of CHRIST, answer this: where will you find the 2-300K troops needed to take N. Korea? Where do they come from?
If you cannot answer this, then you’re argument is a crock.
jg
No.
Ssshhhhh! Leading a horse to water.
Richard 23
Par R mumbled to himself:
OK, I’ll bite. Who are you talking about? Ace-Hole? Ace Frehley? Your big brother?
And why do I care? What did Scooter and Billy have to say?
Darrell
I guess you’re not aware that the S. Korean army has over 500,000 troops alone, not counting those in the SK air force and navy or US forces on SK soil right now.
I’m not saying that military strikes are necessarily the best option now, but it’s stupid as hell to do what you leftists are doing in ridiculing the very possibility of military action against N. Korea.
Steve
Six years of the Bush Administration, and somehow, everything that’s wrong with the North Korea situation is still Clinton’s fault. If we gave him a third term, do you suppose he would ever be assigned responsibiity for anything? How about a fourth term?
Eighteen years of Republican presidents in the last quarter-century – soon to be 20 out of 28 years – but they still blame things on Jimmy Carter. Ah, the party of personal responsibility.
JDRhoades
As with Iran, “military option” here is wingnut code for “use of nuclear weapons.”
And the rest of the world, including the nuclear capable Chinese, Russians, and Pakistanis will sit down and applaud us as the radioactive clouds drift on the wind…
Darrell
If you re-read the thread, the subject of Bill Clinton was first raised by leftist “jg” in a post lecturing us on the “success” of Clinton’s policies in N. Korea.
If you guys don’t want to talk about Clinton, then stop bringing him up yourselves.
JDRhoades
I guess you’re not aware that those troops are under South Korean command, not ours. And last I checked, South Korea isn’t as eager as you are to fight to the last Korean.
jg
What do you mean ‘if’? We can’t change presidents if we’re at war, and we will be at war, thats what they do.
Perry Como
I think it’s actually code for, “I’m running out of cheetos, I’ll be right back.”
John S.
I guess you’re not aware that S. Korea isn’t going to send their troops into N. Korea unless a nuke actually is fired. The ginned up hystrionics of the Bush adminsistration aren’t enough to goad them into open warfare with a country that – up until recently – they had hoped to have some sort of reconciliation with. You do realize that there are a lot of families that span BOTH countries, right?
But I know it is doesn’t matter…all Darrell hears from the voices in his head is WAR WAR WAR (with people other than myself doing the dying).
Perry Como
You’re right Darrell. We should be talking about the successes of Bush’s policies with North Korea. I’ll yield the floor to the Senator.
jg
No I didn’t. You mentioned N. Korea, I responded that Bush fucked that up and away you went from there.
Your post:
And I’m not a leftist. Voted for one democrat in my whole life.
Darrell
Noted, but you repeatedly take leftist positions on these threads. And on this one, singing the praises of Bill Clinton’s “success” with North Korea.
Helene Curtis
“BTW- Do I get special bonus points for writing this whole post without using the phrase the ‘Jane Hamsher’s of the left.’”
No, shut up. Can’t you find anything less trivial to yammer about? And by the way, plurals don’t get apostrophes.
Steve
Who brought up Jimmy Carter, by the way? Just curious.
The Republicans have had total control in this country for years. At some point you’re going to have to take responsibility for the results of their policy.
By the way, don’t you guys think John Ashcroft blaming 9/11 on Jamie Gorelick was possibly the most successful jackalope of all time?
JDRhoades
One of many “WTF?” moments in Ashcroft’s testimony.
“Did the AG just say he couldn’t do something because an AAG in the Clinton Administration said he couldn’t? Wow, those guys really WERE powerful…”
jg
I don’t take leftist positions, I thake moderate positions, you can’t tell the difference. And I wasn’t singing prasies I was refuting your contention that Clinton, not Bush, is to blame for the current situation in N. Korea.
Perry Como
I’m still waiting for the list of Bush policy successes with North Korea, Senator.
