It is the editorial position of this weblog that civilian massacres are bad.
In the future, when Tim or I reference civilian massacres, assume we DISAPPROVE of them.
Idiots.
by John Cole| 35 Comments
This post is in: Previous Site Maintenance
It is the editorial position of this weblog that civilian massacres are bad.
In the future, when Tim or I reference civilian massacres, assume we DISAPPROVE of them.
Idiots.
Comments are closed.
Gold Star for Robot Boy
Aw, man. Really? I am so out of here.
Sincerely,
Some anonymous nutball on Kos or FDL or wherethehellever whose comments will be used by Bill O’Reilly in an attempt to discredit the entire Democratic Party.
rachel
That’s not enough! You also have to write at least as many posts disapproving of the terrorists when they commit atrocities as when our soldiers do. OR YOU’RE NOT A TRUE AMERICAN1111!!ELEVENTY 100-ONE!!
(Jesus Christ, some people…)
tBone
Depends on the civilians being massacred, moonbat.
ixeian
Short and to the point. I like your style, Mr. Cole ;)
Although it’s a sad comment that a post like this is even necessary.
Zifnab
Yeah right. That’s just what Hitler said.
RSA
I propose substituting the phrase “enhanced neutralization” to cover ambiguously legal civilian massacres.
demimondian
But, John, you clearly hate America, and side with the civilians in Al Qaeda who are perpetrating them.
After all, it’s just the same to be horrified at the understandable, yet terrible, acts of someone who’s been broken by combat as it is to support the methodical slaughter of innocents. There’s no difference between an evil organization and an evil act.
Nope. None at all.
demimondian
RSA proposes substituting the phrase “enhanced neutralization” for the hackneyed and emotionally loaded terms “mass murder” or “war crime”. I suggest that “anticipatory neutralization” is a better description of what was being done here: the soldiers were merely anticipatorily eliminating future terrorists and suicide bombers before they developed into Real Terrorists(TM).
canuckistani
So then you’re officially on the record as not supporting the troops?
tBone
What we really need is a descriptive, easy to remember acronymn. I’d suggest S.A.R.P.N.P.F.H. (Selective Ammunition Redirection for Preventative Neutralization of Potential Future Hostiles)
demimondian
Perhaps “Selective Anticipatory Potential Hostile Elimination” (SAPHE)? That way, G-SAPHE could be a key component of G-SAVE.
ThymeZone
Sure, but have you guys disavowed the Immaculate Decelption?
I think not.
ThymeZone
er, Deception.
Dreggas
why not just call it culling, or thinning the herd?
AkaDad
Why can’t Liberals look at the bright side of civilian massacres?
Blue Neponset
Fair enough John but why do you think we care about the moral opinions of someone who supports dog fighting? I don’t recall you or Tim disapproving of Michael Vick’s alleged dog fighting ring. I can only assume that means you support dog fighting. I also don’t recall hearing you denounce the Armenian Genocide or that stupid kid at Blockbuster who grabbed the last available copy of Gears of War before I could. I guess you approve of those things too.
Krista
A big moron and his friend, a little moron, were walking across the bridge. The big moron fell off the bridge. How come his friend didn’t?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Because he was a little moron! Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha!
Goddamnit, I hate working on funding proposals — they make me completely slap-happy. The other night I suggested to the bf that if we have a kid and it’s a boy, that a fine name would be Gargamel. And at the time, I meant it.
D. Broder
Serious people don’t off-handedly rule out strategies without giving the military about, let’s say 6 months (or until mid-September, which is coincidentally the right time, from a marketing standpoint, to begin pushing a new Thought Product) to try them first. If Pre-emptory Neutralization could work, don’t we owe it to the Iraqi people, if not to the Cause of Freedom, to give Gen. ____ the opportunity to attempt it? Especially considering that, like the Asteroids argument back when you debated in college, every other option risks disaster of staggering proportion that can only be stopped by a massive nuclear buildup. Certainly, if we deny Gen. ____ this golden opportunity to bring victory and peace by slaughtering anybody who looks at us funny, we are only dooming ourselves to ongoing war, and probably making the General down in the dumps to boot.
Besides, it is argued that genocide itself cannot properly be said to exist as a concept in an age of globalization and human homogenization, and some describe it as a “quaint” notion from a more primitive, tribal time. Until this controversy is laid to rest, convential wisdom says that playing the genocide card is a non-starter.
tBone
D. Broder kicks ass.
Zifnab
Only if you hate Smurfs.
For some reason, whenever I think of John Cole, I think of Papa Smurf. Weird.
ThymeZone
D. Broder, both the real one and our house version, are a good example of “balanced” thinking.
When all ideas, no matter how toxic or vile, are given equal weight, then no idea has any value at all. Ideas themselves are rendered useless.
I’d compare it to a style of cooking which says that all seasonings are to be treated equally. So, everything we cook will contain equal parts of salt, sugar, pepper, all the aromatics, syrup, vinegar, vanilla, jalapeno, strawberry, anise .. everything.
The flavor of your food will thereby be balanced. That’s the good news. The bad news is that everything you eat will now taste like shit.
Enjoy!
rachel
♬ Is he blue? ♬
Faux News
Oh Curses! Foiled Again! I mean stabbed in the back again! This time from Balloon Juice no less!
Mr. S. Whiplash
Faux News, Canada Desk
Jake
D. Broder, That’s some damn fine spoof you’ve got goin’ there!
Darrell? Darrell who?
D. Broder
Thymezone: what are you saying, that marjoram is objectively better than anise?
What are you, a spice-ist? Is this a country where we want the Taste Police telling us not to chili powder in spaghetti sauce?* Are we going to lock down the Mighty Habenero because its flavor is too dangerous to allow it to just run around without supervision? No! That would be Fascism!
And do I consistently ignore demands that I employ a greater degree of judgment and self-control about the way I use a weapon as powerful as the capital’s editorial page? You bet your ass I do.
*One of spouse’s early cooking experiments. Just don’t.
RSA
Nice. Google shows just one occurrence of this phrase (fortuitously enough): Responding to Terrorism: Crime, Punishment, and War (in Notes) Harvard Law Review, Vol. 115, No. 4. (Feb., 2002), pp. 1217-1238.
Stooleo
I think of him stroking his cat in a Blofeldian manner.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Stavro_Blofeld
Fledermaus
Yeah, back in the 70’s you liberals were always going on and on and on about the dangers of overpopulation. And when people step up to take action on it you start complaining. The “Party of No” strikes again!
The Other Steve
you know, I just realized something.
Not once have you ever condemned this or this or even this.
This is clear evidence that htis website supports slow economic growth, plane crashes, and phosphorous explosions. Without showing your appropriate outrage, you are in effect condoning this bad behavior!
ThymeZone
Yes, but only in the most fair and balanced way.
RSA
I decry the rancor that has led to the marjoram party completely ignoring the demands of the minoram party. Just wait until the tables are turned.
numbskull
Given that one of you voted for Bush twice…TWICE…how the fuck should I know that you think civilian massacres are bad?
Sow, reap, etc.
numbskull
Given that one of you voted for Bush twice…TWICE…how the fuck should I know that you think civilian massacres are bad?
Sow, reap, etc.
The Other Steve
Still no condemnation of airplane crashes. I’m disappointed.
rachel
Oh, yes
:rolleyes: