One factor may be a lack of reliable personnel to translate & review. In the past an administration would have given it all to the CIA but considering the shape of the CIA these days I think any current administration would hesitate to turn these materials over to them. After all, this is the same CIA that when asked to investigate yellowcake sales in Niger sent a person known to be hostile to the administration. That was no accident or coincidence; the people who run the CIA leave little to chance.

Indeed, the CIA is a compromised, untrustworthy, politicized organization with an agenda of its own & can’t be trusted with sensitive tasks. Give routine duties to the CIA, jobs they can’t use to screw the Whitehouse. My believe is that the CIA will be gradually marginalized & de-funded out of existence & other organizations given the duties that would normally be CIA territory. Fifteen years from now the CIA may be only a memory.

Of course, any translators hired by the administration for the job would have to be thoroughly vetted & that takes time. I’ve read suggestions that the tapes be handed over to the blogs to be translated but sensitive material of this sort is better left ‘in house’. No one knows what is contained in this material; some of the information could be injurious to national security.

In recent years archived WW2 material has been released that has to do with Truman’s decision to drop the bomb:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/894mnyyl.asp

Code-named “Ultra” by the British & “Magic” by the US this material was withheld from public view until recent years because of the embarrassing fact that WW2 allies were secretly listened to in order to obtain the information even though they provide complete justification for Truman’s decision. Perhaps the administration has translated a goodly portion of the Saddam tapes & found something embarrassing to the US on them.

Osama is more polite to Bush than some Democrats… ain’t that funny.

That’s the best you can do? “NEENER, NEENER, YOUR DREAMS ARE COMING DOWN, NYAAH, NYAAH!”

You really don’t have any arguments, do you?

As for dreams. . . I suspect you’re still sulking because your own dream of the great Marxist Utopia/Workers Paradise/Big Rock Candy Mountain never came to pass, and projecting your own frustration onto us. It’s your dream that’s dead, not ours.

Like vector physics, if one angle is going north and the other is going south, they will cancel out each other’s momentum. We would go nowhere basically. In war, you don’t want to be going no while, you want to be moving, somewhere, even if you don’t know where. Simply because mobility, in any direction, is better than hesitation and paralysis of action.

The President’s job, through proper propaganda techniques, is to get the entire nation moving FORWARD in a unified and coordinated way. He does so through human nature, through the sadness, the losses, and the patriotism that all humans are capable of feeling.

A divided house cannot stand, simply because the gravity pulls it apart. I remember when the Democrats kept saying Bush was a divider, not a uniter. Bush should have told them that they wouldn’t want him to be a uniter, because then everyone would agree with him and the media would stop propagandizing against his projects.

The way things stand now, most of our domestic propaganda apparatus in the form of blogs is actually used to counter-act OUR OWN PEOPLE.

This is not only inefficient, it is dangerous. Because the psychological health of our citizens require that we divert our frustrations and angst toward the enemy, but if we do not do so, we would disintegrate from within.

Bush wouldn’t know how to create an insurgency in Iraq. I wish he did, because then he WOULD be a uniter, and the national effort would be directed in one direction. True, we might not agree with that direction, as I did not agree with Roosevelt’s, but at least we would have leadership, at least someone would know what the hell they were doing in this war at the political level.

It does not do the morale of the American people to be left adrift, leadership, and responsible for our own actions in war. A military outfit would be similarly ineffective, if green. The good news is what the American people have faced many such wars and developed a couple of immunities.

Thus, why we haven’t been attacked. For as much as our energies are unfocused, we have a lot of that energy. Even if ours are unfocused, the energies of the military are. Though even the military lacks some will and expertise in necessary fields of war.

The only question is, how long can we actually hold out before something breaks in our defense?

Our military cannot destroy the terroist plans in the Middle East forever, eventually one will succede. If not from the ME, then from the European Union, our “ally”.

