HULK SMASHED
Yeah, but the Slate forum on the tenth anniversary of the Iraq War, featuring all the same people, is gonna be really awesome.
damn you tkk!
You Don't "Support the Troop" When You Support the LIES That KILL THEM.
'Nuff said.
tkk = jeevan?
i report, you decide.
Shame is a very underrated emotion.
Yeah, but the Slate forum on the tenth anniversary of the Iraq War, featuring all the same people, is gonna be really awesome.
"If it wasn't for the incompetence of the Bush, Clinton, and Bush administrations, I would have been perfectly justified in calling for this war"
well, it's more like the people who pay them don't want DFHs. there's no profit in that.
Punditry should be a competition. If you're right, you move on... if you're wrong consistantly, you get your megaphone taken away. That would clear the airways out pretty quick.
by the way, way to go Kenosha!
tkk = jeevan? :rocket:
nope
TKK,
$80 covers Friday and both things Saturday, including lunch.
Say wha?
actually, russert invited me on his show to talk about what a mistake the whole thing was from the beginning and apologize for not listening to me in 2001.
but i refuse to share a camera with that wanker.
anti-war voices are almost completely missing from our mainstream public discourse
It's because bringing up the futility of having troops fight and die for no good reason is portrayed as not supporting the troops.
Punditry should be a competition. If you're right, you move on... if you're wrong consistantly, you get your megaphone taken away. That would clear the airways out pretty quick.
This is an idea I could support. It would also help cull the D.C. society club pretty quick. That would rule.
tkk = atrios, slumming.
i introduce rumors, you spread them.
I still dont understand why the people who got it wrong five years ago, and kept getting it wrong over and over, are the ones we read and hear telling us what to do next.
I dont respect or rehire the guy who painted my house badly and then refused to come back and fix it or answer his phone messages.
As a result, the MSM and main political discussion about Iraq is certifiably self-discrediting.
20 years from now the same assholes will be talking about why we can't withdraw too quickly from Iraq.
Seriously, does anyone think American troops will leave Iraq, ever? The only thing that will get them out of there, imo, is when the Iraqis overrun the green zone and the bases.
Can you imagine how uncool it is to get shot or maimed in this piece of shit war? I bet the soldiers on the front line talk about that constantly.
It's because bringing up the futility of having troops fight and die for no good reason is portrayed as not supporting the troops.
George Johnston
And, of course, the people who accuse us of "not supporting the troops" are sitting home on their fat asses, not having the guts to go over and fight for what they deem is this wonderful, noble cause.
tkk = atrios, slumming.
Met them both. Nope.
If only more DFHs had gone to Harvard, Slate might notice them.
but i refuse to share a camera with that wanker.
dirk gently,submerged
Be nice. He lowered his standards too.
both things Saturday
panels & concert? where is link to (smoking) hotel?
MP,
To judge by my students, they don't talk much at all. Lotta self-medication going on.
"If it wasn't for the incompetence of the Bush, Clinton, and Bush administrations, I would have been perfectly justified in calling for this war"
Cheney could fuck up a canned hunt.
It's just like after the OJ Simpson horror show, or the Clinton impeachment horror show. A lot of mea culpas (mea culpae?) but nothing ever changes.
(Howard) Dean's Law: The only thing worse than being wrong is being right too loud, too soon.
YEAAARRRGH!
It reminds me of some of my daughter's 8th-grade friends who took her aside one afternoon and explained to her, basically, that she wasn't being non-conformist the right way.
To the barricades!
After we build some barricades.
-
anti-war voices are almost completely missing from our mainstream public discourse
It's kinda funny, but there's a LTE in the Strib today from this retired Army guy that printed up thousands of lawn signs that said "Liberate Iraq" in the lead-up to the clusterfuck. He says that the surge is working because only 800 people showed up to the weekly vigil on Wednesday.
In my lifetime, I've never heard so many damn justifications for something that should've never, never happened. The utter fucking nerve.
I was thinking of bugging out on the eschcon....but this discourse has got my blood going.....
thanks
It really sucks when you invade and occupy a defenseless country when there's no provocation and it all doesn't work out. I hate when that happens!
unable to recognize that what the world really needs is for them to shut the fuck up and turn their microphones over to people who didn't cheer on this horrible disaster.
There's been a few, but they're always asked, "So, what would you do now?"
Smoking hotel
and
Late registration.
No No, Ferraro and Wright need the megaphones now!!!!
