There’s an interesting wave of fatigue running through the blogosphere. A lot of people are writing about it: The Anchoress is taking time off from politics, although not from blogging; Shrinkwrapped offers keen insight; Austin Bay opines, and Belmont Club weighs in with his trademark deep reflection.
The consensus is that a frustrating frustration is abroad in the land, related to the fact that the “easier” parts of this struggle have ended or are ending. Not that any of it has been easy, but Afghanistan and al Qaeda, and even to some extent Iraq, were clearer targets and tasks than the ones that lie ahead.
Still, they’ve been difficult, and are not clearly over yet, and people are tired. Tired of the struggle, tired of the bloodshed, and in some way tired most of all of the endless haranguing and vicious infighting here in the US.
But now we’re facing even tougher problems. As Austin Bay says:
Al Qaeda is being defeated– it’s not dead but it’s on its way to defeat. Even Al Qaeda’s latest rants reflect an awareness that their great gambit has failed…There is also a growing awareness that Iraq’s long slog may well result in the emergence of a new, more open political system in the Muslim Middle East. It’s still going to take a couple of years for this to be evident –and the worst defeatists and naysayers will either go to their graves denying it– but all of the indicators are there…Iran’s mullahs are demonstrating once again the limitations of UN multi-lateralism– sharp minds on the left and right recognize this. A lot of people staked their hopes for peace and a better future on UN multilateralism. The Iranian situation also illustrates the limits of US unilateralism — how many times can the world’s superpower go it alone?…
I think Iran is indeed one of the biggest causes of blogger fatigue, combined with our lack of agreement on the seriousness of the problem–if we can’t agree on the vicious intent and dangerousness of the Iranian leadership, what can we agree on?
Iran is a topic I’ve tried to wrap my mind around many times, and still it looms, unresolved and seemingly–perhaps–unresolvable. All approaches seem potentially either catastrophic or ineffectual, or both. So fatigue is an understandable reaction; the mind tends to shut down.
For me, personally, I think I faced something of this way back on 9/11, strangely enough. Not the details, of course; I couldn’t possibly have foreseen them. But it came to me that day that we were in something that would be very long and extraordinarily difficult. Here were my thoughts, from my “A mind is a difficult thing to change” series:
[On September 11, 2001], I went to the ocean and sat on the rocks. It was the loveliest day imaginable. I had been alive for over fifty years at the time, and I cannot recall weather and a sky quite like that before. It added to the utter unreality of the day and my feelings. The sky was so blue as to be almost piercing, with a clarity and sharpness that seemed other-worldly. It made it feel as though the heavens themselves were speaking to us; but what were they saying?
All this clarity and purity was enhanced by the fact that there wasn’t an airplane in the sky. There were boats of all types on the bluest of oceans, the sun beamed down and made the waves sparkle, and it all seemed to have a preciousness and a beauty that came with something that might soon be irretrievably lost…
Even on that very first day, as I sat on the rocks overlooking the beautiful ocean that I loved so much, I thought we had entered a new era, one which would probably go on for most of my lifetime however much longer I might live. The fight would be long and hard, and there would be many many deaths before it was over. Perhaps it would result in the end of civilization as we knew it–yes, my thoughts went that far on that day. This war would encompass most of the globe. I had no idea how it would work out, but I knew that we were in for the fight of our lives.
The legal actions of the past–the puny trial after the first World Trade Center attack, for example–no longer seemed like an effective response. It seemed, in retrospect, to have been almost laughably naive. The situation didn’t even seem amenable to a conventional war. Something new would have to be invented, and fast. And it would have to be global. It would have to have great depth and breadth, and it would probably last for decades or even longer.
It’s long, and it’s hard. But fatigue is really not an option, although of course we all feel it. In the deceptively simple yet majestically eloquent words of that wily old leader, Winston Churchill, who knew what long hard struggles were all about, and who knew how to describe them:
This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.
[NOTE: I just wanted to add that the fatigue I’m writing about here is certainly not limited to the blogosphere, nor even to the so-called right. In an earlier (and longer) version of this post, I made that clear, but when I shortened the post it became much less clear.]
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Is this over yet?
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Well I’m just protecting you Sally. You know that talking with foreigners is fraught with danger. Wouldn’t want the NSA to be sifting your rubbish now would we?
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
‘Zounds! I missed one!? Are you sure?
When you wrote: “Besides which he’s an American, not a dirty foreigner”, wasn’t the “dirty foreigner” referring to yourself rather than nconned?
There’s that coyness again, though: I’ve no idea, or interest in, where you are, it’s your country of origin that I was referring to.
And yes, this is to much fun.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Oh dear, you missed one there Silly. I actually said that you were insulting neoconned’s intellect, not mine. Silly you.
Isn’t this just too much fun?
And I am not in Australia,
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Confud: Please post a pointer to said shame.
Well, there was the “dirty foreigner” bit, and your obvious coyness about revealing said country — but if you’re not ashamed of it, glad to hear it. Austrailia’s doing a very creditable job in the global war on Islamism, after all.
Night, night, confud.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Stevie: This one is hilarious
This one’s even better, but you have to be able to see a bald-faced lie as funny:
I did not SELECT those passages, I posted the official Duelfer report summary, as you would’ve known had you bothered to follow the link I provided.
(Here’s that link again, for anyone who’d like to look for themselves, and compare with Stevie’s comment at 9:38 above: http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/Comp_Report_Key_Findings.pdf.)
Oh, and “STUPID & IGNORANT”?? You used to be able to do better than that, Stevie. Why not work on your pimp imitation some more?
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Well, it is one thing to type non sequiters (sic) but it is quite another to point them out and prove them as such.
Your statement that am ashamed of anything is fantasy. Please post a pointer to said shame.
No one can claim to know all about m e “politics” Silly, it is labyrinthine. Even terming it politics doesn’t adequately describe the dynamic of m e power broking.
I do try though when time allows. You should try it. Read someone who you’d probably term a leftie for an insight into the complexity. I note that you have skirted the Mossad-Hamas relationship. How odd! (Scratches chin)
Being called an idiot by a 12 year old whose best friend thinks he is Luke Skywalker and has another ally who is devoted to Korean sex robots isn’t going to lose me much sleep. Tally ho.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
SALLY: Maybe you should stick to your one-liners, Stevie.
This one is hilarious:
“We know for a fact there are weapons there.” - Ari Fleischer, Jan. 9, 2003
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030109-8.html
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
SALLY: Here’s what Stevie carefully selected:
Dear STUPID & IGNORANT,
I did not SELECT those passages, I posted the official Duelfer report summary, as you would’ve known had you bothered to follow the link I provided.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Confud, believe me, your intelligence couldn’t possibly be insulted — and I say that with all due respect. The series of non sequiters in your attempt to “analyze” MidEast politics would make Homer Simpson look insightful.
By the way, I don’t think you need to be ashamed of your own country — most Aussie’s might be a tad embarrassed by you, however.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Sloppy says…
“Whenever you get stuck, you can always crank out some more insults!
Or, and this is just some unsolicited advice, you could take a leaf from your clone, nconned, and throw in the occasional bit of sense and rationality just to change things up a bit, and maybe fool the unwary.”
Actually Silly, it was your 5th column and apologist attempts to insult me (they were insults to my intelligence) that dumbed everything down. I’ve posted several uncomfortable for your line pieces that you’ve chosen either not to respond to or in one case posted a boy’s own brown shirt mini drama piece to “debunk” my statement of fact.
Are you 12?