Typical anti-warrior rhetoric: America ‘created’ terrorists/Saddam/Stalin/Hitler/You Name It/, etc. & mean, bad America caused these nice folks to perform their murder & mayhem. I guess this goes over great on the liberal blogs.

We can all thank our lucky stars that folks that think like Marshall are not in charge.

Hey Marshall, from the above quote it looks as though you have forgotten that Saddam gassed the Kurds & Iranians. What do you think Saddam did with the WMDs that he used to gas the Kurds?

Now, we are in Iraq. Nearly three years down the road, many of you are still bleating, blathering
and bloviating about why we shouldn’t be. Get over it! If you can’t be part of the solution, you are
part of the problem. Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way.

But if all that the tapes ever reveal is what was shown on Nightline last evening, I think they still tend to bolster the WMD argument rather than negate it.

As I remember the argument, it was that the WMD’s existed, not that Saddam would like to have them, which was quite self-evident. In fact the actual argument was that the WMD’s must exist because Saddam clearly would like to have them. The fallacy of this should also have been self-evident.

I can state unequivocally that it was perfectly self-evident to me when the argument was made the first time.

It still does not appear to be so to my good Conservative friends, particularly when they say things like I have quoted above from you.

Without real, tangible WMD’s, these tapes are simply a footnote to history and have been perfectly well covered in the news merely by being talked about at all.

To say that they “bolster” the original argument is ludicrous. Unless they lead to real WMD’s, all they do is reiterate the faulty premise.

If anything in the tapes would lead to real, tangible WMD’s, we would have found them long ago. George certainly looked hard enough for them, so hard, in fact, that he did as much to create the Iraqi insurgency, through neglect, as he did to liberate the Iraqis.

I like liberated Iraqis, too. But I think history [I know you like history] will say that if this was a victory, our hands were too small to hold it.

Just making sure others don’t do something they’d regret, like pissing off Muslims about their prophet.

yon nest of neocons.

Yea, hear them complain

as little children.

Lo! See how their infidel

dreams come down.

lol

Thanks Anon, just set them in the carport. Also Im going to need you to fetch my dry cleaning for me and while your out, if you can get me a 12 pak, I’d appreciate it.

Thanks.

The good news that your dreams are coming down very soon.

LOL

Like shouting into a cave.

No more pearls before swine.

I think everyone needs to understand that when you take a Soviet inspired and WWII era electrical system, add in total annihilation increased wages, and modern appliances, you get what is known as “trouble” in Elec Eng parlance. And you have to “shoot” the “trouble”.

There are too many “loads” on the circuit.

This tends to either suck so much energy no one else has it, or it causes damage to the electrical infrastructure.

If people paid attention to what was going on in Iraq, they would understand that no electricity is a GOOD THING, it means PEOPLE ARE BUYING STUFF LIKE AMERICANS.

Okay, just to get that out of the way.

Well, the thing is, the way I see it, there aren’t a lot of real propagandists in the MSM. But that doesn’t mean they don’t produce propaganda however. A propagandist, in my view, is someone that has something he wants to accomplish and basically does not care if what he says is a lie or the truth, so long as it is effective. Dick Morris, perhaps Clinton, Hillary, those might ascend to the title of propagandists. Some propagandists prefer honest to lying, true, because some people believe that truth is more effective than a bunch of lies. Shrugs.

The MSM seems bound and deteremined to believe in their own propaganda, so the propaganda originators are very low. The terroists produce the propaganda in Iraq and the media reports on it, those kind of situations.

The MSM actually believe they are “moderate”, that they reflect middle America and mainstream America, they actually believe that they are serving the public interest in ignoring Kartoonistan and focusing on Cheney Gate.

Those propagandists are well within their rights to do so, the question is, given the target rich environment, why do they?

It seems apparent that Erasmus and the MSM really believe what they are saying. They have no reason not to do so. They don’t listen to their Republican counter-parts, for various reasons. And their own side is being purged, as you can see in Neo’s case, so they can’t be convinced by their own side either.

and also, how to get their guns onto the enemy?

You simply have to engineer a betrayal, ala Hitler vs Stalin. If you can get, for example, enough reporters killed in Iraq, perhaps the media will start to hate and will start to turn their guns from Bush, who they still hate.

What President Bush can do to turn the media’s guns on the enemy, is to manipulate the media via human nature. The media, regardless of their faults, are still human. All human beings have weaknesses, sometimes in commonality. Clinton’s strategy of media management was quite good actually, was not surprising given the fact that Dick Morris was his advisor back then. Another thing you could do is to hire Dick Morris as Bush’s PR grand dame of strategy, it would help a lot. Rove is over-rated, he has good strategy, but the tactics of media baiting and taking advantage of human nature, is a Dick Morris specialty.

There are things that can be done, but since Bush won’t do them, nothing’s going to change. The internet bloggers will still have to fight a guerrila war against the MSM. Using hit and run tactics, because we are weaker and less powerful than the MSM guys. Bush won’t bring in the heavy artillery, the mobile assault tank platoons, or the heavy tactical nuclear bombardments. Without those heavy weapons, the infantry can only wage an insurgency.

The question is, can America outlast Bush’s presidency or is something going to happen to shatter our guerrila warfare?

I HAVE NOT HEARD ONE WORD FROM THEM ABOUT THE CARNAGE OVER THERE OR THE HEALING HERE AT HOME.

In reference to the people here.

In the end, there is no need to use wounded soldiers as a crutch to support sound reasoning or as a tripod to MG my opponent.

As for not hearing about the healing at home, perhaps you haven’t been paying attention.

Healing the Brave

it is no wonder you don’t hear about the carnage with this,

Carnage
Personally I think the administration is probably stalling for time until Iraq is on its feet &

I think the Admin should have stalled for time, in order to arm Iraq and Afghanistan with nuclear weapons, to the teeth. THen have THEM deal with Iran. Iran is stalling because they want nukes or already have one and are awaiting a delivery system. We need to play the same game, except in a mirror way. That is the only thing that will work. I have nothing against bombing people, but bombing people Do. Not. Work. for long. Iran is prepared for bombs, to win against Iran, we must do the Shock and Awe, except it ain’t gonna be no CNN operation.

Iran is afraid of another Fallujah, but they are convinced we won’t travel across the border to do a Tehran on them…. and perhaps they are right, if our media succedes.

There has been a lot of crap thrown around in the last thrity years, especially by the left, regarding this program.

What does that have to do with what I said though?

Are you or are you not in favor of another Phoenix Program should America take heavy civilian casualties? That’s the real point that is.

It’d help if you just gave me the most pertinent facts you think I am ignorant of or you think is important, but you’ve only just told me to read a book and haven’t told me your reasons.

Rigid, humorless, unwilling

Who’s humorless?

or unable to look at two sides of an issue

I have so many sides of the issue in my head, that if I didn’t spell out the names of the people involved, I would be confused as to who the voices were that are in my head.

Criticising anything about America is immediately ridiculed and rejected.

Who’s ridiculing my criticisms concerning Bush, the State Department, and the UN building? I’m offended by the criticisms of my anti-Bush comments.

By the way, when I mentioned “healing” at home, I was talking about going to a Vet Hospital and helping those back from Iraq with missing limbs or blinded from an explosion.
Guess I am “clueless.”

“shows”

Healing at home? Get a grip. Politics is an open, sucking chest wound. And, you know what they say about sucking chests? They’re nature’s way of telling you to slow down. We are not gonna join hands and sing Kumbahya anytime in the forseeable future. Deal with it. You don’t have to pretend to like me since I won’t pretend to like you. I will, however, fight for your right to be a clueless, dweeb who has his eyes too close to his bladder and who is badly in need of a LART.

Not that I’m calling you on it, but… In WW II they gave a guy who qualed high on the range a Springfield and designated him a sniper. I don’t recall any specific Army sniper MOS. It was a OJT kind of thing. In the teams, even now, there is no sniper mos. The closest is th 18B, Weaps SGT.

Have you read the FA citation as you were clearly directed to? Don’t make me give you an Article 15.

anymouse@0900: Remember, “Dope will get you through times of no money, better than money will help you get through times of no dope”
Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers

“I see dead people…”
“Me too, man! That weed was some good shit! Where you get it?”

Badges? We don haf no steenkin badges!

But, I’ll let you peek up my dress a little bit. Try, nine-triple-six for one MOS with several secondaries and language suffixes. I spent some time in Red Mud City and the Palmletto Paradise, near Fayette’Nam as well as the ‘Bird. I was also a cred carrier. That’s as much chest pounding as I’m willing to do, bad sniper dood.

Here’s, one of many, key graf ledes, The Bush administration’s use of intelligence on Iraq did not just blur this distinction; it turned the entire model upside down. The administration used intelligence not to inform decision-making, but to justify a decision already made. This is no surprise to many. As the Blog Father says, read the whole thing.

Sorry, I didn’t cite it earlier in the thread; I can only plead the press of work and travel. Because, on page two, Pillar says, Official intelligence on Iraqi weapons programs was flawed, but even with its flaws, it was not what led to the war. and then begins to lay out his arguments. It is, for the most part, the statement of a professional analyst whose pride has been injured by the “wet finger” policy formation process of the administration.

As I said, read the whole thing. If you are intellectually honest, you will not post further to this thread before then or you will risk self identification as a poseur and dweeb which is even lower than a spod.

Ymarsakar: No, I’m not talking about the Phoenix Program. For an accurate understanding of what Phoenix was and, more importantly, was not, read:

Phoenix and the Birds of Prey : The CIA’s Secret Campaign to Destroy the Viet Cong by Mark Moyar

There has been a lot of crap thrown around in the last thrity years, especially by the left, regarding this program. Moyar gets it right. Y. you need to read Nagl and Moyar before you start throwing phrases like Phoenix Program around; or you had to have been there in G2 MACV cordinating the multiple aspects. And, thats not likely since it was a classified, compartmentalized program with only a very few briefed in at the top. They only let us peons fondle certain parts of that elephant.

I think this clarification has given me the specifics I need, thanks. Actually, I was wondering about this that you posted:

“If we had been in the dictator removal business, right-and-left-wing dictators both, the administration’s humanitarian afterthought might have gained more acceptance. But we weren’t, from South America to the ME. The installation of the dictatorial Shah and his secret police in Iran is a case in point.”

My question stems from your apparent preference for the secret police of the two alternatives to the Shah: a western-hating theocracy, as in the present, or a Communist regime, if Mossadegh had stayed as Prime Minister. Both types of regimes would be assured of a secret police force. So if the Shah’s secret police is “a case in point” of your disgust with US foreign policy, then it becomes obvious that at least part of your viewpoint on US foreign policy is invalid due to that inconsistency. I wanted to highlight that contradiction for the readers.

Erasmus protests: I never brought up the “facilities” Saddam used to gas the Kurds. How do I know what he did with them? They haven’t been found, right. So? Could be he destroyed them. Could be he gave them to the Syrian dentist-dictator (what a combo for sadism) as a present. Could be our bombing demolished them. This is your issue, primarily, not mine. When we invaded, what did he have that could threaten neighbors or the USA?

But isn’t it also your issue? The last sentence in the above quote makes it clear that you base part of your opposition to the war because no WMD has yet been found in Iraq & because of that Saddam must be deemed as harmless & undeserving of his toppling. I’m not surprised since this is the main tenet of most anti-warrior rhetoric I read. However, Saddam did have WMD & used it on the Kurds & Iranians. Anti-warriors like to forget that because it raises certain doubts. Facilities & systems to produce such weapons are solid, material things. Where did they go? Listen to the tapes that ran on Nightline. It’s obvious that Saddam’s underlings were ready to draw everything together & reconstitute all their WMD programs at a moment’s notice, just as soon as their buddies in the UN lifted the heat. Saddam is even heard casually speculating about nuclear or chemical WMD being set off in American cities. Not that any good anti-warrior would ever believe Saddam would do such a thing, right?

Erasmus: I never found out[what happened to the WMD stockpiles]. Did you?

Nope, no one has ever found out what happened to the WMD stockpiles. When Saddam was kicked out of Kuwait he was allowed to continue his regime on the condition that he account for the WMD stockpiles he was known to possess. He never did. Doesn’t that bother any of you anti-warriors at all?

Erasmus implores: Please Google the Iranian nuclear stuff yourself. Available from the International Commission, in our papers and journals. What is it you’re doubting? That they have a nuclear development program”? How they will use it? I’m not sure what you want to get at. A distinction between Iraq and Iran? What do you think it is?

What I’m doubting is that any Iranian leader has ever publicly admitted, as you claim, the intent to develop a nuclear weapon. In your words: There’s plenty of proof, admissions in fact, of what the Iranians are doing. If I had to bet I would put my money on ‘no proof.’ It’s really up to you to prove otherwise because you made the assertion – perhaps a bit hastily, eh?

I also see an inconsistency in that anti-warriors are always screaming about “proof” in regards to Saddam, yet proof seems not to be important in regards to Iran. Double standards abound in anti-warriorland.

Erasmus asks me: Should we bomb[Iran], invade, both, neither? And why?

Right now the administration wants to pursue a diplomatic approach. In light of Iranian pronouncements & other behavior I think all concerned have little faith it will work but it must be pursued or anti-warriors will later accuse the administration of bad faith – as they do now with Iraq. Personally I think the administration is probably stalling for time until Iraq is on its feet & able to defend & police itself before attempting an Iran solution that looks more imminent with each passing month.

I don’t want Iran to have the bomb & I want my government to use any means necessary to prevent it. Why? For one of the same reasons I supported the toppling of Saddam: The Iranians would not hesitate for a moment in providing WMD to the nearest terrorist organization. You know it & I know it.

What I don’t want to happen is for the Russians to be trusted to provide ‘safe’ nuclear materials to the Iranians. It seems to me that trusting the Russians to do so would be a recipe for a nuclear WMD in Iran. I’m hoping the administration isn’t serious about such a deal.

If Iran manages to develop the bomb the options become potentially much more deadly than if we stop it beforehand.

Erasmus asks: Why is this pro/anti warrior thing so important to you? Is it a dividing line in American society? If so, since when?

Pro-warrior & anti-warrior are convenient & descriptive terms; they have no other importance for me. Since you ask I will confide I do think there is a “dividing line” of sorts in society. The Democratic Party, liberals & lefties have painted themselves in a corner in that they will not support any war conducted by a Republican President. They are just too partisan to do so.

Most, if cornered, will say they would go to war if America was invaded but such an open, direct attack is unlikely. That means that as far as these groups are concerned any tin pot despot can do just about anything they want to US citizens, corporations, allies & soldiers overseas & wage war in America by proxy, using the terrorists. Indeed, that’s what had been happening for a number of years, culminating in 9/11.

And these wrongheaded groups provide aid to the terrorists by revealing secret counter-terrorism efforts like the NSA program & trying to gut the Patriot Act. I think their tactics are very dangerous. If, as Saddam speculated on the tapes, WMD attacks are ever carried off in American cities they might then realize their error but it would be too late to stop the real carnage. If that were to happen a lot of people would die, many, many more than have died so far. I would think that Iran & Syria would suffer heavily in the ensuing response since, aside from Saddam, over the years their leaders have used terrorists the most. Proof of the type to needed to satisfy the current batch of anti-warriors would be a quaint nicety no longer considered even remotely important.

I suspect…

Someone asked if armored divisions have snipers. Yes, the armored infantry units did, in my case in the 4th Armored, in Fort Hood.

Those propagandists are well within their rights to do so, the question is, given the target rich environment, why do they? and also, how to get their guns onto the enemy?

1. Before the UN, Sept. 12, 2002
“Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of these weapons.”

2. Radio address, Oct. 6, 2002
“The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstructing its nuclear wepons program.”

3. SOTU, Jan 28, 2003
“…no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised…”

[conclusion:]
Right. Note the verbe tenses: “has stockpiled,” “is rebuilding,” “continues to possess.”

Evidence? No doubt? Has stockpiled?

At least with Iran, we won’t have to put up with this BS.
- - - - - - - - - -

As to point 3, there is no doubt that Saddam attempted to “conceal” activities and manufactured products he wasn’t allowed to possess or conceal, whether under UN resolution or under treaty with the US at the conclusion of the First Gulf War.
Saddam stonewalled any full accounting of banned material, generated a legitimate causus bellus.

Now as to whether or not Saddam still possessed such material leading up to the 2003 war - this is still disputed, but appears unlikely as per the Deulfer Report. yet until and unless such materials appear and are accounted for, no one can athoritatively say what happened.
Judgement? - leaning “OK,” but mixed.

Consider now claim 2, Iraq is reconstituting a nuclear program. As with President Clinton, it depends on the meaning of is - but in a very public way.

Did Bush mean “‘is’ right now?” That month? or in recent years? If the judgement of the SSIC and Lord Butler commission means anything, Saddam was trying to acquire uranium to do so in 1998-9 period.

If three years is too long to say “Saddam is” - then we simply must disaggree. With his persistence can anyone seriously suggest this means we ought to say “Saddam was” trying to do so, but not in 2002?
This judgement strikes me as unserious in any post 9/11 political environment.

Finally, as to number 1, that Saddam “has” WMD and “is rebuilding” such programs. One can parse the latter term; all he needed was for trade sanctions to be lifted, and post-OFF scandal news, we know he did - we know he believed the US would never go to war because he had China and France on the UNSC on his stolen payroll.

In fact, these same arguments were rehearsed by Clinton in 1998 when the US threatened Saddam with war, too. I challend all above skeptic to read any of the released intel review reports and then say “Bush lied!”

On balance, Bush got the judgement of the situation right. The onus is on the context droppers like erasmus to convince people with the perspective of history otherwise, and these three quotes simply don’t make your case.

The best I’ll agree is that erasmus has raised issues about details of what Bush said.

As for what Bush really intended to do through the War against Saddam, I thought in January of 2003, when Fouad Ajami wrote about it in detail in “Foreign Affairs, that all the WMD talk was really about timing. The real goal was and still is about promoting Middle East transformation toward adjustment with modernity and peace with the rest of the world. (Oddly, this fact was most clearly and consisely articulated in the Hindustan Times that February - not in the US press, although Michale Barone came the closest here.)

But Bush couldn’t gain the cooperation of allies by announcing such a radical goal, one bound to fofend Muslim states whose help we needed. Remember Turkey’s role in blocking US plans to invade Iraq from the north? After all, the GWOT is really about the reactionay Islamic doctrine of Jihad that drives ME terrorism - the “unofficial sixth Pillar of Islam,” as Dr. Walid Phares puts it. But “war on terror” is a useful euphemism, and lacking a serious party of opposition, America won’t overty debate who our enemies really are and why we are in conflict with them, as Al Gore’s stupidity amply demonstrates. The Left is the “useful idiot” of terrorists.

Therefore, Bush only spoke publicly about democratization once in the few weeks before hostilities commenced in March. And when PM Tony Blair spoke to the US Congress with the ringing words of Liberty for the ME, in an almost not covered speech late July of 2003, the reality of Iraq’s democratization could be finally spoken. Bush porceede to do just that in August.

Bush’s project gets Jihadism turned inward, forcing Muslim’s to debate what autocracies and totalitarian states otherwise prevent, and creates room for Muslim’s to struggle with modernity. This buys time for them to create favorable preconditions for population explosion, literacy explosion (ergo Jihadism will grow among the masses of young unemplyed men), and inevitable globalization to take hold.

Without this bold step, even Kerry advisor Graham Alison believes nuclear terrorism on US soil is inevitable. Democratization buys time because it takes a lot of work and time. But will it be enough? No one really knows. But a “Hail Mary” pass really is a game strategy when you’re putting points up on the board late in a scoreless game.

I say, answering nuke terrorism at home in the US with our own against Islam is too terrible to contemplate. Therefore I’m thankful for Bush - and I’m thankful to the soldiers I meet in Colorado from Ft. Carson and the Air Force Academy. And like neo-neocon, I used to be an isolationist peace-nik.

I see no seriousness from the likes of erasmus except “gotcha” moments. That’s simply not enough for most Americans.

Because you’re the one claiming OIF was unjustified. The burden of proof is on you to show that there was another, non-military, way to force Saddam to comply with the inspectors’ requirements.

Otherwise, you may consider that reason enough for OIF.

Know thyself and know thy enemy, because you are the other and the other is you.

An Ueberstaat, perhaps?

Don’t you know that we who call ourselves Americans are the inheritors of the Roman Empire, the Spartans at the Battle of Thermopylae, the Prussian military war machine, the English system of limitations, virtues, and laws, the Athenian system of free speech and government, the Roman system of alliances and provinces and Senate vs Plebeians, and last but not least, the Sword and the Chrysanthemum of the Japanese Empire?

3. The little recital of who “we Americans” are the inheritors of might produce gales of laughter, derisive mostly, at Oxford and Cambridge and in the dankest pub in Ireland. Do you ever get out?

Debate? Entering Y’s prose is like wading into jello.
The subject, for a brief and shining moment, was our invasion of Iraq.

hehe, oxford. I think that place is on my nuke list, definitely on the terroist’s nuke list. They are too annoying for either side.

1. Yes, in your case, lots of gas.

The subject, for a brief and shining moment, was our invasion of Iraq.

I see, I see. the subject is obviously gas, gales, and Ueberstaats.

Erasmus still has not answered what he thinks victory is in Iraq or what he thinks being a warrior is. For things that so upset him, it is kind of hard to talk to a person that won’t describe what he is so jacked up about.

That’s about all the gems I could find.

Well, if you had learned something from Neo’s propaganda post, you might have picked up some strategies that could have dinted my armor. But all you got was a bunch of questions about what “victory means”. That isn’t nearly powerful enough either factually, psychologically, or terminally.

You got to get like that death star ray, powerful enough to destroy planets.

People do get uncomfortable when they start arguing with me, cause unlike other people, I don’t become frustrated and hence spiteful, I just look at their thinking, copy it, and then reverse engineer it for my own purposes. Sometimes I put a virus here or there, and they go crazy, but still. That fun doesn’t have anything to do with the real mainframe and cpu comp structs.

Use them and lose.

Naw, we can still use them, we just can’t kill a lot of people with it.

Force packages will be custom designed for particular situations and will be very un-traditional. Q.v., Sec. State’s proposals to reform the State Department.

What he means is that we are cooking up the phoenix program, but until 3,000,000 Americans die, the Phoenix Program stays dead and unborn.

If he doesn’t mean that, I’ll say it for him.

It is revealing you finally got to the “blood guilt” stuff.

I already did a post on that. Where were you? Wait, don’t answer, I think I know.

Others may want to help you.

Hey, I’m not the guy saying America is in deep crack jack straits here. Realize that people, it’s important.

It’s especially important if you die and meet God, cause I want him to know that I’m 110% behind America. Just in case he wasn’t paying attention the first time.

People that can’t win arguments with me, usually stop.

people I can’t win arguments with, usually ends up with 50000X triple long posts.

They’re still with us, they just have their guns trained on their fellow citizens.

