HULK SMASHED
"It isn't an agenda I'd sign up for, but the obvious problem with is that if it fails - and regardless of what eventually unfolds in Iraq it already has failed - the consequences aren't desirable."
Huh? So if Iraq becomes a thriving democracy within 2 years, with the various groups sharing power peacefully, it "already has failed"?
Iraq-as-message-to-the-world has failed. we were going to go in their, kick ass, and be home in 3 months, to prove we could do it over and over whenever we wanted to whomever we wanted.
That has failed.
atrios, you are too cool. up with atrios for elected office!
So now the media line is "we DID warn you, you just couldn't believe your eyes"? Like hell. The international media, maybe. I'd like to go back and read Newsweek in the first quarter of this year to find these alleged warnings. Except for a few Demo candidates and a few op-edders and some blow-dried generals, all I heard was Shock and Awe and Oooh and Ahhhh.
Aaron - yes. And please tell me where you get your pixie dust.
Projection of power is always a loser's game in the end. Look, we kicked major ass in WWII, had a nuclear arsenal, etc, and that didn't stop the North Koreans or the North Vietnamese. We kicked major ass in GWI, and that didn't stop the Somalis or the Taliban. We kicked major ass in GWII, and that hasn't stopped Al Qaeda or the North Koreans. We've only perpetuated a vicious circle.
We resort to violence from a position of weakness, and the rest of the world sees that. Our real strength would come from restraint and being a positive, constructive force for change in the world.
NTodd, you rock.
There's been one successful outcome of this entire debacle - the PNAC boys have finally proved that their plan for world domination is a total failure. They've been pushing this fascist nonsense for over 12 years. They finally got their opportunity to implement it, with this nightmare of a result. It's time to lead the Cabal offstage in handcuffs.
So, if last February, Bush had come out and stated to the American people. "We are going into Iraq to kick some butt and show the fanatics in that region that if they mess with us, there will be hell to pay." Would Americans have supported the war? (Remember that support was very weak back then, and based on the WMD argument.) There have been so many shifting rationales that I can't tell if this is the true one, but, if it is, at least Bush would have been telling the truth about why we went to war.
The notion that the Iraq war was a message, or an answer, seems a bit far along on the PNAC goals listed. I don't know why a message was needed really. If you want to send a real message then detonate a nuke over Mecca and get it over with. That would piss off a lot of people, but it would also do to them what was done to us in the destruction of NYC's twin towers. They don't expect such an attack to ever happen there, and if it did, it would shock the foundations of their faith as they would wonder why God allowed it.
MYOB"
.
I second that NTodd, you do rock, you summed it up succinctly.
The Pentagon knows it will have trouble finding young people to join the armed forces. That's why they have just launched a huge effort to recruit latinos and hispanics. I attended a Mexican Independence Day festival last weekend at which there was a very large Army recruiting tent along with a big group of military academy students in full dress uniform. Apparently, immigrants are being lured into the killing fields with promises of American citizenship if and when they complete their duty. Very disturbing.
We resort to violence from a position of weakness, and the rest of the world sees that. Our real strength would come from restraint and being a positive, constructive force for change in the world.
Add that to the Newsweek article, and it's a perfect analysis. It's so truthful, it hurts.
Atrios,
"...Iraq it already has failed - the consequences aren't desirable. I may not want projecting our military might to be the cornerstone of our foreign policy, but I sure as hell don't want projecting our weakness to be it either."
You are exactly right. While the Neocon's and most of the media framed the questions leading up to the war, i.e. anti-war vs pro-security", few pointed out that this was not the case. The "anti-war" group were not made up of flower children with their heads in the clouds. Rather it was an anti-THIS-war movement. The correct questions were, "why Iraq?" "why NOW?", "what next?" and "if we go in, how to we go out?" Now that things are going amiss, many in the media are starting to jump on the bandwagon. It took Dean to push the Dems into questioning Bush out loud. But now the new question becomes "can we leave". Have we now placed ourselves in the possession where we are forced to follow through in Iraq. Is sucess now extremely important to our security. Unfortunately, I don't think Bush is capable of thinking deep enough to figure all this out.