And BTW neoconned is obviously way smarter than I am, so its a bit of an insult to call him my clone. Besides which he’s an American, not a dirty foreigner. That still counts for brownie points on your planet doesn’t it?
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Likely true, but he doesn’t think to ask why Iran might be the principal enemy in the region. The answer, of course, is that Iran constituted the principal rival to his own plans to dominate the region — after which, as most understood very well, the “secondary” and even tertiary considerations would assume much greater importance.
Thats a big leap and very sloppy actually. “Of course” doesn’t really cut it and displays your sneering pomposity with ignorance. You don’t think that Iran may have been a bit sore and jumpy due to Saddam’s waging an 8 year war against Tehran with massive loss of life (800,000 to 1 million) and huge economic ramifications for the state and the citizenry do you?
Saddam’s arms and munitions (conventional, biological and chemical) were paid for by the good old freedom lovers at Uncle Sam’s ranch and their whacky pals the House of Saud.
More than that, the US directly struck Iranian civilian targets, blasted a civilian aircraft on a scheduled daily flight out of the sky and blockaded its oil exports for Ronnie Raygun’s “rock in the middle east”.
And you wonder why they don’t like you and they feel a touch threatened by the western world.
You see Sally, it is way more complex than you can grasp. In the face of the horrors that these people (and they are human beings not demons) you can’t forgive them their distrust but you blandly seek the boo hoo vote because a lunatic (not connected with either of these nations) organized a few planes flown into New York and Washington. Your trauma is reason enough to unleash war on civilians no closer to Bin Laden than you or I. But in the face of their losses you can feel no empathy or reason to clearly analyse this non crisis.
And, don’t mention selling oil in Euros for gawd’s sake. That, would be way beyond you.
And please, don’t mention the pipeline through Afghanistan. That may look bad too.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Confused: I’m struggling to convince myself this is fun anymore
What, troll burnout!?? Oh, say it isn’t so, confud! Come on, it’s always darkest before the dawn, it’s the end of the beginning, every cloud saves two in the bush, and all that. Whenever you get stuck, you can always crank out some more insults!
Or, and this is just some unsolicited advice, you could take a leaf from your clone, nconned, and throw in the occasional bit of sense and rationality just to change things up a bit, and maybe fool the unwary.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Ah, Stevie — finally had to skim the actual report did you? Looks like you can read, alright, however slowly, but reading comprehension is another matter. But let’s take a quick look:
Here’s what Stevie carefully selected:
Saddam wanted to recreate Iraq’s WMD capability—which was essentially destroyed in 1991—after sanctions were removed and Iraq’s economy stabilized, but probably with a different mix of capabilities to that which previously existed.
Here’s the very next sentence, which he carefully left out:
Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability—in an incremental fashion, irrespective of international pressure and the resulting economic risks—but he intended to focus on ballistic
missile and tactical chemical warfare (CW) capabilities.
Here’s where we see Stevie’s inability to understand what he reads:
Iran was the pre-eminent motivator of this policy. All senior level Iraqi officials
considered Iran to be Iraq’s principal enemy in the region. The wish to balance Israel and acquire status and influence in the Arab world were also considerations, but secondary.
Likely true, but he doesn’t think to ask why Iran might be the principal enemy in the region. The answer, of course, is that Iran constituted the principal rival to his own plans to dominate the region — after which, as most understood very well, the “secondary” and even tertiary considerations would assume much greater importance.
And so he goes, somewhat desperately trying to cherry pick his way through the report in order to find anything that, in or out of context, might help to absolve that old sweetie, Saddam Hussein — like all his ilk, he’d rather put his trust in the islamofascists than in a Republican (gasp!) administration.
Maybe you should stick to your one-liners, Stevie. When you’re stuck, you can always profess your love for the troops.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
You know something Steve?
I’m struggling to convince myself this is fun anymore
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Sally. I don’t expect semi-literate people to be know how to read or write. So that doesn’t surprise me.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
CONFUD - All that animosity between Assad and Saddam for all those decades was a blind…
Yup, just like an earlier version of wingnuttery claimed that the USSR and China were pals depsite the USSR keeping 100 divisions on the Chinese border.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
SALLY -
GET SOMEONE TO READ THIS TO YOU:
DUELFER REPORT SUMMARY
http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/Comp_Report_Key_Findings.pdf
Saddam wanted to recreate Iraq’s WMD capability—which was essentially destroyed in 1991—after sanctions were removed and Iraq’s economy stabilized, but probably with a different mix of capabilities to that which previously existed.
Iran was the pre-eminent motivator of this policy. All senior level Iraqi officials
considered Iran to be Iraq’s principal enemy in the region. The wish to balance Israel and acquire status and influence in the Arab world were also considerations, but secondary.
ISG uncovered Iraqi plans or designs for three long-range ballistic missiles with ranges from 400 to 1,000 km and for a 1,000-km-range cruise missile, although none of these systems progressed to production and only one reportedly passed the design phase.
Iraq Survey Group (ISG) discovered further evidence of the maturity and significance of the pre-1991 Iraqi Nuclear Program but found that Iraq’s ability to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program progressively decayed after that date.
While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991.
In practical terms, with the destruction of the Al Hakam facility, Iraq abandoned its ambition to obtain advanced BW weapons quickly. ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new BW program or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes. Indeed, from the mid-1990s, despite evidence of continuing interest in nuclear and chemical weapons, there appears to be a complete absence of discussion or even interest in BW at the Presidential level.
Addendum to the Comprehensive Report
http://www.odci.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/index.html
Based on the evidence available at present, ISG judged that it was unlikely that an official transfer of WMD material from Iraq to Syria took place. However,ISG was unable to rule out unofficial movement of limited WMD-related materials.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
But Steve J these mensa candidates on here will no doubt spring a huge surprize on you (I can feel a factoid ticking through their little brains as we speak) Baathists!!
They was both Baathists!!!
All that animosity between Assad and Saddam for all those decades was a blind for when the freedom lovers rolled in to wreck the WMD party. And, undeniably they were both Muslim….islamists…(you see where this is heading yet?…..islamofascists. Hurrah, we made it. Praise the lord and pass the tissues. Lap shandies all round.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Read the Duelfer Report and LEARN.
Stevie hasn’t read the report himself, Ymar, or he’d know how bad it makes him look.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
YMAR: The Leftists should get on their knees for supporting the Confederation from European strongholds..
WTF are you taking about?
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
YMAR: What does stevej expect me to say…
I expect you to say that you’ve finally made an appointment with a psychiatrist.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
YMAR: Demands loyalty to a single leader, often to the point of a cult of personality.
What does that have to do with bush?
Pres. Fredo values personal loyalty above competence.
E.g., Harriet Miers, Michael Brown.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
YMAR -
Read the Duelfer Report and LEARN.
You’re constant prattling from an alernative universe is no longer amusing.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
KCOM: That you can’t see or acknowledge the bigger picture others see…
Morons like this guy don’t have a bigger picture:
We have no idea what kind of ethnic strife might appear in the future, although as I have noted, it has not been the history of Iraq’s past.
PAUL WOLFOWITZ, FEBRUARY 27, 2003*
http://tinyurl.com/exk73
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Demands loyalty to a single leader, often to the point of a cult of personality.
What does that have to do with bush?
So, the feisty, tough little investment banker has to rely on the police to get rid of pesky loud teenagers.
It’s better than going over there in the middle of the night to pick a fight with a bunch of drunken teenagers. Less fun, but sometimes it is wise to avoid too much fun.
All talk, all bluster, all scared, all want someone else to do their dirty work and want someone else to pay for their sweaty little waking terror.
You should write for Hollywood, they need script writers like you.
YMAR: Both Blackfive and Michael Yon, believe they got shipped to Syria
Both are wrong.
What does stevej expect me to say, stevej is wrong? Again, we get the feeling we’re back at Kindergarten again going back and forth about who did it. He did it, no she did it.
You gotta feel sorry for people with that level of competition.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
YMAR: There is no limit to what humanity can achieve or how many we can kill. The universe is the limit,
You are insane.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
YMAR: Both Blackfive and Michael Yon, believe they got shipped to Syria
Both are wrong.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
GRACKLE: One wonders what happened to them? Where did they go?
Read the Duelfer Report and find out.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
nyomythus said…
SARAH
MANNERS. I grump when six under 30 types revel on a balcony at three on a Wednesday morning and wake up an entire condominium unit of over 500 people. My friend says I should have just joined the party.
Do what I do — simply call the police. This happen to me from time to time. If they have no respect for you, then return the favor — I keep the number posted on the kitchen door.
So, the feisty, tough little investment banker has to rely on the police to get rid of pesky loud teenagers. And so often that he has the number on his kitchen door.
Heehee, you couldn’t make this up. Advocates nuclear strikes on civilian targets but calls the cops on a regular basis. Classic.
I think this tells us a lot about the collective courage of the neocons. All talk, all bluster, all scared, all want someone else to do their dirty work and want someone else to pay for their sweaty little waking terror.
Post traumatic stress disorder.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Fascism is associated by many scholars with one or more of the following characteristics:
1. A very high degree of nationalism,
2. Economic corporatism,
3. A powerful, dictatorial leader or ruling cadre who portrays the nation, state, or collective as superior to the individuals or groups composing it.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Fascism exalts the nation, state, or race as superior to the individuals, institutions, or groups composing it.
Fascism uses explicit populist rhetoric; calls for a heroic mass effort to restore past greatness;
Demands loyalty to a single leader, often to the point of a cult of personality.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Because in the real world there is a limit to the losses we can take. or is there?
There is no limit to what humanity can achieve or how many we can kill. The universe is the limit, parochial Leftists disagree however. Their horizons are a bit limited.
What would history have made of abe lincoln if the south had been murdering each other for years after the end of the civil war and if union troops and remained taking steady losses for years.
See, this is why I don’t like idiots who paint themselves as multicultural experts(They’re in Europe, they travel, dontcha know) and Americans as ignoramus fools. They don’t even have enough brain cells to rub together to realize the crap they are putting out. If they were aware of the low-intensity terrorism going on in the South with the KKK lynching freed slaves so that they don’t vote *gasp* Republican, they wouldn’t make a fool out of themselves trying to claim that after the American Civil War, everything was peaceful and safe in the South.
President Grant sent in National Guards to crush the KKK, and it worked, up until the time appeasement orientated Presidents reversed it, and then the Democrats gained power throughout the South, and that has been sustained until only recently when the South shook off the shackles of Democratic racism and Robert Byrd KKKness.
When Sherman torched Atlanta, and put the fear of God into those plantation owners, their will was broken. America does not have the benefit of having a Sherman destroy Fallujah, Baghdad, and any other Iraqi city that resisted the Coalition and the banning of Baath party loyalists.
The Leftists should get on their knees for supporting the Confederation from European strongholds, they should get on their knees and beg forgiveness for supporting Democratic terrorism and racist policies. But they won’t, just as they won’t beg for forgiveness when they tried to prop up a corrupt dictatorship feeding off of Iraqi children and women, just cause of spite.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
right then kcome so you can see the bigger picture….
well i am willing to agree with you that Bush was probably making up the rationale behind his strategy as he went along and that some of that is just the nature of things. But at what point will the thing be declared a success? or will he just keep changing the rationale. As it stands it looks very scary to me. Increasingly seems like some low level civil war. The daily death rates of iraqi’s has got to be worrying to all concerned. Also at what point will it be delared a failure and the troops withdrawn? Because in the real world there is a limit to the losses we can take. or is there?
What would history have made of abe lincoln if the south had been murdering each other for years after the end of the civil war and if union troops and remained taking steady losses for years. If illegal imprisoned cobatants had been doing their level best to kill themselves while abe sat home and planned his next war?
The only reason you wish to drag the civil war in, or any other war is to cover up the shaky basis on which this one was fought.
so not a bigger picture sunshine….just another little neo-con one
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
One wonders what happened to them? Where did they go?
Both Blackfive and Michael Yon, believe they got shipped to Syria during the time we were pocking around in the UN based upon Blair’s “advice”.
Look, it isn’t too much of a stretch. The reason why we haven’t found WMDs is because they are in a country Bush has decided not to blow up. Osama is in Pakistan, and we can easily grab his ass with Spec Ops and JDAMs support, but that would have to mean invading Pakistan and destabilizing ONE HUNDRED twenty million Muslim fanatics… That big war.
Just to put things into perspective. Iraq has 25 something million….. Afghanistan has FREAKING 29,928,987!!! Both Iraq and Afghanistan combined wouldn’t make one dent in Pakistan’s population. Now do you know why Osama is hiding out in the Pakistani mountains and why Bush likes Mushareff? You should, 120+ million is A LOT of pocking suicide bombers.
Still, there is no assurance that Bush would go into Pakistan even with the pop, because obviously Bush has not wiped Syria off the map, and Syria’s a push over.
Nice argument, well laid and persuasive kcom. Too bad only people like me will appreciate it, and not steve j. Steve j doesn’t have the mental patience to come up with complete sentences for god’s sakes, I find it extremely doubtful he can comprehend basic logic, let alone advanced reasoning. For some reason, he has chosen the simple expedient of disconnected argumentation. OH, well, his loss.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Steve J: Pay attention because I’m only going to do this once!
That’s very nearly once too many because it doesn’t really address the point I made. No war in the world is or has ever been fought for one reason and one reason only. Just like no space shuttle has ever blown up for one reason and one reason only. It’s a whole train of things that leads to something as complex as either of those events.
As oft-sited as it is, I’ll still bring up the case of the US Civil War because it’s appropriate. Pay attention, because I’m only going to do this once. (Wait a minute, strike that, since it’s incredibly patronizing and pathetic.) Anyway, I think it’s pretty clear that the consensus among historians (note: I am not one) is that Abraham Lincoln went into the Civil War with one overriding goal - to preserve the union. Well, guess what. By the time it was over that was not his only goal and it certainly was not the only achievement of the Civil War.
By the time the fighting was over (and the immediate legislative repercussions of the war were over), slavery had been abolished and many other aspects of American life and the American constitutional system had changed profoundly. I believe I’m right in saying most people alive today believe those changes were much for the better. And I also believe I’m right in saying that there were large numbers of people supporting the Civil War from the very beginning because they believed it would bring an end to slavery, whether that was Abraham Lincoln’s initial intention or not. Life is always more complex than your simple distillation would acknowledge.
Now, as to whether giving the Iraqis the opportunity to speak for themselves was a goal of the Bush administration at the beginning or not (and I would argue that it was a goal), the fact is that some number of people, and I would say not an insignificant number of people, supported the war because they could see the big picture and could see not just the primary purposes of the war, the tactical ones, but also the long-term strategic ones. They knew it would bring change, both predictable and unpredictable, and have consequences beyond merely the WMD question, just as the Civil War brought changes beyond merely the preservation of the Union.
That you can’t see or acknowledge the bigger picture others see, and can’t adjust your thinking to the complexities of real events and the motivations behind them, speaks more about your ability to accurately view the world than it does the people you are criticizing with such a narrow, pedantic, unrealistic view of something as complex as the events we are discussing. Despite the quotes you cited, if the result of the war is that the Iraqi people (and I’m talking about the everyday voters) have a say in their government and their future and are able to provide themselves with a better life than that under Saddam then the war will have accomplished a goal that was the motivation for many people supporting it in the first place. And it won’t just be a lucky coincidence. It will be the result of that support and a logical consequence thereof, just as the Emancipation Proclamation was a logical consequence of on-going political developments and Abraham Lincoln’s evolving political consciousness.
So, to put it plainly, there was not a simple, single reason for the war, there was not a simple, single type of person who supported it, there was not a simple, single expectation of the consequences thereof, and there is not a simple, single criterium on which to judge its success or failure. The war involved many players, positions, and judgments (none of which meshed exactly with each other) and the fact that you can only see an extremely limited subset of them is limiting your ability to even see the arguments others are making. You’re stuck “inside the box”. Think bigger. You can still disagree, that’s your prerogative, but at least look at the whole picture.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Thank you, Sally. The anti-war crowd conveniently overlooks the fact that Saddam had a WMD arsenal at the end of Gulf1 and was required by the terms of his defeat to account for those weapon systems – which he never did. One wonders what happened to them? Where did they go?
The anti-war folks also make much of the fact that Saddam never kicked out the weapons inspectors. The inspectors were recalled by the UN a couple of times because Saddam would not allow the inspectors to inspect. Even the corrupt UN, which we now know parts of which were in criminal collusion with Saddam, wouldn’t willingly participate in such a farce.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Steve J: Try reading the Duelfer Report instead of wingnut agit-prop.
Have a look in a mirror, Stevie, and repeat the sentence above.
Duelfer Report, Key Findings:
Saddam Husayn so dominated the Iraqi Regime that its strategic intent was his alone. He wanted to end
sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) when
sanctions were lifted.
…
Saddam wanted to recreate Iraq’s WMD capability—which was essentially destroyed in 1991—after sanctions
were removed and Iraq’s economy stabilized, but probably with a different mix of capabilities to that
which previously existed. Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability—in an incremental fashion,
irrespective of international pressure and the resulting economic risks—but he intended to focus on ballistic
missile and tactical chemical warfare (CW) capabilities.
…
By 2000-2001, Saddam had managed to mitigate many of the effects of sanctions and undermine their
international support. Iraq was within striking distance of a de facto end to the sanctions regime, both in
terms of oil exports and the trade embargo, by the end of 1999.
And much more in that vein.
Ho, ho, ho!
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
SARAH
MANNERS. I grump when six under 30 types revel on a balcony at three on a Wednesday morning and wake up an entire condominium unit of over 500 people. My friend says I should have just joined the party.
Do what I do — simply call the police. This happen to me from time to time. If they have no respect for you, then return the favor — I keep the number posted on the kitchen door.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
GRACKLE:Steve, given that it is an undisputed fact that Saddam had WMD(because he gassed the Kurds with it), what do you suppose happened to the facilities that produced the nerve agent, the records of its manufacture, the scientists and technicians that produced the gas and the specially modified munitions used to deliver the gas? These are material things and people that all existed. What in the world happened to them, Steve?
Hehehehee! YOU haven’t been paying attention. Here’s what happened:
Gulf 1, inspections, sanctions, Operation Desert Fox.
Try reading the Duelfer Report instead of wingnut agit-prop.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Only the Enlightened Progressives are allowed to answer questions which explains why you never answer any questions just rant madly away
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
What in the world happened to them, Steve?
How dare you ask your betters questions. You don’t ask the questions, you answer them. And you better not lie again about your answers, either. Only the Enlightened Progressives are allowed to answer questions, don’t step out of line again or we’ll find you in contempt of court.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Steve, most of us pro-war types already know that the administration thought they were going to find WMD in Iraq. Most of us do not dispute that.
But why would the administration believe such a thing? One reason would be that Saddam had already used WMD on the Kurds. Another would be that the UN weapons inspectors were prevented access and foiled at every turn by Saddam. Still another was that intelligence estimates by intelligence gatherers in other countries thought Saddam had WMD hidden away.
Steve, given that it is an undisputed fact that Saddam had WMD(because he gassed the Kurds with it), what do you suppose happened to the facilities that produced the nerve agent, the records of its manufacture, the scientists and technicians that produced the gas and the specially modified munitions used to deliver the gas? These are material things and people that all existed. What in the world happened to them, Steve? Did they just disappear – poof! – into a black hole?
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
A friend of mine calls me a grumpy old woman. Mind you, I am still in my 30s and I hardly feel old, and I probably have a few more jokes in my quiver, a few more laughs in my belly, and a few more paper umbrellas than most people because I am rather a positive, upbeat, happy, glass overflowing kind of person. But I am deeply concerned about the future of OUR country. Not Mexico. Not Zimbabwe. Not Cuba. Or even France. I am concerned about the United States of America. Yes, I am grumpy about a lot of things. I write this with PhD, 15 years international development experience and author of 7 books of which two are adpated in over 70 countries.
MANNERS. I grump when six under 30 types revel on a balcony at three on a Wednesday morning and wake up an entire condominium unit of over 500 people. My friend says I should have just joined the party. But I remain incredulous that most people don’t send thank you notes, RSVP, or bring flowers or wine to a party. Most people dump friendships as easily as losing interest in a sitcom. Most people almost find it demeaning to hold open a door for someone or feel their personal space is invaded if some dares smile or talk to someone in an elevator. Is it just me or are we interrupting each other more? Putting each other on hold at the hint of another call coming in? Do you read your e-mail while someone is talking to you? If you don’t want to respond to someone, you don’t, right? You increasingly don’t care what another person thinks about you, do you? Do you say things that hurt others and you really don’t care? What happened to the promise?
CELL PHONES. If you’re in a public place, don’t use your cell phone. Period. Not while standing in line or on line, not while sitting in front of a computer at an Internet cafe, not while waiting to board a plane, not while sitting in a plane, not anywhere near a train unless you are in a crowded car where they cram all of you together in one room to talk on your cell phone, not while waiting for your gynecologist, not while waiting for a movie to begin, and certainly not while waiting for a friend in a restaurant. It is rude. We can hear you. Put the phone DOWN. Didn’t you hear? Congress just passed a law that you are allowed to use your cell phone only when in a grocery store, while parked or driving with a hands-free device, or walking down the street. Oh, that’s right. You missed that. You were too busy talking on your cell phone to read a newspaper.
CULTURE. We worship youth and ignore the wisdom of our elders. We are drawn to faux reality shows to learn how others act in completely unreal situations. We would never see someone over 30 on American Idol because anyone over 30 has no talent left, right? We think Oprah is a new religion and I have a lot of respect for Oprah but she’s just what most of us were like 30 years ago - caring, polite, warm, and wanting to help others.
YOUNG WHITE MALES. Why are they still living with their parents well into their 20s and 30s? Do they care that GenY women are buying homes and adopting children in droves? Their college graduation rates have plummeted. They are being surpassed by girls not only in terms of college enrollment but also in academic performance. And yet they continue to wander listlessly with a straw stuck in their mouth and Razr cell phone in one ear and an iPod in another as they head toward home to plop in front of a violent video game or watch some vapid “reality” show.
YOUNG WHITE FEMALES. Put some clothes on.
VIOLENCE. Do you remember less violent, less corrupt times? Do you think there is a connection between the violence we see and the violence that is committed? I sure do. When are we going to step up and demand that the media stop producing television, movies, and music that is so very violent, and most of it directed at women? I’ve stopped reading articles about the latest person who was found murdered or dismembered. Of course it is tragic but it is not news. It is gruesome and should not be “reported” outside of a local community. Because the more murder and mayhem that is reported as “news”, the more we become accustomed to the violence, the more “normal” it becomes.
GENOCIDE. I grump when our complete lack of interest in genocidal wars allows governments around the world to abuse their people under the guise of sovereign rights, and there is nothing the United Nations can or will do top stop it from happening.
ECONOMY. Our savings rate is the lowest ever since the year before the Great Depression. Gas prices hit an all-time high a few weeks back and yet we have the technology to make alternative fuels - just as we have the technology to make runless nylons and chipless nail polish but what’s the incentive? There is genuine concern about how we are going to pay for the retirement of millions of baby boomers when the Social Security accounts don’t have enough in them. And we had a record budget surplus in 2000, and we are now facing an annual deficit of $368 billion this year and a 10-year projected deficit on $1.35 trillion.
LIBERTIES. I’m grumpy that my e-mails are being read at work and home. I’m grumpy that a stranger could have listened to any number of my phone conversations. I’m grumpy that some low level clerk in the alumni office of where I went to any number of colleges is selling my social security number, mother’s maiden name, and my date of birth. I’m grumpy that three times last year someone tried to steal my identity. I’m grumpy that some cyber-thief in Russia can quietly go into my bank account and take a few hundred bucks without my realizing it.
POLITICS. I’m grumpy that you never hear about how computer-based elections are stolen because techno-wizards go into a database on election night to silent and anonymously change a few votes in a few hotly contested counties to declare the winner of their choice. Not our choice. I’m grumpy that it has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt that the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections, and yet the media won’t touch this story with gloves and a gas mask because it stinks and our very democracy is at stake on this one. Best not to think about it.
LEADERSHIP. And I’m grumpy that the Democrats haven’t a clue about how to do anything about it, and I am fascinated how the Republicans and religious right will continue to dominate politics until this country is brought to its knees. And I’m grumpy that I’d love to step up but I didn’t go to an Ivy League school, don’t keep company at the right clubs, and God forbid that I have an opinion.
THIRD PARTY. It is appalling that we’re all sick of the Democrats and Republicans but not one of us has the courage, creativity, and conviction to start a viable third party. Someone with courage, creativity, conviction, and about ten thousand bucks could start a third party. With the Internet, blogs, social networks, Podcasts, SMS, RSS, and AdWords, it wouldn’t be difficult to up-end the two-party system. But oh. That’s right. We’re too busy watching American Idol and talking on our cell phones at Starbucks to give a hoot about this.
RELIGION. Speaking of God, I am grumpy that we have become so intolerant of someone’s particular brand of religion. I call them “brands” because, really, all religions teach the basic tenets of good behavior. Where are the religious leaders to help solve these problems? And who in their right mind would produce a movie that leads unknowing masses to believe that Mary and Jesus were more than Son and Mother? People are going to start believing the fiction they read and see because the DaVinci Code is just too close to promoting it as fact.
GAY RIGHTS. Am I the only one of the planet who believes that being gay is as genetically-based as being male or female? I believe every day babies are born heterosexual, bi-sexual, or gay. Simple as that for me. So can we please conduct some sound scientific research into this so that we can allow people to live in peace and love, no matter their genetic makeup?
HEALTH. Cancer rates at all age levels are the highest ever. Why? The food we eat, the air we breathe, and the junk we drink. One in three people will get cancer because we are drinking chemical-laden sodas, water, and coffee; eating anti-biotic laden chickens and cows; and do we even LOOK at the ingredient list of most of the things we eat? It is so sad but eating a strawberry is like eating a dollop of Draino. Don’t do it, no matter how delicious it looks. All organic all the time.
ENVIRONMENT. Tsunamis, earthquakes, massive rainfall, hurricanes, more tornadoes than usual, warmer winters, cooler summers, huge spikes in skin cancer. Hey hey! Global warming’s here to stay!
COMMUNICATION. It is increasingly impossible to communicate with immigrants. I don’t sense many seeming to care that they can’t communicate with us, and I don’t sense native-born Americans seeming to care to communicate with them. What is wrong with requiring that English and Spanish be required languages in school? When my brother-in-law speaks English with a heavy accent and is called a French Pig and should return to his home country, we have some serious problems.
And our biggest problem is that not enough of us care to demand that our leaders address these issues. Oh now here’s something really important - cappucino or latte, anyone?
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
JOE KATZMAN: To which the snarky response would be that someone has to stay home to engage the traitors like him on the home front
That’s not snarky, that’s narcissistic delusion.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
KCOM: The point is, they get to speak for themselves for the first time in 50 years.
Pay attention because I’m only going to do this once!
“We know for a fact there are weapons there.” - Ari Fleischer, Jan. 9, 2003
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030109-8.html
THE PRESIDENT: Our mission is clear in Iraq. Should we have to go in, our mission is very clear: disarmament.
3/6/03
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030306-8.html
“But make no mistake — as I said earlier — we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about.” -Ari Fleischer Press Briefing 4/10/03
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/04/20030410-6.html
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Get in line kcom, you ain’t getting ahead of me, I got me a re se veration.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
What school of higher learning, logic and rhetoric did you go to, dollar? I gotta get me some of that!
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Wrong, wrong, wrong. All you ex-hippie born again warmongering warbloggers…kiss my ass.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
If the military guards us from foreign enemies, who will guard the guardians from domestic enemies?
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Pope Ratzo said…
“You really think that your blogs are involved in a war? Does it somehow assuage your guilt that young men and women are actually dying while you’re writing a blog to think that you’re somehow making a contribution to the war on terror?”
….To which the snarky response would be that someone has to stay home to engage the traitors like him on the home front, when they try to stab the American military in the back.
This response is not precisely true, of course - a proper response must start with the concept of ‘citizenship,’ which our friend Pope Ratzo evidently does not understand. But neither is it wholly false.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
A lot of people seem to think that military strength and capability is whatever they see on paper. Rather naive, you know.
Countless times people come up to me and say China’s military is equal to becoming equal to the US, cause they got millions of soldiers.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
I think we - Americans - left and right - tend to idealize the little brown people to the extent that we no longer feel it’s necessary to find out what they actually think. The leftists think they want what the left wants, the rightists think they want what the right wants. The truth is often surprising - and dismaying to those who already have their minds made up.
Ahem…I would say that’s what the elections are for. The problem in Iraq is that no one has asked the people what they wanted for the last 50 years. Saddam certainly didn’t. He told them what they wanted. For the left or the right or anyone else to say they know what the Iraqi people want is crap.
The difference between East Germany and West Germany after World War II is that we implemented a system in West Germany where the German people got to have a say in what kind of country they lived in and the Soviet Union implemented a system in East Germany where they did not. What we did was morally right, practical, and highly effective and any comparison between West Germany and East Germany made that crystal clear. It was the difference between NATO (a voluntary organization of likeminded people) and the Warsaw Pact (a forced collective created by duress).
Well, what I want to see is a system where the people in Iraq have a say. I want them to let us know what they think. I don’t want some leftist American or European telling me what is good for them or what they believe. I want to hear it from them. Dennis Prager often says he prefers clarity to agreement. That’s the way I see the situation in Iraq. After 50 years of Baathism, I would like some clarity. I want to know what the people of Iraq really, really think - whether it agrees with what I think or not, because then we’ll know where we stand, they’ll know where they stand, and the world will know where they stand.
But to find any of that out there has to be a way to gauge the will and the priorities of the Iraqi people. And that’s what the last three years has been about. It’s been about setting up a system where they get to say what they think. None of us in favor of giving them that opportunity ever thought they would be in 100% agreement with us. That’s not the point. The point is, they get to speak for themselves for the first time in 50 years. And those of us who supported their right and their opportunity to do so owe an apology to no one. The ones who should apologize are the ones who would deny them that opportunity while practicing the very same right in their own countries every day.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Steve J: Where do you get this crap?
Excreted from the mouths of lefties.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Psychological Projection
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Steve J.
“Logistics” is not the same as “Mutually Assured Destruction”. Sorry, I’m not jumping in the middle of this discussion — but that seemed a bit obvious.
Let’s not manufacture fatigue.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
YMAR - China does not have the logistics to reach their hand across the globe to the US
You are just a never ending source of fiction.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/icbm/index.html
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
China’s espionage efforts
Just to clarify something to SB about what I mean when I say that China is not a threat to the US. I mean China is not interested nor do they have the means, to destroy the US homeland territory or cause political/culture instability in the US.
It does not mean I don’t think China’s espionage of American technolgoy or anything else, won’t kill Americans. But there is always a difference between those who die in the front lines and the safety of the country itself.
There’s a lot higher chance for war when people have matching technologies and weaponry, but there would be if one side was outclassed by the other. But any war that would occur, would focus and disrupt China’s surrounding terrain. China does not have the logistics to reach their hand across the globe to the US, unlike the US that is.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Neoconned, your posts may not be as ‘violent’ as Ymars are, but they certainly arent any more enlightened or tollerant.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Here’s a different segment of the Left.
Canadians, combination of Britons and French without the economic immigrant problems
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
JASON - the original sin (private property),
Where do you get this crap?
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
YMAR - I learned psychology to destroy them.
You destroyed yourself.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
so neo con let the comment stand as a bit of instruction….i say you associate with violent retards and are tainted by this….i say you pontificate never debate,,,,and you say?
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
oh hell either
1. I am as stupid as you all on here keep telling me….
or 2. yrmdwnkr is a violent little retard
The Left has nothing on me in terms of temper, rage, or righteous anger. They don’t know what berzerker rage really is. It truly is an insanity that eats away at your soul, and unless you break something or hurt someone, it just keeps eating and eating.
that will be me again huh?
neo….nice friends out their in the right wing. Do you ever condemn this stuff or just save all that passionless dry ire for democrats?
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
China is very patriotic and nationalistic. Their civil rights is on par with Russia’s. China’s last war was WWII, which they count as a victory. Russia’s demoralized cause their last war was with us and they lost, and their current one in Chechnya is an ongoing disaster.
China isn’t a direct threat to the US, but China is a direct threat to Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, India, and Pakistan.
Americans don’t reflexively want to waste lives retaking Cuba cause there is no one defending it, but Chinese people will, cause it is a matter of pride and nationalism.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
I think we - Americans - left and right - tend to idealize the little brown people to the extent that we no longer feel it’s necessary to find out what they actually think. The leftists think they want what the left wants, the rightists think they want what the right wants. The truth is often surprising - and dismaying to those who already have their minds made up.
I would be very interested in reading what some Chinese bloggers have to say - assuming they haven’t all been arrested already. China is presumably the only nation that can challenge American power in the future. If the Chinese themselves feel that way, I think it would be refreshing to hear their opinions. That is, I’d like to hear from someone - friend or enemy - who has the confidence not to believe that the whole world world revolves around Washington DC.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
I always believed that it wasn’t very multicultural to ignore the brown and midget people in the rest of the world, myself. Especially when people like Iraq the Model, Indians, Japanese, and Chinese are working so hard to learn English so they can “chat” on the internet.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Y - The only thing I ever read about Indian execution techniques was in Sharpe’s Tiger by Bernard Cornwell - a work of fiction, narrated from an English point of view obviously. In it, the Tippoo Sultan had strongmen who specialized in: a) suffocating victims by squeezing them, b) breaking their necks by twisting their heads backward, and c) driving iron spikes into their heads with bare hands. Very creative…
Interesting reading, your links. Interesting that somebody in India thinks more of the Administration than most Americans do. Context helps.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Go see this, it is funny
This one too
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
To deny that the relationship between India and the United States has been transformed from the cold war suspicion to strategic partnership where the two have deepening mutual interests, as the Marxists do, may be in line with their ideology. But a little analysis would throw up the fact that for the Marxists to retain their power base in West Bengal, the vote bank politics with Muslim fundamentalism has become important. So much so the CPM bosses have turned against their own Chief Minister when Buddhadeb Bhattacharya criticized the madrasas and expressed concern at infiltration from Bangladesh especially in the border districts of his state. Sometime back, he was even forced to eat his own words on the need to reform the syllabus in the madrasas and on their proliferation and funding.
The Left has been successful in creating an environment in this country for several decades now in which anyone who exposes their double talk or finds some virtue in American policies is dubbed a “reactionary” or a “CIA agent” or worse. This hypocrisy prompted the late Piloo Modi, the Swatantra party leader, to come to Parliament wearing a badge that “I am a CIA agent” needling the Left and some Congressmen with their own barbs. But those were days when the Left would refuse to believe that the people in the Soviet Union were resenting an oppressive regime. The overthrow of Communist regimes throughout Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union through popular uprising ought to have given the Left a lesson. But even now they refuse to read the writing on the Berlin Wall as people clawed into it and brought it down.
The Left would have you believe that America’s beef should be localized on Osama only, not a War on Global Terror, not a war on any global scale. This shows you the lie of the Left, it is global, precisely because Marxism, Socialism, and the Left are global. transnational as den beste termed it. It transcends nations, just as jihadism transcends nations.
I suggest you read it all, SB and others.
India eviscerates the Left
It was funny though, I actually came across this in my research on “Indian execution techniques” but I couldn’t find anything on google about staking. But I did on crucifixion, ain’t that funny. All the things it showed up was about American Indians, or Native Indians, or whatever. India doesn’t seem to be very um… popular to the anglo-saxon world.
Not a very good resume for the Left’s “diplomatic, international, UN based” initiatives, now is it.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Did someone say Tookie? This is bad….
IMAGE
Spelled his name wrong, and it’s a pitiful rendering, but if I remember correctly I just wanted to crank this out real quickly that day. Why people defend evil is amazing.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Y - Not sure who I’d call the children and who the grownups in the current situation. Given that our leaders and thinkers are acting like those kids from ‘Lord of the Flies,’ I think my confusion is understandable.
Somebody else’s blog posted the famous quotation from ‘Catch-22:’ The enemy is anybody who’s going to get you killed, no matter which side he’s on.
That pretty much sums up my relationship with my fellow Americans right now.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Btw, the Savior I am refering to is the “American” polygamist in charge of a doomsday cult.
I’m not sure if Islam can get WORSE PR than that.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Most people see polygamy and see the Savior raping little girls and boys, and then see Islam doing the same thing… it is rather hard to tell them that religious beliefs about polygamy play little part in violence.
The exposure of Islam is all about polygamy, sexual repression. This is its images, regardless of anything else. When you say religion, or islamic religion, it means different things to different people based upon their interpretation.
But one thing that isn’t open to interpretatin, is polygamy. Polygamy defacto causes societal destabilization and warfare, internal or external. Islam would be okay if they got rid of polygamy, but that’s not going to happen without a religous war you know.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
say it with me, the response to terrorism is: intelligence, law enforcement and diplomacy. it is NOT throwing bombs blindly at the world and hoping you actually kill a few terrorists (all the while creating even more).