VidaLoca
Darrell,
One problem with this reasoning is the fact that Seoul is approximately 40 miles from the NK-SK demilitarized zone. The conventional artillery that the NK’s have on their side of the DMZ is more than capable of reducing Seoul to rubble in short order (and it’s been that way for years) — which is one of the reasons that SK has for a long time taken the position of attempting to work out some kind of a rapproachment with NK. In other words NK has SK by the short hairs; Seoul is essentially a hostage to the NK’s.
Punchy
It’s Official. You’re as dishonest as they come. We CLEARLY don’t have the military units to fight–something you STILL WILL NOT ACKNOWLEDGE. Yet you STILL say “it’s stupid to take the military option off the table”. WTF?
You know, I can THREATEN to buy a Ferrari, but if I don’t have the money, does the salesman take me seriously? I could threaten to buy Microsoft, but if I don’t have the money, will Gates talk to me? So how the FUCK do you sit there and CONTINUE to claim “oh, well…we should still consider the military option” when there aint no friggin’ soliders to have????
And nice South Korea reference. Ya know, Germany’s got an army. So does France. I bet Sri Lanka’s got some guys with killer aim and a handful of slingshots. But they dont want war. So quit trying to pretend they’ll jump to the front lines.
JDRhoades
BE patient. History will vindicate him. Besides, if we just keep showing everybody how crazy-mean we can be, Kim will knuckle under real soon now.
Darrell
As usual, you lefties lack balance and perspective. If N. Korea ever got into a shootout with SK, Kim Il Jung would be dead or out of power in weeks, and everybody knows it.. especially him.
It’s bullshit to assert, as you have done, that NK holds all, or even most of the cards.
Richard 23
I’ll yield the balance of my time.
JDRhoades
And as usual, you wingnuts lack any connection with reality.
The Easter Bunny
I’m up to my tail in moose guts, trying to save you bitches from the Maple Menace, and this is the thanks I get?
Fuck it. I’m selling my JDPM (Joint Directed Peep Munitions) technology to Kim Jong II. Choke on that candy, mofos!
Darrell
He might if your daddy gave you the money and/or guaranteed the car loan.
Who the hell ever said that we would have to fight North Korea all by ourselves? And you guys consider yourselves to be the reality based community, right?
Darrell
I think it better to instead send him a stern letter of condemnation next time he test fires missiles outside his borders. Or offer to build him some more nuclear reactors as did one unnamed Dem administration.
Those are the deep thinking leftist strategies which will make us safe.
tBone
He’s right. Let’s not forget Poland.
JDRhoades
Right. Which is why we don’t imagine a horde of imaginary allies ready and willing to attack NK at our command.
JDRhoades
We’ll always have Poland. Except when we don’t.
jg
Richard 23
Fuck yielding my time if Darrell’s just going to fart nonsense.
Have you learned to read yet double D? How stupid are you?
JDRhoades
As opposed to the simple minded Bush strategy that’s kept Korea from developing nukes and firing missiles?
JDRhoades
There’s a well with no bottom.
Perry Como
Still waiting for that list of Bush successes in North Korea…
Darrell
As I asked upthread, can you leftist simpletons come up with any concrete ideas on what we should be doing differently in N. Korea and Iran? ..other than Blame Bush(TM)?
jg
As opposed to doing what?
As opposed to doing what?
BTW the nuke reactors you mentioned were non weapons grade.
Perry Como
As I asked upthread, can you rightist jackalope chuckers come up with any concrete successes with our current policy with North Korea? …other than Clinton Was Worse(TM)?
Richard 23
Double D,
How about Blame Klintoon™?
jg
Exactly what was done under the last president, diplomacy. Play the game. We get what we want (nukes under control) and he gets what he wants (food and oil or just a lollipop who cares).
John S.
Why bother, Darrell?
You’ve got it all figured out.
Solution to North Korea: WAR.
Solution to Iran: WAR.
We’ll just fight wars with everyone as a means to resolving conflict from now on. Where we will get the money and troops obviously doesn’t register on your radar. You prefer the Republican/Underpants Gnome model for foreign policy:
1. War
3. Problem Solved
It’s working out REALLY well in the theaters where it has been applied so far, don’t you think?
chriskoz
Darrell says:
No one that I can see said that we would have to fight NK on our own. Maybe there are some countries willing to join us.
Now… Who the hell said that they actuall would join us in our “Excellent Adventure Part 2: The Korean caper”?
No one that I can see.
So… the rational thing to do is to assume we are likely to be on own. Cuz it sure is stupid as hell can assume anyone is with us that hasn’t said they would be. Therefore… any plans that call for troops from counties that haven’t said they are sending such troops are utter crap. (which is why I suspect this actually IS the Bush administration “plan”.)
And that, Darrell, is called… REALITY. (like it or not)
Darrell
Someone has seized control of jg’s keyboard. I don’t agree with anything you’ve written, but at least you’re making some semi-coherent arguments.
I don’t think payoffs to batshit crazy megalomaniacs are likely to work. Kim wants the power and influence that only nukes can give him. Steve posted an article several days back about how NK refused to return to China a train which was used to rail in aid. That, in my view, is evidence of lunacy. And unfortunately, batshit crazies usually understand only force, not nuanced diplomacy.
DougJ
The trouble is Clinton didn’t have the guts to do what needs to be done, his relativistic moral sense made him too much of a coward to start killing Arab men at random, as J-Pod suggests.
Make no mistake: we will only win the war on terror via genocide. If you can’t admit that, you’re mealy-mouthed wind-surfing liberal who has no place holding elected office.
Perry Como
“Bush’s policy has been a success because…”
“North Korea has been dealt with successfully because…”
“Here’s a list of the ways Bush’s North Korea policy is working…”
Come on Senator, just fill in the blanks. Be Strong. Smart. Reality Based.
John S.
Darrell unintentionally speaks the truth!
He thought he was referring only to North Korea, but the rest of us realize that this statement also applies to him and the hawks of the Bush administration.
Darrell
WWI (worked really well), WWII Japan and Germany (worked really, really well), Balkans (worked well), Afghanistan (successful so far), Iraq (too early to say)
Give war a chance, libs. It’s got a decent track record
Darrell
And that’s why you noble reality based libs need to seize control of this country by ANY MEANS NECESSARY, just like in lib fav movie ‘V for Vendetta’. I say run with it.
Richard 23
WWI worked really well all right. Killed a lot of people for a great cause. What was that about again?
DougJ
That is, without a doubt, the most insane thing I have ever heard in my life. WWI was, quite possibly, the greatest and most unnecessary catastrophe in human history. You’d have a hard time finding a historian, liberal or conservative, who would disagree with me there.
Perry Como
Darrell, it’s a simple question. Just list the ways that Bush’s policy with North Korea has been a success.
Reason 1)
2)
3)
etc. Serious. Smart. Strong.
DougJ
Darrell: I’m going to give you a chance to take back what you said about WWI before piling on some more. I don’t think you meant it.
Darrell
You could say the same about WWII.
jg
Batshit crazy people don’t respond in predictable ways. You have no idea how he’ll respond to force, the worst case scenerio is unacceptable and just as likely as the best case since the person is a lunatic so why would you choose this tactic?
Have you read 1984?
DougJ
No, you fucking moron — WWII had to be fought to stop Hitler.
WWI was fought because…essentially because the arisocracy of western europe went off its rocker.
Steve
Oh man!
DougJ
Darrell — as I’ve said, you’re not a complete idiot, so go back and read a bit about WWI. Otherwise I’m going to have to refer to your comment that “WWI worked really well” in all future correspondance with you.
Darrell
Libs, instead of seizing on 1 insignificant point (disagreement over WWI), concede the FACT that WAR often ends up accomplishing better results, which never could have been achieved without war.
War has a decent track record, yet you halfwits are pretending it’s always worse than the alternatives.