Wouldn't it have been better, what with all that sympathy and "nous sommes touts les americans" sentiment after 9/11, to show our might and values to the world by turning AFGHANISTAN into a showpiece of modernity and secularized democracy?
Wouldn't that have illustrated our can-do spirit, our commitment to democratic values and the rights of the individual, our military might, and our wealth in way that all the world could see and marvel at?
Imagine if, today, there was an Afghanistan that was moving into the modern age, with a constitution and representative democracy. What would that say to the world?
Oh well.
"Apparently, immigrants are being lured into the killing fields with promises of American citizenship if and when they complete their duty. Very disturbing."
Cheap labor conservatives want the poor and disadvantaged to do their heavy lifting for them.
Speaking of hell to pay, another horrible story this morning.
U.S. Soldier Kills Baghdad Tiger After Attack - Zoo
Adil Salman Mousa told Reuters a group of U.S. soldiers were having a party in the zoo on Thursday night, after it had closed.
"Someone was trying to feed the tigers," he said. "The tiger bit his finger off and clawed his arm. So his colleague took a gun and shot the tiger."
The night watchman said the soldiers had arrived in military vehicles but were casually dressed and were drinking beer.
There was no immediate U.S. comment.
At the tiger's now-empty cage, pools of blood showed that the soldier passed through a first cage intended only for keepers and was standing right up against the inner cage's narrow bars.
Mousa said U.S. officials came to see him on Friday to discuss the incident. . . .
No doubt the soldiers are sorry now, but there's a lesson in there somewhere.
Drunk with power = dangerous at the wheel.
MYOB If you want to send a real message then detonate a nuke over Mecca and get it over with. That would piss off a lot of people
Piss off a lot of people? Yeah, two billion is a lot of people. If not 7 billion.
it would also do to them what was done to us in the destruction of NYC's twin towers
I was as angry and saddened by 9/11 as anyone, but nuking a city full of living beings and destroying two buildings and killing 3500 people (half the civilians killed in Operation IraqAttack) are not the same thing. Add to that the fact that the city is sacred to a huge portion of the world's population and you have the end of the world as you know it on your hands.
I know your post came from frustration and anger, but let's make our fantasies at least conform to some hope of a real solution.
You mean the reasons were even stupider than just Wolfowitz/Kristol making the world safe for Israel with a psycho dream of peace through democracy at gunpoint and Halliburton/Cheney robbing the country through no bid, overpriced contracts and controlling 2/3 of the worlds oil supply? So they mostly just wanted to show the towel heads that we're really bad ass dudes?Mmmmmmmkay.
MYOB - the entire PNAC philosophy is based on the idea that the US is the world's only superpower, and that we should constantly remind the world of that, rather in the same way that Stalin kept having people killed just to prove that he could.
However, setting off a nuclear bomb over Mecca would directly interfere with the economic interests of most of the PNAC members.
If an awe inspiring demonstration of American dominance was the goal, this exercise was an abject failure. The kind of power we have is most effective when it isn't used. That is a subtle point this decided anti-subtle administration doesn't seem to have grasped.
We don't have the power to control the world. We have to power to destroy opposing militaries. These are two entirely seperate issues. With our sort of military power, we can kill other organized militaries or we can engage in genocide. Those are the choices. Other goals require other means.
This is why it is vitally important to have the bulk of the population in your corner. This is the lesson that we should have, that most of us did learn in Vietnam. This is why Max Clealand's parting short in his editorial was not a cheap shot, it is directly to the point.
Only someone who didn't serve in Vietnam could really believe that we lost that conflict because of the press and a lack of resolve on the part of the population. We lost because we got ourselves onto the wrong side of local nationalist aspirations. We did that here before a shot was fired.
Victor Rattrap - the reasons you cited were part of it, too. But the bottom line was always "We must do it just because we can and the whole world needs to be reminded of that."
Monica - I couldn't agree more with your comment. I believe that the only effective way to fight terrorists is to treat them like the international criminals they are. That requires cooperation between nation: the sharing of intelligence and a real coalition to help find the terrorists and bring them to justice. Bush blew that for us big time.
Absolutely, NTodd. If only the US and Israel would end the cycle of violence instead of perpetuating it.
"I know your post came from frustration and anger, but let's make our fantasies at least conform to some hope of a real solution."
Sorry Billj but it's obvious you're as clueless as some others. There is not frustration and anger. I don't live anywhere near NYC, and when 9/11 happened, I was in disbelief sure. Perhaps I was even a bit concerned for the future not knowing if these people had also managed to set into motion far more devastating plans like using nukes.
But anger and frustration? Not in the slightest.
I was at work on 9/11 and most of my friends at work were arabs and persians from Syria, Saudi, the West Bank, and Pakistan. The first thing I was worried about was whether any of the kansas city bigots would do something to my friends.
I wasn't angry at anyone. I kept a cool head and speculated whether this was indeed terrorists, or if there was something in the NYC atmosphere that had caused plane malfunctions at specific parts of the flight path.
My father is a pilot and I've heard tales of unique weather phenomena or electromagnetic occurances that have caused plane system malfunctions for no obvious reason. I also speculated if the pilots were carrying out a suicide pact. I didn't rush to judgement on anything other than whether the right wing bigots would start trying something.
You say it's a fantasy on my part?
Remember there has been more than enough coverage of this administration talking about plausible nuke usage in Afganistan as well as designing smaller strategic nukes. With all of this going on, how can you say that anything I might suggest be of the realm of fantasy? With Bush anythingm, no matter how stupid, is plausible.
Be well.
MYOB'
.
There's been one successful outcome of this entire debacle - the PNAC boys have finally proved that their plan for world domination is a total failure.
In a sane world, sure. But Kissinger, for example, is still around, despite his abject failures in Vietnam and Cambodia (cf. "Sideshow").
And how do you explain the Republicans generally, with their Victorian social engineering?
Tena,
I know, but since when have these people done anything based on reason? I've lost all hope that when the foundations of logic are put to the test in their minds that they will do the right thing.
For the same reason we think one of the reasons we went to war was pride, the CCCP will probably stand defiant and continue to do stupid things just because they realize doing the right thing might be an admission they were wrong to begin with.
Can you see Tom Delay doing the right thing and admitting he was wrong and a liberal was right?
On any possible situation?
I figure my fault in this case is that I'm too much of a 'go-for-the-throat' kind of person. No dicking around.
Kinda 'bold' huh? I owe my king georgie for showing me what it means to be 'bold'.
Be well.
MYOB'
.
Dr Pedant - Well, jeez, who can explain the neo-cons? But the Republicans generally are not all enamored of PNAC. The plans were considered loony even by Poppy, despicable though he may be.
The domrestic agenda is a separate issue.
- the domestic agenda is a separate issue except insofar as the whopping increase in military spending has furthered the domestic agenda by sucking money out of Congress and thus away from social programs.
Newsweek has changed the name of Dickey's article; now called "Pride and Prejudices."
"Unfortunately, I don't think Bush is capable of thinking deep enough to figure all this out." Diogenes, it isn't just that Bush is incapable of deep thinking. (I won't argue that point) His entire administration has ideological blinders on, they see what they want to see, and the stubborn facts that don't work for them are ignored.
Another Bruce - "...and the stubborn facts that don't work for them are ignored." They are ignored or twisted until they assume a workable shape. That was one of Stalin's favorite methods of power grabbing, too.
If you're doing to split your cards, it's essential that you have a pretty good idea of what the dealer has in the hole. Otherwise, you run the risk of losing both bets. So far, this hasn't happened, but does Afghanistan still have something to show?
So, if last February, Bush had come out and stated to the American people. "We are going into Iraq to kick some butt and show the fanatics in that region that if they mess with us, there will be hell to pay." Would Americans have supported the war?
Honestly, I think it would have resonated better than the rather absurd idea that our leaders were deathly afraid that probably the weakest power in the Middle East, crippled by a decade of economic sanctions, and clearly an always-available target for our bombs throughout that period, was going to attack us to such a catastrophic degree that a preemptive war was the only option. Although Americans have no sense of history, I think they have a good enough memory to see that the country that couldn't even hold onto tiny Kuwait is not a genuine threat to the US.
Maybe further study will reveal that the democracy-building, humanitarian "reasons" for the war are what really sold it to the people, which would actually say a lot for the American people and a whole lot about the cynicism of our leaders.
Maybe further study will reveal that the democracy-building, humanitarian "reasons" for the war are what really sold it to the people...
Call me cynical, but I highly doubt that most Americans who wanted war wanted it for such altruistic reasons. They could care less about the Iraqi people or their pain and suffering. Where's the outrage about this now?
MYOB - I didn't think that reason came into it. I don't find anything reasonable in any of their ideas. But I do think they know which side their bread is buttered on.
I agree with NTodd. The Israeli/Palestinian conflict is a perfect example of why the projection of power is a losing proposition. Add to that the fact that obviously the Cabal completely miscalculated the effect the invasion would have on the people of Iraq, and it was a recipe for disaster from the start.
Except for a few Demo candidates and a few op-edders and some blow-dried generals, all I heard was Shock and Awe and Oooh and Ahhhh.
"'Oooh. Aaaah.' That's how it always starts. But then there's running, and screaming."
&*#151; Dr. Ian Malcolm
After years of touting the military ROTC, Reserves and National Guard as good ways to get a "college education", I think a number of people who once considered it an option are now considering a part time job as, perhaps, a less hazardous way of securing a degree.
On his show, NOW, last night, Bill Moyers did a great closing on his visit to France.
URL: Bill Moyers on Old Friends and Comrades in Arms. Please notice his reference to a piece in The Financial Times:
' "Last week even the FINANCIAL TIMES of London — pro-American, pro-business, conservative to the bone — threw up its hands in despair over Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice. This is, said the lead editorial, a team whose "instinctive and ideological tendency" from the start has been "to regard international consultation and cooperation as a burdensome bore or intolerable constraint." Don't they know, the paper asked, that "alone the U.S. is far more vulnerable than it likes to believe, while in concert with free nations, it is far more powerful than even it can imagine." '
Just to add to the pile-on ... the whole commentary he made is worth reading, if you didn't happen to hear it.
Dtraeton - Well, there's always the draft.
Why do dogs lick their balls?
Because they can.
Ozymandias
I met a traveler from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read,
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed,
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look upon my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
-Percy Bysshe Shelley
1792-1822
Wow. That is *exactly* the truth: "Afghanistan just didn't satisfy their bloodlust, so they wanted to go punch someone else."
Well said. It's really about conservative psychology. And they are disturbed. In the modern vernacular, "they have issues."
.
remember Einstein's definition of craziness: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. jeesis christmas. what the hell were they thinking?
Tena, I've thought about this and wondered how a draft would be handled. The problem with a draft, for a lot of folks is that there would have to be a system that is both random and fair. To put it briefly, the problem with a draft is that it would expose rich kids to the armed forces.
Another Bruce - I was being somewhat facetious with my comment, although I could see it happening if Bush gets elected. The problem you raise is always the problem with the draft. By and large, affluent kids get college deferrments. Eventually, those run out and everybody gets a turn, unless they are super rich, like the Bushes, and can buy a substitute.
I doubt that the republican party would be happy to be responsible for reinsituting the draft, so I doubt it will happen. But so much has happened since the neo-cons stole the WHite House that I have learned to expect all kinds of outrages.
Call me cynical, but I highly doubt that most Americans who wanted war wanted it for such altruistic reasons.
I don't know -- a lot of the pro-war people I talk to in my very conservative town in the Midwest are always talking about the war of "liberation." On second thought, though, you're right that it's not necessarily "altruistic" even if my theory is true -- it might be, in their minds, yet another example of just how morally superior America is to everyone else (see the constant, nonsensical arguments that France isn't interested in democracy in the Mideast, as in Friedman's latest column). Thinking of the US as a liberating force frees them from having to face up to the unsavory history of American foreign policy.
John Isbell, that poem is an indictment of the Bush administration. So very apt. And to think it was written almost 200 years ago to describe an ancient civilization.
Incredible. And tragic.
Thinking of the US as a liberating force frees them from having to face up to the unsavory history of American foreign policy.
I agree there, Adam. But how sad (short-sighted, poor attention span?) that they've never been able to see it through. It's as if stepping onto foreign soil somehow meant that was all that was necessary for liberation to occur.
Pardon the obvious stating of the obvious, but can you say Viet Nam, boys and girls? I knew you could.
...and then there is the (once again all too timely) wonderful "Fiddle and the Drum" written by Joni Mitchell:
And so once again
My dear Johnny my dear friend
And so once again you are fightin' us all
And when I ask you why
You raise your sticks and cry, and I fall
Oh, my friend
How did you come
To trade the fiddle for the drum
You say I have turned
Like the enemies you've earned
But I can remember
All the good things you are
And so I ask you please
Can I help you find the peace and the star
Oh, my friend
What time is this
To trade the handshake for the fist
And so once again
Oh, America my friend
And so once again
You are fighting us all
And when we ask you why
You raise your sticks and cry and we fall
Oh, my friend
How did you come
To trade the fiddle for the drum
You say we have turned
Like the enemies you've earned
But we can remember
All the good things you are
And so we ask you please
Can we help you find the peace and the star
Oh my friend
We have all come
To fear the beating of your drum
Question: If I read Atrios's intro correctly, Dickey's article was titled "The French Were Right" -- but what I got when I clicked to it was a piece titled "Pride and Prejudice." Did Newsweek change the title, or did I misread Atrios, or what?
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert...Near them, on the sand,
half sunk, a shatttered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor wellthose passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed:
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
JW - someone upthread noted that the title was changed
See what happens when Republican judges puts the scion of a corrupt family in the White House. I wonder if Sandra Day O'Conner still thinks that it would have been terrible if Al Gore was president.
Al Franken was on PRI this morning, his bit about his meeting with Mama Bush was very interesting, especially when she went into "Queen of Hearts" mode. This woman will be paste on television next month, with rosy filters, hawking a book that, from what I can gather, will be a hatchet job on just about everyone who might be a danger to her criminal clan. Watch out for it soon.
EPT - Time for me to get up on my particular hobby horse - see what happens when you have political dynasties? It's like having an aristocracy; eventually you get the inbred idiots on the throne.
We need to get rid of these dynasties - a family should get one shot at the presidency. Period.
I don't know about the anti-dynasty thing as a rule, but you are right it hasn't worked out in the US. The Adams were both failures as president and now the Bushes. I guess it depends on the family.
Someone just told me that Babs was on Discovery reading "Millie's Book".
I guess that shows why we don't need non-commercial public television.
Why did they say that ipicac wasn't good for you, just when you need it most?
Hell, pie, there isn't even any outrage about the killing of our own men dying for lies.
It is one of the most disheartening examples of general American citizenship I have ever lived through. People just hear the small number and let Bush get away with killing Americans for no fucking good reason. Whatever the hell reason they say it is this week.
This from all those red state pro-lifers. I hope they rot in hell for their god damn silence. Life is precious my ass.
I remember when the propaganda campaign started last sept (annouced with arrogance by Andrew Card).
Each week another example of why we need to go in.
One of the classic moments of that campaign was when they trotted out the puppies being used as gas test dummies.
Talk about overt manipulation.
I don't know -- a lot of the pro-war people I talk to in my very conservative town in the Midwest are always talking about the war of "liberation."
Cognitive dissonance. The reason they wanted the war deep down was really the bloodlust but they are ashamed to admit to themselves that part of them is barbarian.
And also they're parroting the wingnut talking points.
We didn't really start hearing about "liberating" the poor Iraqi people until the WMD issue was poked so full of holes it was swiss cheese.
i>...there isn't even any outrage about the killing of our own men dying for lies.
And what kind of welcome will the amputees or psychologically-scarred soldiers get when they return home? What will their grateful nation do to help them live near-normal lives?
You know what this reminds me of, don't you.
pie - well, we've already had a good indication of how this adminstration is going to welcome them. With reduced benefits.
It may sound like Vietnam, but it feels like Hooverville to me.
Well, if we're going to do culture 'n' stuff...
All those years we spent jubilant,
seeing the trifling, cowering world from the height of our shining saddles, brawling our might across the earth as we forged an empire, I never questioned . . .
It seemed so clear--our fate was to rule. That's what I thought at the time.
But perhaps we were merely deafened for years by the din of our own empire-building,
the shouts of battle, the clanging of swords, the cries of victory.
Aeschylus, The Persians
Good pick, Diane.
Yes -- the ancient Athenians tried to do what the Bushies are trying to do -- and it destroyed Athenian democracy and power -- forever.
Jackson - I agree that Diane made a good pick.
"--and it destroyed Athenian democracy and power--forever."
There's a cheery little thought.
> There's a cheery little thought.
The truth shall set you free -- but it may not make you particularly happy.
For W from The The - Infected - "Sweet Bird of Truth"
6 o'clock in the morning & i'm the last person in this plane still awake
Y'know I can almost smell the blood washing against the shores,
Of this land that can't forget its past.
Oh the wind that carries this plane, is the wind of change,
heaven sent and hell bent!
over the mountain tops we go, just like all the other GI Joes
EE-AY-EE-AY----adios!
"This is your captain calling--";with an urgent warning;
"We're above the Gulf of Arabia--";our altitude is falling;
"& I can't hold her up--";there's no time for thinking;
"All hands on deck--";this bird is sinking;
Across the beaches and cranes, rivers and trains
all the money I've made--bodies I've maimed.
Time was when I seemed to know,
Just like any other GI Joe
Should I cry like a baby, or die like a man
While all the planets' wars start joining hands,
Oh what a heaven--what a hell!!
Y'know there's nothing can be done in the whole wide world.
I don't know whats wrong or right,
I'm just a regular guy, with bottled up insides,
I ain't ever been to church or believed in Jesus Christ
but I'm praying that Gods with you when you die!!!
Hmm, I wonder if some of these reservists decided they didn't want to go to Iraq and went AWOL, would they get off scott free like W?
As they say, lying to yourself is the fastest way to hell there is.
The Bush administration has lied long and hard to itself (yeah, we're all done in Afghanistan, Karzai can hold the fort; yeah, Chalabi has widespread support; we don't need any help from mamby pamby Europeans; they'll love us once we get rid of Saddam etc. etc. etc.) and we're all going to be paying the price.
For the record, I think the invasion as an in-your-face statement of American power has failed. I don't think Iraqi reconstruction has failed yet, and I think it could be turned around if we committed the right kinds of resources to it (and to Afghanistan) it's the only honorable thing for the US as a country to do. Cutting and running at this stage would be reprehensible.
I don't think that's possible with the current administration.
I'll happily vote for whatever democrat is for engaging in real reconstruction that benefits Iraqis without cutting sweetheart deals and without scrimping.
For a long time, Michael Farris, I felt that we owed it to Iraq to stay around long enough to fix what we broke. I'm beginning to change my view on that. I don't think they want us there and I don't think they are going to let us reconstruct the country.
Of course, this administration can't be trusted to fix anything except elections and the bidding for contracts in Iraq. Maybe if we could start over with a real plan...
This way of thinking is just so weird and testosterone-laden. Why screw things up when the international community was already in our court because of 9-11? What, near-worldwide friendship and empathy too "girly" for these guys?
Dantooine is far too remote to make an effective demonstration.
But don't worry. We shall deal with your rrrrrebel friends soon enough.
but MYOB,
We had already gone to Afghanistan and had our 911 REVENGE! Iraq had nothing to do with 911 except they are in the same region. While we were in Afghanistan warring, we were really excessively cruel, too. In a Newsweek article, it was reported that our allies the Northern Alliance captured a bunch of Afghanis and put them in the back of tractor trailers. These people were in these hot hot trucks and to make air, rifles were shot into the trailers.. According to the article our forces saw and allowed this...
Don't forget the kicker. They had to give in to bin Laden's demand to get the US out of Saudi Arabia.
BTW, if everyone feels safer from 9/11 attacks if Clark (a general) is president, why is no one asking why our military didn't scramble jets within 10 minutes on that morning like it had in all previous hijackings?
"What, near-worldwide friendship and empathy too "girly" for these guys?
"
Absolutely. Cheney and Rumsfeld saw this as pity. Absolutely unacceptable.