Already told her that ; )

And stop insulting propagandists or those interested in the art of propaganda, you will chase them away by saying Erasmus is a propagandist. He isn’t. He isn’t nearly good enough at psych ops.

People who believe in propaganda, are by definition, not propagandists. They are true believers, there is a freaking difference. It’s kinda hard telling them apart cause… well, they like say the same things.

I listened when W and Powell and Cheney told us he had them.

See, See!?

Propagandists don’t believe anything they are told by the government… anything, without double checking and using critical analysis.

I think Erasmus heard, believed, then found he should not have believed.

This is why making one’s own judgements is sooo much superior than relying on the government to do your thinking for you.

Then, they weren’t there anymore.

Omg. It’s like, they are there when they say so, but when they disappear and they don’t say so, then there is a problem. Hilariii ous.

This is like peekaboo. Here we are, no we disappeared, we come back.

Why don’t YOU tell us?

I think all of us now understand what happened the last time someone told Erasmus something.

Somehow, this remains the prevailing sentiment here.

I don’t think America is lucky enough to have you as an enemy.

Are we the only one? Is France one too, or Germany or the UK?

Everyone knows America is not only the most powerful nation in the history of the world, but that we are the greatest nation in the history of the world as well. A lot of people will deny it, but they know deep down that that is the truth.

France sucks, they got race riots, they can’t do shat.

Germany releases terroists for hostages. Very nice, that sure makes them great.

And the UK are 1/3rd of the way into Dhimmitude, slaves of the Arabs, wearing headscarves and crackola like that. Not exactly good news for the citizens of the UK.

Everyone knows it, except the anti-Americans.

America is so great, everyone is our enemy.

There’s always something about America people don’t like. Even me, I can’t believe America let the UN in NY. What do we have nukes around for if we can’t even tell the UN to move somewhere else?

He puts out long, gassy essays that you can’t wrap a thought or response around.

Oh. My. God.

I must have almost perfected my mysterious mind puzzling powers of precognition and telepathetic suggestion.

I must keep working on it, for I shall have the ultimate power in no time!!!

Or not.

But if you poke at him just a little, he comes back with stuff like “blood guilt.”

When I quote Bezuhov, and ask him a question, I don’t think Erasmus deserves to think I’m talking to him. Maybe he does, but that’s just rude to think everyone is talking about you all the time.

I think the discussion results were predictable, don’t you?

It’s always predictable when WMDs vs Propaganda.

Few arguments in the propaganda thread. Lots of arguments in the WMD thread.

Propaganda is a future tool, very important. WMD is old and stale and not important.

Since many of the constructs and arguments have already been laid for WMDs in people’s minds, sort of like the political mind of a guerrila warfare insurgency, there will always be the predictable response.

The propaganda thread is new, something not covered in the memo. So people have to actually think about it, and like new stuff, not a lot of things to be said.

Gee, thanks, and in much, much less than the usual 50 minutes.

But now, back to training my gun on “my fellow citizens,” as Bezuhov claimed at 10:19.

Care to analyze that?

Classic passive/agressive answer.

Well why the hell hadn’t you said so back in ‘03? Now I say to myself: If only greg wirth had said so earlier.

I now retroactively withdrawal my support for ousting a +20 year old brutal pain in the ass, mass murdering, nation attacking, population gassing, terrorist funding, resolution disregarding, sanction ignoring regime.

Down with Bush! Down with Bush!

There. Now I feel superior despite no longer having any real convictions. I can argue and equivocate any point and say; “See? We do bad things too!”, then deflect the issue entirely by expressing a liberal view of how miserable some have it in this country.

Not that it actually solves anything, but does make it easier on me criticize without offering any real solutions.

There was no debate. There can be no debate with Y. He puts out long, gassy essays that you can’t wrap a thought or response around. It’s verbiage.
But if you poke at him just a little, he comes back with stuff like “blood guilt.”
If you’re aching to debate, pick a topic and start. Somebody will respond and then you can keep score, something you seem to like doing. Enjoy.