HULK SMASH
IMPEACH
CONVICT
Did you mean "witout any plan"???
JAIL
Source: http://www.dispatch.com/live/con...ss&cat=&
sid=101
"Limbaugh's 'Operation Chaos' in Ohio, Pennsylvania and other states holding presidential primaries is designed to help presumptive Republican nominee John McCain win the Nov. 4 election."
WTF? Just a few weeks ago the press and the Obama supporters were demonizing Hillary as an evil bitch because they said both Limbaugh and Coulter had endorsed her and would campaign for her OVER McCain. Looks like all you Clinton-haters were fooled because Limbaugh is all about McCain now.
Make that "without" any plan.
If only reality didn't get in the way, things would be perfect!
Die better!
Huh?
bush isn't the prince of peance and freeance????
No one could have foreseen... no one could have anticipated... no one could have guessed... no one... no one... SHADDAP YOU THERE IN THE PEANUT GALLERY!!
2002 GOP: WE GONNA BLOW UP SADDAM BUT GOOD LOL
DFHs: And, uh, how are you gonna keep the Sunnis, Shi'ites and Kurds from immediately beating the tar out of each other to fill the power vacuum?
2002 GOP: LOL WUT?
. . .
2008 GOP: HEY DONT BLAME US THOSE SAVAGES CANT BEHAVE THEMSELVES.
Is it just me or is he slurring more than usual?
There is also the fact that destroying a country's infrastructure does not yield good will or stability,
Is it January 2009 yet?
'Baghdad was on virtual lockdown Friday as a tough new curfew ordered everyone off the streets of the Iraqi capital and five other cities until 5 p.m. Sunday.
Smoke rises Friday in Baghdad from the area commonly known as the Green Zone after mortar and rocket attacks.
1 of 2 That restriction didn't stop someone from firing rockets and mortar rounds into the capital's heavily fortified International Zone, commonly known as the Green Zone. One slammed into the office of one of Iraq's vice presidents, Tareq al-Hashemi, killing two guards.'
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/me...main/
index.html
There is also the fact that destroying a country's infrastructure does not yield good will or stability,
Ba'al | 03.28.08 - 12:12 pm
You obviously need a holiday in Cambodia...
Are people incapable of reasoned thought? Think of this country. If there were a sudden collapse of the federal government, wouldn't there be dozens of factions vying for their own little slice of power/heaven? Sheesh, even the recent wingnut porn Jericho used this as a storyline.
The Bush government went into Iraq, removed Saddam's government, then created bullshit photo-ops to simulate the appearance of democracy. A Marshall Plan there wasn't. Big surprise things didn't go well.
I'm sorry I missed that thread below. Did anyone explain why it's so fucking important to have an embassy in Iraq?
You obviously need a holiday in Cambodia...
Where people dress in black...
Our fabulous media is covering the teen sniper story like it's the Second Coming. Baghdad in flames? Not so much.
1 of 2 That restriction didn't stop someone from firing rockets and mortar rounds into the capital's heavily fortified International Zone, commonly known as the Green Zone. One slammed into the office of one of Iraq's vice presidents, Tareq al-Hashemi, killing two guards.'
sekmet | 03.28.08 - 12:12 pm
Are they accurate enough with their fire yet to hit helicopters landing on roofs?
Did anyone explain why it's so fucking important to have an embassy in Iraq?
Personally, I would ask Switzerland to represent our interests there.
I could say the same for you people and I will!
Bugs
You know Bugs, if you can't stop thinking about how good it would be to deep throat Lexington Steele while having Shane Diesel turn your rectum into the Lincoln tunnel, THAT'S OK. It's this nasty reaction formation redirected at Obama that's ugly and destructive. Can't you see that? Just let yourself be yourself and you'll feel so much better!
Put the American embassy in Qatar, and you don't need a gazillion troops to protect it.
Can you imagine if Bush had been in charge after WWII? *shiver* Hirohito's son would now rule the US and we would all be Shintoists.
I'm sorry I missed that thread below. Did anyone explain why it's so fucking important to have an embassy in Iraq?
Moe Hussein Szyslak | 03.28.08 - 12:13 pm
Well obviously it would be important to handle all of those embassy things, like visas and the like, except the US embassy in Iraq doesn't actually handle that sort of embassy business.
Greenwald posted a Charlie Rose clip of an interview with two Iraqis who explained that our "Surge Success" is a duplication of what the hated Saddam was doing. Paying off tribal leaders to keep the peace.
This "birth of democracy" in the Middle East is all just Potemkin smoke and mirrors.