But as usual, feel free to gloss over the larger important point while focusing on insignificant details
jg
1984? Have you read it?
Darrell
talk about “fucking moron” you idiot, France and England had every opportunity to nip Hitler in the bud before creating a worldwide-scale war. Not that it has anything to do with the larger point, but please feel free to obsess over insignificant details.
DougJ
Darrell, no, take back what you said about WWI or remain branded a lunatic.
Perry Como
Darrell, that list? Just rattle of the successes of Bush’s North Korean policy. Should be easy.
VidaLoca
Darrell,
The NK’s don’t need to hold all of the cards. They only need to hold enough of the cards to make it seem to the SK’s that getting into a shooting match would be a really, really dumb idea. Which they do.
Which is why you might not want to count on those 500,000 SK troops you were figuring into your plan.
jg
and then the kettle called the pot black! Get it. LOL
Darrell
No, not a big George Orwell fan. What’s your point?
Punchy
Why do you have to go doggin on wind-surfing for? And what the hell is “mealy-mouthed” mean?
Perry Como
Ahh, the honesty of Bush supporters. Discuss what a failure Clinton was then when asked a simple question about Bush, avoid, avoid, avoid. Sleek. Smooth. Jackalopish.
Krista
Regardless, that doesn’t mean that war should be entered into lightly. I won’t speak for the rest of the halfwits here, but this halfwit is very concerned that historically, the decision to go to war has been made by those who will not be risking their own lives in said war. There have been cases of war being very effective. And I think that WWII was very much justified. Because it works well in some situations, however, does not make it a one-size-fits-all answer. Each situation has to be evaluated on its own merits, and even though politicians often say that “war is a last resort” for the sole purpose of appeasing the masses, I truly believe that war really should be a last resort, only to be used with great thought and consideration put towards the consequences.
DougJ
Darrell really sounds like a spoof today. Between thinking WWI was a success and not being familiar with 1984, I’m starting to wonder.
chriskoz
Wasn’t WW1 the “war to end all wars” (or was that WW2 I can never remember) That seems to have worked wonderfully. Nope… no war after that.
Hmmm… I wonder if there could be any other wars that we can look at that didn’t make Darrell’s list. I’m sure they would hold true to his “It’s got a decent track record” statement. I’d hate to think he was cherry picking his wars to make a bullshit point. (And some really lame cherry picking at that. Hey Darrell, leave the rotten cherries on the ground alone)
But then, what’s the point? Any war that didn’t fit the mold is no doubt an Arab lie.
Steve
What’s funny is that Darrell didn’t even list the Gulf War, which I would certainly include on a list of successes.
Perry Como
A recent Darrell sighting.
Evilbeard
Being realistic is now “stupid as hell?” It’s no secret that the US does not have the forces to commit to war unless we’re talking about invading something the size of Rhode Island.
Pretending that isn’t true has no chance of fooling anyone.
Richard 23
Darrell thinks WWI was every bit as worthwhile as WWII.
He hasn’t bothered to read 1984 while Bush reality apes Orwell.
The Senator is a Spoof or a complete sociopathic nightmare.
Krista
Cute little buggers, aren’t they? No wonder they’re so distracting.
Punchy
Yes, like Vietnam. Just think of all that crappy-ass foliage that’d still be there…all tangly and green and animal-ous…if it wasn’t for our Agent Orange.
And just think of how busy our VA hospitals would be today if said Agent hadn’t cancer’ed-off so many soliders years later.
So we got tree-less forests and some biz for the funeral homes…I’ll give Darrell props for that comment.
Darrell
No one has suggested otherwise, and I’d appreciate it if you would be a little more careful with making accusations like that unless you have evidence to back up your assertion that anyone is taking the possibility of war “lightly”
I think the comments in this thread demonstrate that many on the left feel war should NEVER be an option. That mindset IMO is detached from reality
In case you don’t know, most every ‘war mongering’ Republican would probably agree 100% with that statement.
VidaLoca
Orwell was a socialist. That’s what they used to call moonbats back in the day. Case closed.
Darrell, c’mon. Seriously. World War I?
jg
I’m thinking you should read it. I think it might give you a different perspective on the issues you support. Not saying you won’t still support them but you might get a better understanding of the larger picture involved.
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
War is peace
Richard 23
But to be fair, Darrell’s “Give War a Chance” makes a lot of sense. There haven’t been enough successful wars lately. Let’s keep starting new conflagrations until we get it right.
Perry Como
What happens when you ask Darrell to list the successes of Bush’s North Korean policies?
Run, Darrell, run!
jg
Nice use of made up stats. 72.58% of the commenters here would agree with me.
Steve
Show of hands.
How many think WWII was a mistake?
How many think invading Afghanistan was a mistake?
For that matter, how many think the Gulf War was a mistake? I’m just trying to get some hands here, people.
VidaLoca
Darrell,
Orwell aside then, have you read Bill Kristol?
jg
He can’t answer because its a trick question. No way Bush has more than one policy so your question is moot.
Perry Como
Darrell spots a Loony Leftist Liberal.
GOP4Me
Well, WWI DID deprive Germany of its overseas colonies. Think about how bad WWII would’ve been if Hitler had had his hands on those!
WWI also sparked the invention of the tank, without which victory in WWII would’ve been impossible. It also trained many of our greatest generals, who led us to victory in WWII. Plus, it killed 2 million Germans, few of whom managed to successfully produce children to fight in WWII.
WWI accomplished the goal of making WWII easier to fight and win. WWII accomplished the goal of letting us fight WWIII with the Russkies on German territory instead of on our own backyard. WWIII accomplished the goal of letting us fight WWIV in Afghanistan and Iraq and the other Cold War playgrounds, setting up flypaper there so we didn’t have to set it up here.
And WWIV is distracting the Canadians, so that when we conquer them in WWV, we can catch them with their pants down. If the Mexicans intervene, we’ll conquer them, too. If not, they’ll have to wait until WWVI for their comeuppance.
You see, it’s all a seamless web of victory, with the long-term goal clearly in mind.
Darrell
If North Korea fires off more missiles, what do you think we should do? Call the UN? Please tell us your solution.
Call me crazy, but I don’t think we should sit on our hands and do nothing, non-action which permits an openly hostile batshit crazy govt. like N. Korea to perfect missiles carrying nuclear payload, which could hit us or our allies. Yet, most leftwingnuts (Krista excepted) scream at ANY possibility of military action.
I think you lefties need to make that position the centerpiece of your foreign policy platform in the midterm elections. Tell the electorate that under NO circumstances can we respond militarily to N. Korea. No matter what. The electorate will see the noble truth you are speaking and rally behind your message of peace. Make sure you tell everybody how you feel on this issue.
Richard 23
Jackalope crossing!
Krista
Don’t start.
That was an accusation of nothing. It was a statement, pure and simple, that war should not be entered into lightly. And, if you want to believe that all Republican politicians are so noble as to truly take that statement to heart, then I admire your lack of cynicism. I, for one, don’t believe that ANY politician, Republican, Democrat, Liberal or Conservative, takes the possibility of war anywhere near as seriously as they should, and certainly not as seriously as those who will actually have to go out and risk their lives in a war.
Darrell
Prior to the Bush admin, our N. Korea foreign policy was “see no evil, hear no evil”. North Korea was plowing ahead with their nuke program throughout the 90’s, and doing so virtually unchallenged.. in fact, we were actually aiding and financing them.
At least now we an administration which is not pretending that North Korea is, or was, a “success”.
jg
Dude, seriously you have to read 1984.
Krista
Nope
Nope. Would have been nice if you guys had stuck around, though.
Nope yet again.
Perry Como
So Bush’s success in dealing with North Korea is realizing that we are having no success in dealing with North Korea.
Awesome.
