Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

When do we start airlifting the women and children out of Texas?

This must be what justice looks like, not vengeful, just peaceful exuberance.

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

Republicans: slavery is when you own me. freedom is when I own you.

I might just take the rest of the day off and do even more nothing than usual.

Good lord, these people are nuts.

I swear, each month of 2025 will have its own history degree.

“Jesus paying for the sins of everyone is an insult to those who paid for their own sins.”

Museums are not America’s attic for its racist shit.

Lick the third rail, it tastes like chocolate!

When you’re in more danger from the IDF than from Russian shelling, that’s really bad.

Boeing: repeatedly making the case for high speed rail.

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

Shut up, hissy kitty!

Weird. Rome has an American Pope and America has a Russian President.

You know it’s bad when the Project 2025 people have to create training videos on “How To Be Normal”.

A snarling mass of vitriolic jackals

Come on, man.

I’m starting to think Jesus may have made a mistake saving people with no questions asked.

Washington Post Catch and Kill, not noticeably better than the Enquirer’s.

Damn right I heard that as a threat.

Relentless negativity is not a sign that you are more realistic.

rich, arrogant assholes who equate luck with genius

Perhaps you mistook them for somebody who gives a damn.

You are here: Home / Politics / War on Terror / War on Terror aka GSAVE® / Friday Terror Thread

Friday Terror Thread

by | 20 Comments

This post is in: 

Regarding the London arrests I highly recommend Defensetech for the most levelheaded analysis of what is going on.

UK Terror Plot: American Connections?
Countering Liquid Bombs
Mining for Terrorists
Terror Plot Deja Vu

Since I get paid to do something other than know the defense/intelligence business backwards and forwards I will defer to their judgment.

Or, if levelheaded isn’t your thing check out this entertaining post by Rogers at Kung Fu Monkey (from a link in the comments).

Reader Interactions

20Comments

  1. 1.

    Punchy

    I cannot fucking believe that people are JUST NOW realizing that a easy mix of very available chemicals (uh…Na and H20?) can cause a big explosion. Christ, I can make luminol by mixing two simple liquids, should the need arise while flying to illuminate the cabin with a bright blue hue.

    That’s what peeves me about this whole plot. That people, after first changing their diapers, are now feigning astonishment that chemicals might explode.

    I’m now convinced this whole plot was an effort to force passangers, unable to swig their own swill, to buy up the 3-year old bottles of unused Crown so the airlines can make their numbers.

  4. 4.

    Nutcutter

    I continue to be amazed that we have a president who can’t do anything in these situations but stand in front of the cameras like a deer in the headlights and say “They hate us for our freedoms.”

    Who is this lame fucker, and where is the real president?

    And we have a press that watches this apalling performance and says …….. nothing. Crickets chirping.

    Who are these incompetant boobs, and how did they get these jobs?

  5. 5.

    Tony J

    This is all just a plot to screw with my upcoming holiday plans.

    Goddam Talibalquida, they hate my freedoms so much

  6. 6.

    Perry Como

    Even assuming the War on Terror is a not just a bad metaphor and there is an actual measurable winning point*, the short 4GW struggles last fifty years or so.

    I’m still waiting for someone to define that. What are the victory conditions in the GWOT?

  7. 7.

    Nutcutter

    What are the victory conditions in the GWOT?

    Been asking these questions since I got here.

    What is a GWOT? How is it fought? What examples in history show the strategy at work and a successful outcome?

    If you really want to piss people off …. try these:

    Israel appears to be a modern, democratic, well armed and well equipped country whose forces are trained and experienced. They have been fighting a WOT for sixty years. How’s that going? And how does your proposed GWOT differ, or not, from what Israel is doing?

    I have never seen any answer to these, much less a satisfactory one.

    These questions are apparently radioactive. Yet one could argue that these questions should have been raised, and discussed at depth, years ago here.

    So, WTF?

  8. 8.

    Punchy

    I’m still waiting for someone to define that. What are the victory conditions in the GWOT?

    Every Brown Guy pushing up daisies. It helps the economy (casket makers with record profits), helps the environment (literally, man-made fertilizer for farms everywhere), and helps global politics (only Muslims cause trouble…duh!).

  9. 9.

    mrmobi

    Anonymous Liberal, guest blogging at Glenn Greenwald, has this to say in response to Sully slamming Democrats as “unserious”:

    The blunt instrument of military force is particularly ill-suited to fighting a worldwide terrorism network, particularly one that spawns unaffiliated copycats. Nor is military force an effective way of attacking the “root causes” of terrorism, as the war in Iraq tragically illustrates. As a general matter, invading and occupying countries is a recipe for more terrorism, not less.

    People like Sullivan seem to believe that because Islamic terrorism is such a serious threat, only a bold, audacious, totally unorthodox strategy is sufficient to deal with it. I very much question that assumption. There are no quick fixes when you are fighting an ideology. Like communism before it, I suspect Islamic fundamentalism will only be defeated through a slow war of attrition. Ideologies must die out, they cannot be killed.