The 'goal' was an is to put airbases all over Iraq, so as to create the footprint for invading any country there that they like.
It is a racist strategy, deeply, so it isn't suprising to hear people talk of nuking Mecca, as if the existence of bin Laden is justification for genocide. Isn't the existence, then, of Bx equal justification?
Serious craziness, and they ain't done yet.
The idea that NORAD didn't have fighters tailing ALL the 9-11 planes that were planes (Pentagon 'plane' probably wasn't) is absurd.
What they didn't have was authority to do anything, since only the Bx could have given it, and he was kept from phones until it was too late.
Finally, some hero took it on himself and shot down the PA plane, orders or no orders.
And then NORAD had to redo their official timeline to pretend they didn't get there on time, which made them look like asses, but which was the only allowable solution.
I believe that there are many high-level officials just itching to get this off their chests, and I also fear that when we finally do puncture the myth, we are going to find out just how the shadow government has been using this time to set up their Internment camps and necessary martial law.
Those who believe in elections, especially one in 2004, may have a nasty surprise in store. Even so, I also believe as I have said many times, that our best bet for surviving this is to Get behind the Governor, and to march en masse, 30-50 million of us worldwide on Oct 25 to demand impeachment.
I could certainly be wrong about many things (that would be FINE with me!), but of this I am certain: We don't march, and protest often, and interfere with the passivity by defying the lies in public, and we are the last generation of free Americans.
Paul,
Get some sleep, you're up too late and your conspiracy thinking is middled. On the other hand, the massive demonstration sounds like a good idea.
that's muddled
Why does the soldier sticking his finger into a tiger's cage and getting it bitten off strike me as an appropriate analogy for the entire operation in Iraq?
There will be a serious recruitment problem for the military; retention will not be such a big problem. They have a program called "stop loss" which they implement to prevent people from leaving the military at times when their military specialties are needed, which is all of them right now. Even if the service member's time in service is up, even if the service member is eligible to retire, they can (will) be retained against their will.
To expand on my first thought a bit:
Why does the soldier sticking his finger into a tiger's cage and getting it bitten off and then shooting the fucking tiger because he was stupid enough to put his hand in the cage strike me as an appropriate analogy for the entire operation in Iraq?
Fair&balancedoldwhitelady,
It confuses me, too, that attacking bin Laden/Mullah Omar did not satisfy the need to salvage wounded pride from 9/11. Maybe, though, Afghanistan opened a door of opportunity for some people to satisfy their longstanding hunger to salvage the wounded pride they felt from GWI, when Saddam was left in power. Maybe they used 9/11 as a flimsy excuse to themself/others to tie unrelated things together and settle old scores.
I dunno. Incidentally, for Tony Blair, I think 9/11 was a window to get people to go after a human rights abuser, Saddam, and he's said as much publicly. Both groups then manipulated evidence to frighten/anger the public into going along.
Also, I think that the Bush administration can't get all the blame for manipulating Americans into attacking Saddam out of wounded pride. A lot of nationalistic Americans were only too happy to buy into it, and I think they need to ask themselves some hard questions about why that was. Ultimately I think that Bush et. al must have had plenty of humiliation in their private lives for them to feel such a strong need to prove that they're powerful. No amount of invasions or warmaking will ever quench that, and as proud as Bush is of his lack of introspection, it's doubtful he'll ever confront his personal demons.
Atrios said:
'The Neocons were on record all over the place (pre and post 9/11) discussing the need to project American might through a major military conquest so that nations would tremble before us.'
Since guerilla war tactics were devised to counter exactly such a threat, I suspect that overthrowing nations will have little to no effect on the number or resolve of terrorists who use those tactics. Heck, one could even make a case that Saddam Hussein knew he was about to go out, so he devised a plan to wage a guerilla campaign instead of fighting a conventional war. It certainly puts him into a position to be viewed as a saviour of the Iraqi people (something he's always believed himself to be).
los altos pharmacy los altos pharmacy los altos pharmacy // chinese poker rules chinese poker rules chinese poker rules
flamingo casino las vegas flamingo casino las vegas flamingo casino las vegas // san juan hotel and casino san juan hotel and casino san juan hotel and casino
64 Visitors Online
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