Darrell
Some don’t. But going to war, even when it’s the right thing to do, is not often a politically successful idea.. ask Winston Churchill, who got tossed out by voters right after WWII.
For that reason, I believe most politicians are usually hesitant to advocate military action. That’s not always the case of course, but I think it’s typically so.
jg
What are they pretending?
Punchy
I have yet to see a Canadian save Avril that I’d like to catch with their pants down.
Ok, Darrell. I call Uncle. Give us YOUR plan. You’ve so dogged us for being clueless…we all want to hear your plan. And if it contains the phrase “military attack”, please, please tell us who’s military and where the soliders are coming from.
I’m all ears. Shoot.
jg
And may God forgive him if he’s a democrat because he’s about to get hit with a FOX News lead right wing shitstorm.
Krista
You obviously don’t watch Battlestar Galactica, do you? Check out Tricia Helfer and Grace Park. Both lovely as can be.
DougJ
I was just up in Canada and I was actually struck by how attractive the women were. Seriously.
Krista
DougJ – I hear they have really nice racks.
Perry Como
When I was a kid we had a family of squirrels that moved into our attic. We attempted to lure them out with food, but they would just take the food then go back into the attic. So we stopped trying to lure them out with food.
My dad said we won the fight. See, even though the squirrels were still in the attic, we knew that luring them out with food hadn’t worked when we tried it. And knowing that trying to lure them out hadn’t worked was a victory. So we just ignored them ’cause we had already won.
I wonder what ever happened to those squirrels?
VidaLoca
Darrell,
Well, the last President that decided that a strong military response to NK was just the ticket, got his ass handed to him.
Any of this sound familiar?
DougJ
I’ve been doing a lot of thinking and I think we need to renumber the world wars. Look at the Napoleonic wars — they ranged over three continents, four if you count the related wars in the United States (battle of 1812). That’s got to be a WWI, unless we think about throwing in one of the Punic Wars into the mix. If we’re caling the current conflict in the middle east as a world war, I think you’ve got to count one of the Punic Wars, too, the more I think about it, so how about this:
WWI — The Second Punic War
WWII — The Napoleonic Wars
WWIII — WWI
WWIV — WWII
WWV — The cold war
WWVI — The current conflict in the middle east.
Does that sound about right to people? Anything else we need to add?
Perry Como
WWVII — The jackalope comeupance
DougJ
Krista, speaking of Canadian women, I have a question for you: I went out a few times with a Quebecois woman (who lives in the U.S. now) and I decided to stop calling her after she told me she was a member of the Bloc Quebecois. Was I right to do that? How crazy are they?
Steve
Was her name Jenny? Jenny from the Bloc?
Krista
Was she a member at the time, or was it that she had been a member at one point, but no longer is now?
Perry Como
:smack:
DougJ
How long do we have to stick with the Roman numerals for? Is it like the Super Bowl?
I was thinking about this — maybe it is better to consider the wars that happened before the advent of air travel (which made true world wars possible) like AFL and NFL championships from the 1960s prior to the beginning of the Super Bowl. But by that measure, I’m not sure WWI was a realy world war.
jg
Didn’t we kick Koreas ass all the way to the border with China? I thought we had them handled until China got involved, that’s when it became a stalemate.
DougJ
Still was.
Darrell
Depends.. how big were her boobs? Was she fat?
VidaLoca
DougJ —
Don’t forget the 30 Years’ War, 100 Years’ War, War of the Roses. And if you’re going to count the current conflict in the middle east as WWVI then you should give a nod to the Crusades too, all four of them. In the more modern era, the Franco-Prussian War.
Actually with all the fighting going on back and forth across their back yards, it’s no wonder that they’re all a bunch of cheese-eating surrender monkeys.
Krista
Doug – still was? Yeah…I don’t blame you for ending it, but I’m a very biased source. Strangely, I don’t like people who are trying to tear my country apart.
Darrell
Sounds like Doug’s little Quebec French cherie may have been passed around from guy to guy like a box of bonbons
DougJ
Those are good questions, Darrell.
Perry Como
We could move to hexadecimal: WW0x0A
DougJ
Darrell, why would you start saying things like that? What the hell is your problem?
Krista
That wasn’t nice.
I don’t think you got the original joke, Darrell. Bloc Quebecois? Jenny from the Bloc? He doesn’t actually know Doug’s erstwhile girlfriend, he’s just making a funny.
Steve
Well, maybe I do. Do you have more than one Jenny in Canada?
demimondian
I’m looking forward to WW0xDEADBEEF, myself.
Punchy
POTD candidate. Partially cuz it’s penned by a chick/woman/girl/covering all bases….
chriskoz
I forget…. was the last Korean war on Darrells list of wars with a “decent track record” or was it just an Arab lie.
I noticed that Vietnam didn’t make the list, but that one was definitly an Arab lie.
Perry Como
Or even WW0xCAFEBABE, keeping with the Canadian theme.
Steve
I would have put Vietnam on the list of successes, since we would have won if it wasn’t for the libs. Alternatively, at least it’s in the “too soon to tell” category.
John S.
I would say the comments characterize how many SANE people are opposed to Darrell’s views. Because I think the comments in this thread demonstrate that Darrell feels war should ALWAYS be an option. And they should ALWAYS be the option you go to after “diplomacy” (China, you want to reign North Korea in, right?) fails. Which it will. Because you’re dealing with “those” people.
That mindset IMHO is detached from reality.
demimondian
Yeah, but you know, geeks, they wouldn’t know what to do with a pattern like that.
Besides, it’d show up as WW0xBEBAFECA on a Sun or a PPC Mac, and then *no one* would know what to do with it.
Darrell
You mean Steve doesn’t really know her? I’ve been duped?
Good point. After all, how many girls named Jenny could there be in Quebec who can speak French? My money’s riding on Steve having nailed Doug’s girlfriend.. which is the real reason she and Doug broke up.
John S.
Yes, we need more “history” to pass before that situation can be judged accurately through the lens of a generation that comes much, much later. Preferably one that doesn’t co-exist with people that have a first-hand perspective to share.
Steve
I’ve only slept with 2 Canadian girls, neither of whom belonged to the Bloc Quebecois, so we can put that rumor to rest. Although they both had strong separatist tendencies, if you know what I mean.
John S.
Of course they would.
Separatists always go for extremists.
John Cole
Ok. The last comments are about sleeping with canadian girls. Does anyone care to tell me how we got there without me reading all 400 comments?
Perry Como
Wow, you slept with all the women in Canada?
Darrell
I’m sure there was a clever joke there which went over my head.
John S.
Comments about the topic > Darrell > N.Korea/Iran > Foreign Policy > Wars > Canadian Girls
Makes perfect sense.
Steve
We went by way of North Korea and Iraq, like every other thread. Except this time we found an exit strategy, if you know what I mean.
jg
Am I the only one who knows Jenny from the Bloc is a J-Lo song?
Darrell
No good reason, just happened.
Perry Como
The comments section of BJ is a blog version of Exquisite Corpse.
Steve
It’s possible. Here is an informative link on the subject.
Nutcutter
Darrell established a long time ago that he doesn’t actually have to have a plan for anything, or actually know anything, in order to talk trash about it.
His job is to make righty noise. That’s what John pays him for. Page views. It’s all about the page views.
jg
I guess split personalities aren’t aware of each others actions.
Steve
If you were the only one, it would make my joke particularly baffling.
Perry Como
Tracing the thread back, it seems to have started with pantsless Canadians. Er, don’t ask.
Steve
Thus enriching the coffers of his corporate masters, to be sure. Have they revolutionized the Internet yet?
jg
Why I didn’t write ‘only one but Steve’ is a mystery. Is a mistake like that enough to ruin my credibility in the eyes of the right wing blogoshere?
Nutcutter
Israel has observed how successful the American approach is here. No WMDs in Iraq? Bad intelligence.
Colossal fuckup? Bad intelligence.
Thousands dead, America not safer? Bad intelligence.
Children bombed in their sleep? Bad intelligence.
Look, bad intelligence has always been a part of war. If you are going to take away bad intelligence, how are we going to defend ourselves? Do we have to stop and ask “Is this good intelligence?” every time we start a war or make an attack?
Nutcutter
At last, our dreams are coming true.
demimondian
Damn, now *that* is funny.
Richard 23
Sorry for going offtopic on y’all but this is not a jackalope.
Heat converts Bush ally Robertson on global warming
So all it took was a really hot day? What a freak. I hope this conversion lasts longer than a popsicle in the current heat wave.
Nutcutter
Just goes to show you what an idiot Robertson is. Global warming isn’t about a hot day. A hot day is weather. Climate and weather are just a little different.
Of course, in order for the peabrains to understand the difference between climate and weather, they would have to learn about what global warming is really all about, so I guess that’s a good thing in its backward way. So let them think that a hot day is about global warming.
Krista
It’s very easy. GOP4Me mentioned that WWVI would be easy, because the Canadians would be caught with their pants down. Punchy said he’d like to see Avril with her pants down, I said that Canadian chicks have great racks, and it all went downhill from there.
Just be happy we’re all being civil for once, dammit.
The Other Steve
Well that settles it. Global Warming is now a dead issue for Democrats, as none of us want to be associated with that freakshow.
John S.
Darrell? Paul L.? Yoo hoo, anybody there?
It was faked, right? Another Jenin?
Punchy
I see this headline:
…and instantly pictured Shaq and Wade going over ocean temperature graphs and CO2 readings with the Good Preacher…
Nutcutter
Good point. Righties have power they don’t even know about.
Obviously, they haven’t noticed their effect on the popularity of George Bush.
chriskoz
Obviously Israel’s military is now pushing Arab lies.
Nutcutter
Robertson’s new cable channel:
The 700 Degree Club
demimondian
It may well be, even ignoring the idea of agreeing with Robertson about anything important. It depends on how fast the Republican party “gets the Gospel” on the issue — fast, and a powerful issue is diffused, slow, and the evangelical vote splits. I’m hoping for fast and sincere, myself. It would make the world a better place. Second to that, I’ll settle for slow. Fasst and insincere…not so much.
Andrew
My 2c:
French Canadian chicks have very hot accents. During world war WW0xEBABEFAC (64bit power chip), I plan on occupying Montreal.
DougJ
Ha ha ha ha! I like this joke.
demimondian
Good. Can you explain it to me?
demimondian
Good. Can you explain it to me?
DougJ
I’d rather not, but what two things do you think they might be separating?
I feel like I’m in junior high here.
Ned Raggett
Haven’t checked in in a while.
*scrolls through thread*
Hm. So Jane Hamsher is a conniving wretch and Darrell is a strutting ignoramus, and neither conclusion is surprising. I do like the occasional reminder why I never joined a political party, actually.
To John and Tim — keep up the good work and keep your sanity.
The Other Steve
Neat, the Lieberman plan of hiring Republicans to support his campaign has apparently been successful.
Problem is, they’re acting like Republicans instead of Democrats and I’m not sure how this is going to help them in the primary.
chopper
and as usual, you rightists lack a grasp of reality so you change the subject. these predictions of the aftermath of a war betwwen south and north korea is just wankery.
the thing is, SK does not want to go to war with NK and will avoid it at all costs. even if the US gets a hard on to attack NK over its nuke program, SK will not want to be a part of that.
so unless the US can somehow pull of some crazy move to convince SK to fight NK, which is unlikely, i don’t see the US attacking NK out of the blue with the aid of SK.
for us, the ‘military option’ really isn’t on the table due to a lack of troops; the only way we’d be getting involved militarily is if a war started between the north and south on its own. we don’t run the SK army.
John S.
You leftist kook.
Advocating taking something off the table that isn’t even on the table to begin with…
That’s why nobody will take you seriously on foreign policy!