What makes the above a Terrorism-Is-Caused-By-Fighting-Terrorism meme is the “all the while creating even more” phrase. The reasoning goes like this: If you confront a bully you will anger the bully’s supporters, thereby causing them to become bullies as well. So it’s best to find out the bully’s schedule in order to avoid him(intelligence), call the cops who don’t have the resources to find the bully(law enforcement) and more diplomacy, the same old look-the-other-way-and-hope-for-the-best diplomacy that was tried for 30 years before 9/11.
I would also submit that 2 deposals of terror-sponsoring regimes could hardly be accurately described as “throwing bombs blindly at the world,” but we all know about the anti-war crowd and their love of hyperbole.
As for intelligence, the anti-war crowd, if you pin them down, concedes that it’s necessary but then will turn around and do their very best to sabotage intelligence efforts, gleefully revealing secret programs so the enemy will know exactly what the US is doing intelligence-wise. That this schizophrenic behavior could ultimately result in far more deaths than all of the US actions in Iraq put together is apparently shoved back in the recesses of their confused minds where it cannot bother them.
Steve, would you mind explaining the significance of the Wolfowitz quote? Stupid and ignorant old me isn’t certain of your point. Are you claiming that Wolfowitz is wrong about Iraq’s past history? To refresh your memory, here’s the quote:
“We have no idea what kind of ethnic strife might appear in the future, although as I have noted, it has not been the history of Iraq’s past.”
BTW, here’s another link about Saddam’s terrorist connections if you’re interested: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2730253.stm
There’s lots more; all you have to do is Google “Ansar al-Islam” and you come up with a boatload of results. Have fun.
Also, Steve, while violence among Iraqis has recently risen(as opposed to US casualties, which have never been very high) it hasn’t yet risen to the level of civil war. It may or it may not, time will tell. Be patient and you may get your wish; I’m sure the Iranians, as well as the Syrians, are diligently working to foment a civil war, and they just might succeed. While there is certainly ethnic components(read Kurds) and political components(read domestic Baathists, Syrian and Iranian enabled outsiders) to the current flare-up in violence among the Iraqis, the violence is mostly religious in nature, as would be expected in the midst of a religion-driven World War3. It mustn’t be forgotten that the labels of Sunni and Shiite refer to members of opposing religious factions, not ethnic groups.
I want to make it clear that I don’t believe Islam as a religion is particularly or intrinsically violent any more than other religions. Religion itself cannot be violent. But fanatics use religion for their own base purposes, although they themselves may remain blissfully unaware when doing so. Most people do what they want to do(and believe what they want to believe) and find reasons later, which is another way of saying that the human capacity for rationalization has no boundaries. Most of the leaders of terrorist organizations are religious fanatics, from bin Laden on down. It’s a religious world war, Steve, and the sooner this fact is comprehended the better it can be defended against.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Y - Glad you’re able to make sense of this behavior! Maybe you sleep better at night.
I sleep better at night because if I get into a rage, my pain tolerance thresholds increase about 5 to 10X, and things that would cripple me in normal life simply shunts so much endorphines into me I feel like I’m flying amongst the dream of ages. The Left has nothing on me in terms of temper, rage, or righteous anger. They don’t know what berzerker rage really is. It truly is an insanity that eats away at your soul, and unless you break something or hurt someone, it just keeps eating and eating. I don’t have the luxury of the Left, being enraged at every political opponent that crosses my computer LCD screen. It is a loss of control and although it gives a sense of power that is truly intoxicating, the loss of control really bugged me until I learned to control it. One of the reasons people are scared of angry people is this. When people get angry, their civilizational inhibitions like Do Not Murder, Do Not Do Violence, Do Not Violate the Law, tend to disappear. That’s what makes people scared, the idea that you are a fanatic and unpredictable and going to do things that the other person is limited from doing by law and reason. (Iran vs US, sound familiar) I truly do not understand why the Left favors holding their anger in, and using it to power their beliefs, tolerating the loss of control. That makes little sense to me. Is the intoxication of rage and anger so addictive that they are unable to let it go? Perhaps in embracing their darker side when they become enraged, fullfills some need of theirs. I’ve always been scared of that side of mine, before I learned to deal with it. It’s surprising for a liberal indoctrinated kid to learn that he finds violence against bad people fun and thinks their physical blows are just a way to get more anger, endorphines, and adrenaline into the system. Any fake liberal that finds that in him, I guarantee you will have freaked long ago. When that LT. General of the Marines in Afghanistan said that it is a HOOT to shoot muj that slaps their wives around, I was like “that’s my kind of guy”. Nothing the fake liberals taught me, told me how to deal with righteous anger, namely because the people I was angry at in 2004 were the people the fake liberals were praising as freedom fighters fighting the oppression of america. That didn’t seem exactly right, based upon the principles of kindness, compassion, and justice that the Left taught me. There is a difference between me, who gets quite angry at injustices perpetrated upon the weak and the helpless, and people like nnconned who gets angry at Americans. As I said before, I can’t afford to let anger control my actions because it tends up never letting go. For people who have a far less volcanic level of rage when they get angry, perhaps they can maintain it for years on end. That’s the difference. Some people are angry at everyone, all the time, everytime. I focus my anger on those who deserve it, and not try and bully the weak and helpless or those who don’t deserve my wrath. Because once I let the controls go, it’s going to be hard to stop. Perhaps you see that in some of the Left as well.
I respect that you worry about future generations. I respect and appreciate my ancestors who have fought to provide me the opportunities that I have today. However, you have to let the children go eventually. You can’t always protect them, for the simple reason that they will live longer than you. It is best to prepare them for it now, than try to hide the pain of war from them. The WWII generation tried to do that, as I think all generations born and raised in war try to do, but we all know what really happens. People become spoiled if they are protected all the time. We know that in the vaccine world, and we know that in war and peace. I don’t think any one person can do much about it, personally. It is the paradox of the human condition.
The more you provide for and protect a person like a child, the less that child is able to appreciate your sacrifices and the less the child will be able to support him or herself independently in the future. If the world really was a Socialist paradise of peace and kindness, this would not be such a problem. But we all know there are monsters and barbarians in the world, waiting to raid our village when it is defenseless.
I can’t recall if Neo ever wrote anything about the sheer intoxication of berzerker rage, how it can fill you up with a surety of purpose and strength of will. I’m not sure if this is because it doesn’t matter to psychology what anger feels like, so long as therapists can help people control that anger. Or whether Neo never experienced anger as I do, but regardless, rage is very addictive, speaking from personal experience.
Another reason to feel sorry for the Leftists, SB.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
neo-neocon at 11:53
…reminded me of a graphic I fashioned together some short time back, ineffectual garbage I know — but having fun with Photoshop nonetheless:
IMAGE
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
To see you cosily agreeing with yrmdwnkr
If Neo openly stated her disagreements whenever her beliefs came into conflict with me own, I suspect that Neo would have zero time for her own blog. This is, of course, just dealing with one person.
One badly messed up childhood.
my childhood is not particularly different than any other liberal indoctrinated school child of the public education system. Amanie, I believe, had a far worse childhood given that he grew up in revolutionary times and transitions of governments. You should have sympathy for people like Amanie with bad childhoods, otherwise you’re just mean.
Talk to neo she is the therapist and can probably explain how you became such a f**k up.
Neo learned psychology to heal people. I learned psychology to destroy them. I don’t think Neo would like comparing notes, personally. We could always switch roles, but neither of us would be comfortable with the other’s native interest.