Can you imagine if Bush had been in charge after WWII? *shiver* Hirohito's son would now rule the US and we would all be Shintoists.
His response to Pearl Harbor would have been to declare war on Mexico.
Rice said the United Nations sanctions killed Iraq’s agricultural sector
She's right on that count.
Put the American embassy in Qatar, and you don't need a gazillion troops to protect it.
Moe Hussein Szyslak | 03.28.08 - 12:16 pm
I'm sure there is an American embassy in Qatar.
Can you imagine if Bush had been in charge after WWII? *shiver* Hirohito's son would now rule the US and we would all be Shintoists.
On the bright side, it would be easier to find good sushi...
Did you see the way Iraq was dressed? She was totally asking for it.
We don't need an embassy, or a base or anything else. We need a couple of carrier strike groups and a port to service them. That's it.
On the bright side, it would be easier to find good sushi...
Certified Mutant Enemy | Homepage | 03.28.08 - 12:19 pm
Ya don't think the sushi would have issues of radioactive contamination?
Can you see GDumbya pulling a Truman on Macarthur and pulling the US away from a broader deadlier unwinnable war?
We don't need an embassy, or a base or anything else. We need a couple of carrier strike groups and a port to service them. That's it.
Falstaff
Er, to do what?
Can you imagine if Bush had been in charge after WWII?
We would have invaded Brazil.
Same shit they trotted out after Katrina to deflect attention from their mistakes and incompetence. It's always somebody else's fault, it's always the fault of ahem, how to say this delicately, uh, "certain people" who are not quite as advanced or civilized as the Bush family and their cronies.
Remember Barbara Bush's ghastly, stupid comments in Houston? (Katrina evacuees in New Orleans "were underpriveleged anyway, so this is working out well for them.") These people really do think they are civilization's chosen ones. So I'm not surprised they would blame the Iraqis.
Are people incapable of reasoned thought? Think of this country. If there were a sudden collapse of the federal government, wouldn't there be dozens of factions vying for their own little slice of power/heaven?
Great point.
Not to mention the fact that if China invaded and stationed 3 million troops here and payed off Protestants to fight Catholics, what would this country look like?
Divide $ Conquer. That's what it's all about in Iraq. That's why the US has been dealing with the Supreme Islamic Council who are Shiites aligned with Iran. All to divide the Shiite, pitting one group against the other.
MSNBC chyron: Who can save the Dems?
Er, to do what?
Moe Hussein Szyslak
You have a point, but...
To project power without stirring up the hatred of the local people. What is over the horizon doesn't bother them. If you control the seas (and the airspace), you pretty much control the region.
but hummvees go where ponies fear to tread, and get blown away.
If you control the seas (and the airspace), you pretty much control the region.
Falstaff
Leaving aside the question of whether it's the Americans fucking god given right to control a place half way around the world, don't they already control the seas and airspace? And I'd argue that they don't really control shit, when it comes down to it.
I guess we - and Iraqis - are finding out what happens when you don't do nation-building.
For the entire history of the war I have been pointing out that the only acceptable explanation in the U.S. propaganda system for why the U.S. would have to leave while Iraq had no magic ponies was to blame the Iraqis.
John Kerry did the same.
It's because it's the only PR line you can take without being open to charges that you hate America or you hate the troops or that you would dare, dare suggest the U.S. government could carry out any foreign policy which was actually morally wrong.
"Look, we tried to give the Iraqis a chance at Democracy. They failed to pony up. Let's go!"
At this point, I think we can safely conclude they were never looking for ponies.
Unicorns, maybe. Not ponies.
Quite right, Atrios.
Let's not forget, it took three years of anti-Shiite atrocities by foreign jihadists to get the civil war started, and even then they didn't take the bait until the Golden Mosque was bombed.
If a few thousand African and Carribean terrorists spent three years slaughtering white people in America, and capped it off by blowing up St. Patrick's Cathedral, would there be wide-scale violence between black and white Americans?
Hell, yeah, there would.
Is she the most clueless and at the same time dishonest government hack you can imagine? Cheney and company are just evil.
But she and Powell are always portrayed as the reasoned opposition to Cheney and Rumsfeld. If they really were, they got outmaneuvered at every turn. And then they went along with the program.
I also find her squirming out of any semblance of responsibility for her own actions and what she has participated in beyond description.
These people are truly monsters.
Can you imagine if Bush had been in charge after WWII?
If George Bush had been the Prime Minister of Great Britain, they would still be landing troops at Gallipolli.
But just like any other good Iraq war supporter, Rice deflected blame for the “long, hard slog” in Iraq away from the Bush administration and onto other pre-war factors. Rice said the United Nations sanctions killed Iraq’s agricultural sector and the “structural problem” of Saddam Hussein’s regime is dissuading Iraqis from making political progress:
Ohhhhh, FUCK YOU!
You have the 'expertise' to 'analyze' how the agricultural sector's problems supposedly affect your invasion's chances for success NOW, how did you miss that BEFORE?
She doesn't realize this is a further self-indictment of their criminally incompetent unpreparedness?
What's really rich is a member of the Cheney-Bush (mal)-administration complaining about an "authoritarian regime". Douchebags all.
who can save the dems? either mccain or bush, take your pick.
iraq is in a civil war over two very good candidates who would both make a good... oh, wait, thats us. iraq must be that mission we accomplished 4 yrs ago so that the surge could work.
Well, who the hell else are they going to blame?
Themselves for getting into this mess to begin with?
Their own country?
Even though that is where blame squarely belongs, these people didn't get where they got (Dems too) by taking responsibility for their fuck ups, or having moral or intellectual integrity.
"I love your trouser tapioca"-Ken Pollack to Michael O'Hanlon
Democracy is not about voting. If the courts are not impartial, if the cops are not clean, if there is no equal justice under the law, then voting means Dick.
If you control the seas (and the airspace), you pretty much control the region.
Falstaff | 03.28.08 - 12:27 pm | #
That's a curious notion of 'control' you have there.
"Some say these people are incapable of governing themselves"
Ahh, the old hoary chestnuts
meant to say, wasn't Bush using this same line of reasoning to attack Democrats just a year or so ago? You know, "Dems say we're doomed to fail because these people are just incapable of governing themselves".
You know, the bad Democrats insinuating that the poor brown people are so inferior as a race that they can't understand the concept of democratic government.
And now they're using the exact same line to explain away their failures. I guess just another in a long line of examples of Demoicrats being right all along.
They probably hate one another because of our freedoms.
If you really want to know why Iraq has been so tough, the answer is George Bush as an incompetent leader. Here is a thumbnail sketch of what he (and Condi) did wrong:
The Pattern of Bush's utter failure as President is clear. He has been a figurehead, with no interest in what actually got done or even what was attempted. He has chosen people who often were incapable of doing the job he assigned them (Rumsfeld is the prime example) and then failed to give them clear guidance regarding what job was to be done. Then he failed to ensure coordination between the various individuals when their jobs should have been mutually supportive (Rumsfeld, Powell and Tenet of the CIA), and failed to make them coordinate their actions when required (particularly Bremer and Rumsfeld and Rumsfeld and the CIA.)I have a more in depth description of Bush's failure, describing Rumsfeld, Bremer, Tenet, Condi and Dough Feith at Whiskey, Tango Foxtrot - over.
On coordination, that was the job of the National Security Director, Condeleeza Rice, during the invasion and early occupation of Iraq. With Bush's refusal to get involved in government activities and his adverse attitude for telling someone he was failing or - god Forbid - firing someone, Rice was not able to do the job at all. We'll never know if she was capable of it. She clearly failed, but the blame for that failure rests with her boss, George Bush.
So while the Bush administration has failed utterly in every matter of importance, and while a lot of people contributed to that failure, the greatest failure is the failure of leadership and vision that George Bush refused to contribute. He ran a shop that amounted to anarchy among the most powerful members of government, and never stepped in to take control.
Why? Why did Bush fail so abjectly?
As far as I can tell, he has never understood the job of manager or leader, and has no aptitude for such a job, nor interest in putting in the effort to accomplish such a job. He was a passive individual chosen to be made President, and while he seems to enjoy the perks of the job, he has not bothered to exert himself to perform it beyond reading speeches someone else has written for him and accepting the adulation of crowds of carefully selected supporters. Even in public he has been protected from those who would confront him with his many failures.
How did Iraq become such a disaster? It was conducted by the single poorest excuse for a President America has ever endured.
But the gist of it is that Bush has been absent as a leader, leaving his subordinates to do whatever they each wanted and had the individual power to do. He hasn't even had someone sub for him, because that would mean he would have to understand what the issues and solutions were at a level above what his speech writers can give him speeches for.
maybe we should study how our own white-knit society understands our own uprisings instead of playing the race-card abroad. i hear that vendors in new orleans still sell mini-statues of a sambo eating watermellon.
72 Visitors Online
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