    Fighting terrorism effectively will involve working closely with other countries, even the ones we don’t particularly like, to identify and cripple terrorist networks. Occasionally there will be ways to effectively use military force, like in Afghanistan, but these will be the exception not the rule. The most effective way to address the root causes of terrorism is to pursue policies that will hasten the spread of modernity, not just democracy, throughout the Middle East. When people have jobs and lives and hope, the ideology of jihadism will be far less appealing. But this process will take a long time, and we can’t make it happen by brute force. We must be vigilant and patient. Very patient. The Cold War wasn’t won overnight. But there were many points along the way where reckless ill-considered action could have been disastrous.

    Over the last four years, our leaders have engaged in a counterproductive strategy, and they show no signs of understanding that. Under those circumstances, the burden isn’t on the administration’s critics to present some grand alternative strategy. The only “unserious” option at the moment is allowing these clowns to continue making a mess of things.

    Emphasis mine. This is good stuff. I’d like to hear some of the more prominent Democratic Presidential contenders take this tack in the coming debate. I guess it’s too nuanced, but sometimes things are complicated as shit, and you need to think them through before sending your guided munitions.

  10. 10.

    mrmobi

    Tim, that link to Rogers if hilarious! I damn near soiled myself laughing.

    Really, guys, go over there, this is some funny shit!

  11. 11.

    RSA

    I’m now convinced this whole plot was an effort to force passangers, unable to swig their own swill, to buy up the 3-year old bottles of unused Crown so the airlines can make their numbers.

    My suspicion is that it was masterminded by airport maintenance workers, hoping to scoop up hundreds of discarded bottles of perfume, Diet Sprite, sun tan lotion, and duty-free liquor from the trash bins.

  12. 12.

    ThymeZone

    “The London Bombers were within DAYS of trying a dry run!!!”

    — was because MI-5, MI-6, and Scotland Yard let them get that close, so they could suck in the largest number of contacts (again, very spiffy police work). The fact that these wingnuts could have been rolled up, at will, at any time, seems to have competely escaped the media buzz.

    This is terrorism’s A-game? Sack up, people.

    Yes, mobi, world class material, and spot on.

    But, we have Bush, yesterday: “They want to destroy us.”

    What a fucking lameass joke this guy is.

    And I really appreciated the visual of him saying this shit as he was boarding Air Force One. Here’s a guy who isn’t standing in too many airport security lines, eh?

    So now they’ve decided to go all NoShampoo at the airport, and we are supposed to feel safer. But wait, isn’t Bush’s message that we shouldn’t feel safer?

    Otherwise why does he keep repeating that sorry coward shit that he says all the time?

  13. 13.

    ThymeZone

    In 24 hours of nonstop lameness and insanity emanating from sorry politicians and bloviating pundits and crazed bloggers…. I don’t know if anything tops the MSNBC video online of Matt Lauer talking about whether the Britain terror arrests are a “political victory” for the Bush administration.

    Can anyone explain to me how this case can be taken to be any kind of “victory” for this sorry, lame, dishonest, corrupt, cowardly lying sack of shit we have for a president?

    Really, all you Bushmonkey apologist, explain this to me. Lay it all out.

    No, not the spoofs and the trolls, but the real apologists. You know who you are. Explain.

  14. 14.

    neil

    It’s very difficult for terrorists to actually manage to ‘reach’ people with their attacks. Even on 9/11 only a tiny fraction of air passengers was killed.

    Conversely, stupid stunts like confiscating shampoo and perfume and nail clippers, and long security lines, reach every air traveller.

    I find it hard to believe that this isn’t partly the point. The terrorist attack didn’t go off, but the powers that be made sure that people couldn’t ignore it.

  17. 17.

    mrmobi

    I find it hard to believe that this isn’t partly the point. The terrorist attack didn’t go off, but the powers that be made sure that people couldn’t ignore it.

    Me too, Neil. It saddens me that it’s so plausible.

  18. 18.

    mrmobi

    OMFG! Just when I think I have seen everything … Kevin Drum points me to this.

    Here you have it, the vision of the neocons and Rumsfeld, in pictorial fashion.

    Just stare at it for a while. Suddenly the whole last five years starts to make sense.

    I design things for a living, and I want to say, that slide is why I’m in business. The author couldn’t actually see it, his head being so very far up his ass.
    It does paint a very accurate portrait of “freedom on the march” though, doesn’t it?

  19. 19.

    neil

    Maybe I should walk it back a little bit. I think there’s an argument to be made that it’s a reasonable security measure since they couldn’t be sure that they had rolled up all the agents or sure that there wasn’t a cell in the U.S. And once the London cell was exposed, of course the risk is that other cells could try to activate immediately.

    And yet… the fact remains that a terrorist threat yesterday negatively impacted thousands of people, with a major assist from the government. I don’t think this should be ignored, but instead, it is actively obscured. Take a look at the AP wire and you’ll find no shortage of articles playing up how happy Americans are to have people rifle through their bags and confiscate things. One article I saw had two — yes, really two — quotes from people saying they were glad to be delayed for three hours. “Today is probably the best day to fly,” added one cheery traveller.

    When they catapult the propaganda it’s easier to see.

  20. 20.

    Ancient Purple

    Interesting breaking news headling on CNN.com right now:

    British police say one of the 24 arrested in connection with an alleged plot to destroy U.S.-bound commercial jetliners was released without being charged, AP reports.

Comments are closed.