Clearly
P. O'Neill, I dig your posts. Informational to the core, just as I like em.
Plus, you swung a mean bat for the Reds.
sheets
his retired Army guy that printed up thousands of lawn signs that said "Liberate Iraq" in the lead-up to the clusterfuck. He says that the surge is working because only 800 people showed up to the weekly vigil on Wednesday.
There's some who needs to get a flaming bag of dogshit or two on HIS doorstep.
Heaven preserve us from these jackasses who have SEEN war but have learned nothing from their experience.
He says that the surge is working because only 800 people showed up to the weekly vigil on Wednesday.
At least he's honest. The 'surge' was never going to stabilize the political situation in Iraq, nor was it meant to. It was intended to take Iraq off the table as an issue here, in this country, because the GOP had not even the ghost of a chance in '08 otherwise.
By those standards, it has largely succeded.
Someone, not some
Also, drop me an email at the homepage telling me what you want for lunch. The box lunches include a sandwich (turkey, Italian, or vegetarian) and a drink (coke, diet coke, or water) plus fruit and chips.
It really sucks when you invade and occupy a defenseless country when there's no provocation and it all doesn't work out. I hate when that happens!
Cookie Fleck `08
And it REALLY sucks when certain parts of the population actually have the temerity to FIGHT BACK.
I mean, everyone should bow down to the almighty US of A!
blerb,
yellowdogjen, Jennifer, and Jenny from the blog are three different people, all long-time posters. I heart Jenny from the blog, too bad she doesn't come back much anymore. A sweet, bright, gentle soul is she, and I understand beautiful as well.
At least we have podcasts.
I'd rather lick the puss-filled, feces-smeared hemorrhoid of an elephant than to click on any of these blue letters.
Is this sort of like the way that the people who really opposed the Vietnam war were treated like unhinged nutcases while the sober people who argue we 'could have won' it some other way are given the national stage?
Is this sort of like how the people who supervised death squad and genocide activities throughout Central America and Southern Africa for an entire decade (1979 - 1989) are allowed to lecture everyone else on how to support democracy & human rights?
Is this sort of like how all the people who predicted the awesome happy pony surprises from NAFTA are the only ones allowed to review it now and suggest that maybe some claims were overblown?
Sort of like that?
Can't we go back to talking about call girls and black racists?
-
First, these “academics” are practicing cargo cult science since in physics or say climate modeling repeatably failed predictions would invalidate their hypothesis. Sticking to these repeated failures in light of the evidence would drop them from community leadership. This correction hasn't happened because their community “peer review process” is corrupted.
Secondly, the broken personality type that would rush us to war using a consensus based approach appeasing political power, would be the same flawed character to try to stick around regardless of the consequences of their actions. You can't rush to war and still have the conscience to remove yourselves when proven horribly wrong. These are broken people operating in a broken academic community.
Bary Ritholz, on the alleged "recovery" after the 2001 dot-com bubble:
I have long railed against superficial headline data that belied the weakness underneath. There were a parade of syncophants and cheerleaders who, despite knowing better, continued to cheerlead punk data. These pundits, politicos and pinheads are now confronting the ugly reality they can no longer ignore. Consider the progression the motley crew of fools and liars went through: First they denied what was happening, then we got the whole contained thingie, then they blamed da Bears. Now, they have unwittingly embraced Marx, and have successfully pled for the central planners to rescue them from their own stupidity...
Here's my question: Are we stuck with these fantasists? Has Truthiness replaced Truth? Are we going to be saddled forever with these damaging, hallucinatory hacks?
You can read the whole thing, but it points out a fact that everyone accepts, and which the mainstream anything won't acknowledge -- if they did, their happy fluffer gravy train would end.
In order to include Andrew Sullivan, Slate now labels him a "liberal hawk"?!!! WTF? Sullivan has ALWAYS ALWAYS called himself a conservative.
It's a little more absurd when the top contender on the Dem side can't say unequivically that Iraq was a mistake.
All Atrios can see is the people who say shit, not the people who don't say anything and don't use an iota of their power shut those neocons up.
"You know, I don't know what got into me. I mean... My janitor kept telling me my neighbour had a gun, and was pretending to use it on me. I didn't know for sure, yeah.
But the folks who lived with me kept telling me I shouldn't go over to his house to (kill him and his family, take all his possessions and break the walls to transform both apartments into a big one) and they just annoyed me. So I went there and did it. Yes yes, I wasn't completetly right.
(yeah, I know, my brother still insists it was a good idea and that we created peace on the building -- he makes me very mad, I'm with you ok? Ok?)
Now let me tell you more how I feel."
on bill moyers, i think phil donahue said some very powerful things last night about the corporate media destroying democracy.
so even if it is said, you're never going to hear about it from msm, at least not without their special spin.
bush made a deal in 99 -- my fcc will lift the limits on outlets owned by you if you play ball with us.
among all the other agencies corrupted, include the fcc. check out how the ownership regs have changed over the last 7 years.
"there's enough of my man-perm to go all around"-Michael O'Hanlon
Yes, by all means, please turn the microphones over to Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan or someother high profile "anti-war" voice; that will play great in the general election.
Atrios keeps forgetting that among those who were "cheering this thing on" was a majority of americans..insult them at your peril.
[....] all of the idiots who cheered this thing on are given platform after platform to describe their intellectual journey or whatever.
I wouldn't mind that so much, if there was ever any actual journey involved. That is, I don't mind debug traces from people explaining exactly where they were wrong, as long as they realize that they were wrong.
If someone wants to say, "I was mistaken, and here was how I made my mistake," I'm ready to listen. If someone wants to say, "Things didn't work, but I was still right, so there," no matter how they dress the sentiment up with weasel words and half-assed excuses, I want to punch my monitor very hard. If they want to blame the people who were right all along for their error, I want to strangle my monitor with its entrails.
John Edwards cleared that hurdle by starting off with his Three Simple Words; Andrew Sullivan may have barely cleared the hurdle with his latest mea culpa, but not by much. Kevin Drum sailed over it so long ago that many people don't even remember that he was ever in favor of the war.
All of those guys are, to varying degrees, worth listening to if they want to talk about their journey, because they've actually had a journey. The folks who are still busy blaming other people for the fact that they were wrong are, at best, extremely annoying, and, at worst, actually evil.
tsk, tsk tsk. Those who did not cheer this thing on, and who might be given to speaking in front of a microphone (if one were offererd), are guility of constantly looking backward, navel gazing, doncha know.
I watch Chris Matthews because despite some of the stupid things he says, he is strongly anti-war, and it's a point of view that isn't often expressed by people in his position.
If the people who have been consistently wrong were no longer allowed to give voice to their oh-so-brilliant insights, then only DFH's would be on the TeeVee. Dare to dream.
Rupert Murdoch's Blog
Atrios, the problem isn't that leftwing voices aren't on the teevee. It's that the teevee is Rupert Murdoch's blog.
Or whichever owners' blog. The point is, you're not likely to invite guest bloggers onto Eschaton that talk up Lieberman or dismiss the concept of Friedman units. You can do that, because it's your blog.
The teevee is these other guys' blog. So it's not surprising that the same guys show up on it saying the same things. It's actually very noticeable how few of them there are, by the frequent rotation of the same faces.
So if people ask if I've seen something on the teevee, I just say I don't go to blog, it's not very interesting.
Great resolution quality, graphics. But no content.
go to *that* blog
ummm...that would include Matt Yglesias, Andrew Sullivan, Josh Marshall, just for starters, and I would be all for that.
None of these people seem to have any sense of the horror they have been part of enabling, nor any degree of appropriate shame or the need to make amends.
But they do seem to sense their own narcissistic need to continue to spout off authoritatively on their latest line of bullshit, as though their credibility should not be questioned.
Sorry to get here late, but I do want to say we did pretty well on the teevee. Check it out. Yes, it's Bangor (market 249/250 or something), but it does show what can be done. Does this mean hope or something?
"I don't really understand the degree of narcissism that many of them exhibit..."
You don't understand it because it's not narcissism. It's sociopathy. They don't give a shit about anybody but themselves. They've got the microphone, the money coming in, the power, and that's all they care about. Nobody else matters. That's why there had to be Nuremberg trials. That's why Nazi war criminals had to be executed. And, at some point in time, it is why the current cluster of American war criminals will be executed.
how do you figure its a disaster?
Are you "reality based" people just going to keep acting as if Iraq is in the state of civil war and there are record levels of violence? You snarkily post "over there"- ok, four soldiers died. How many murders were there in similarly populated California, a "civilized" area in an established democracy.
Look, the US had a Civil War that killed and maimed 4000 people in 20 minutes in one of the battles (Cold Harbor). I certainly think, that though every death is a tragedy, its well worth it to establish the first Arab true democracy. It will be a triumph over history, a triumph for the ages. Its working. You know it is. Its only pure pigheaded politics that makes you act this way. Kosovo is an unqualified success because it was a Clinton project, buy you'll go to your grave calling the removal of a dangerous, murderous tyrant who would still be murdering and threatening war with his neighbors today if we didn't take him out.
Oh, and the answer in Cali is that in 2006 there were 2,485 murders (it keeps going up, presumably 2008 will be worse) so that means there were nearly 7 murders a day in California. Should we give up and move from there? Your behaviour would be risible if it weren't so serious. If, by some miracle, a Democrat gets elected, they will have been based on promising to pull the troops out of Iraq
This WILL be a disaster, and those 4000 lives WILL have been wasted in that case. And you'll be very happy then, to be proven right, that Iraq will descend into madness and genocide.
You couldn't stand for success there and President Bush proven right. That would shatter your worldview.
We're winning. The people's lives are better. They deserve democracy and self-determination. We are all enriched by every country that joins the free world. It could be the start of a revolution in the Arab world.
I think that's worth a lot of US money, lives and sacrifice to achieve. I'm sorry you don't. JFK did.
i thought i was right, but i guess i was wrong. now we have war, depression, and decline, but those certainly aren't MY fault.
i won't have to care about any of this when i get to heaven, so why start now?
Yes, the only way this war ends is with a big, noisome antiwar movement. Otherwise, it will be come institutionalized with our politics totally unable to deal with it. It will truly become a 100 Years War.
War Critics Decry Interminable And Unwinnable Conflict January 15th, 1945
WASHINGTON (Routers) With the "Allied" forces continuing to be bogged down in the Ardennes Forest, many are questioning Roosevelt administration war policies, the unreasonable length of the war, and even whether or not it can be won.
The 7th Army's VI Corps is waging a desperate, and perhaps futile battle with German troops, surrounded on three sides in the Alsace region. A whole month after the beginning of the renewed German offensive, with almost twenty-thousand American troops dead in this battle alone, there remains no clear end in sight, or hope that the American lines can be closed.
There are serious questions about the competence of Generals Bradley and Patton, concerns that were only heightened shortly after the beginning of the battle, when two armies from Bradley's army group were removed from his command and placed under that of the British General Montgomery. General Montgomery's comments in a press conference a week ago have served only to buttress such legitimate doubts. He didn't even mention their names in describing the limited efforts to recapture lost ground, that remains unsuccessful, with the Germans continuing to take the initiative.
Many point out that these lengthy battles, and lengthy wars, are somehow indicative of a fundamental failure of American policy, not just in waging the war, but in the very decision to enter into it.
"It's not just that we're a whole month into this battle with no clear resolution or exit strategy. In a few more months, this war will have gone on as long as the Civil War," said one Republican critic of the administration. "And that one was Americans against Americans. We should have expected to do much better against Germans. After all, this war has now gone on twice as long as World War I, when we mopped up the Kaiser in a year and a half." He went on, "It's clearly the fault of this Roosevelt administration, that lied us into war, and then botched it. I'll bet that had Tom Dewey won the election a couple months ago, he would have exercised his judgment by immediately implementing his policy of not having entered the war."
Others disagree. One administration spokesman has said on background that this seems like flawed logic.
"One can't judge war progress by a calendar. Wars aren't run on a schedule, and every one is different," he pointed out. "And neither can one judge the progress of a battle that way, or by the casualty count. Often the heaviest fighting occurs just before victory. Our heaviest losses at Normandy were just before we took the beach and the cliffs."
"Yes, the fighting is fierce in the Ardennes now, but Hitler is waging a war on two fronts, and he's down to young boys and old men as soldiers. We will simply have to outlast him, and I'm confident that we will start making serious progress into Germany in a month."
But war opponents will have none of it. "This administration has been
With the "Allied" forces continuing to be bogged down in the Ardennes Forest, many are questioning Roosevelt administration war policies, the unreasonable length of the war, and even whether or not it can be won.
In fact, that's exactly what some Repukes did during WW2. When they weren't financing the Nazi government, like convicted criminal Prescott Bush.
Setting aside your extreme flattery of Saddam Hussein by comparing his piddly third-rate military to the Wehrmacht, I don't recall 4000 American combat deaths while occupying Germany from 1945-1950 after the surrender.
5 Visitors Online
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