I’m just saying, a 12 inch wooden stake is a mercy. You should try it with a short stake. I’m just being sensitive to the Left’s disdain of torture. And given that it is not a Western execution method, like the firing squad, crucifix, and water boying I was almost sure that the Left would appreciate multicultural diversity here given their disdain of Western brutality. But it seems my efforts are futile.
I’m not really so civilized that I feel shame for wanting to do violent and barbaric acts against my enemies. Every man, and yes woman, has a dark side. We are not judged upon what we think, we are judged upon what we do unto others, those weaker and stronger than us. I’m pretty sure terroists aren’t weaker than the women and children they kill, but I could be wrong. Sure, our civilization frowns upon vigilantism and violence, but like any compulsion it can be overwritten. The military themselves could not exist if they could not train civilians to shoot and kill on orders. The compulsions people have when they grow up in a civilized and peaceful society can indeed be overwritten and bypassed. The problem is the opposite. How do you get crazy and violent people like the rapists in Iran to stop the violence? If violence and vigilantism is always wrong, and always frowned upon, and could never be overwritten then Flight 93 wouldn’t have crashed in Pens.
and you get trolls because it is what you deserve.
I’ll remember that, when I see the teenaged girl hanging from the execution stand in Iran, executed for being raped. I’ll just remark to her spirit that Americans believe she got what she deserved and so did the neocons who might have saved her like we saved Raj in Afghanistan. “We don’t want to get our hands dirty executing an innocent man like Tookie”. *shakes head*
So when you sit smugly in new england sticking up for all the
I’m in the Bible Belt. Not with Neo in New England.
What defines a movement like neoconservatism and marxism is who makes up the movement from the ground up to the leadership. Sure, some movements attrack rapists and people who like to have multiple wives like polygamists and Islamic fundamentalism. But even the worst philosophy can act for good ends if the people in it are good.
It is after all not ideas and philosophies that are evil or good, but the people who live and breath and act in real life that produce good or evil. On this score, if neo-cons have enemies like nnconned, then that’s a good thing.
When Jimmy Carter is on your side, that might not be so such a good thing though. I think Bush lost the port deal the moment Jimmy Carter supported it, personally. To many, that was just too much.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Y - Glad you’re able to make sense of this behavior! Maybe you sleep better at night.
I was raised by a classic jarhead; maybe that explains my dismay at Americans’ current behavior. I expect ‘gung ho’ in a crisis - what I see is a bunch of civilians doing what civilians do best: scampering around in all directions, gobbling like frightened turkeys. Even after more than twenty years living outside the fortress, I still have to remind myself that this is how things are really supposed to be. Democracy works, but it looks like a clusterf**k.
On the other hand, I’m not wired tightly enough to be an Honor A type. I enjoy peace and quiet and would like to live a long and comfortable life with minimal interference from the government, religious fanatics, and fellow-citizens who think they’re better than I am and are therefore entitled to tell me how I should live. Content to work at my trade, not looking for trouble, but ready if trouble comes looking for me or my loved ones. The word “yeoman” comes to mind. Seems to express a balance between career soldier and completely hopeless chickenshit civilian. Of course, I’ll never know for sure until I’m tested - which I pray I’ll never be since in my case it would involve fighting other Americans.
I think, though, that the real reason I feel anger and shame rather than pity for my fellow citizens is that I’m afraid their self-indulgent antics will one day lead to exactly that kind of test. Maybe not for me, but for a lot of young people who don’t deserve to pay the price for our foolishness. And the assholes who do most of the screaming just can’t see it coming.
As usual…
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
kcom: see this post of mine for the Left’s, and some liberals’, view of the military.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Jason H. Bowden: My policy is a bit different. I delete at times and allow to stand at other times. I let some of it stand to illustrate the mindset of this particular form of “opposition.” I think it can be quite instructive.
Also, of course, I’ve never deleted real arguments, couched in a respectable and thoughtful approach, from the opposition. Anyone who reads this blog for any length of time knows I welcome that sort of commentary.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
In their minds, neo-cons stand for if not fascism, then at least totalitarianism. Just look at the comments talking about deleting comments. — these are the things that I loathe and can not tolerate at all and why I can not stand politically with liberals. I reference to myself sometimes in “neo-conservatism” terms because we don’t support nor enable these things.
[I think neo-neoconservatism might be distinct from the earlier use of “neoconservatism” and how this title or description may evolve is still avant garde]
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Oh, but if the soldiers support the war, their views become irrelevant as well. And it doesnt stop the left from marginalizing the sacrifices of soldiers.
And it doesn’t stop the Left from patronizing soldiers, either. Or infantilizing them. To paraphrase: they’re just dumb kids who couldn’t get a job anywhere else and don’t know any better.
Richard Belzer
This despite the fact that many are college graduates, many are much older than teenagers, and every last one is a volunteer.
So to sum up: You can only support the war if you are a soldier. And once you are a soldier you’re just some dumb slob who doesn’t know any better, or is forced to toe the party line, or is a baby killer - so your views can be safely ignored.
Wow! How convenient is that!
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Oops. A case of premature post-ulation.
Anyway, to take up where I left off, I can only laugh at the aburdity of the phrase “NOT throwing bombs blindly at the world”. Because I don’t remember any bombs landing blindly in Sweden, or Uruguay, or the Dominican Republic, or Thailand or Burkina Faso, or the Maldives, or even France. Perhaps there will be a cruise missile strike tomorrow on Zambia, but somehow I doubt it. I’ll keep my eyes open, though, because I have it on good authority (or at least self-proclaimed authority) that it’s happening…
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
say it with me, the response to terrorism is: intelligence, law enforcement and diplomacy. it is NOT throwing bombs blindly at the world and hoping you actually kill a few terrorists (all the while creating even more).
I could say it with you, but not without breaking out laughing. Particularly the second part, “it is NOT throwing bombs blindly at the world”.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
neoneoconned–
My preference is to delete morons whether I deserve them or not, but hey, this isn’t my blog, and I don’t make the rules here.
Post on my blog again, neoneoconned, and you’ll witness the same predictable result. ZOT! Consider yourself OWNED!
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
By their friends shall ye know them
And neo your friends are a smug, nasty, violent little collection. To see you cosily agreeing with yrmdwnkr, an unpleasant individual endlessly advocating violence;
Even the meanest and baddest man around will die screaming in agony if you shove a 1 foot wooden stake up his ass. nice guy huh?
and while we are at it yrmdwnkr the weaknesses in your psyche hang all over this blog. One badly messed up childhood. Over authoritarian parents and bullying at a guess. Talk to neo she is the therapist and can probably explain how you became such a f**k up.
and you get trolls because it is what you deserve. You don’t debate you ponitificate and all critical visitors to this site are immediately attacked as stupid, trolls, spammers etboringcetera.
So when you sit smugly in new england sticking up for all the right wing policies of an oil driven right wing president yet claiming not to be right wing, just think about all the people you agree with….cos they all are. And so are you, it is a natural part of the aging process so don’t worry.
Elvis Lives
Long Live the Trolls!
…..and they are going to
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Steve J–
I agree with you 100% that socialism has all of the properties of religion. Consider the beliefs that socialism entails: self-sacrifice, personal redemption, anointed saints, the Garden of Eden (the noble savage), the original sin (private property), worship of the poor and the ignorant, sacred texts, prophecies of the always imminent capitalist apocalypse, and promises a socialist heaven on earth. Comte de Saint-Simon’s last work in favor of socialism is not surprisingly called The Last Christianity.
Note that Intelligent Design was shot down in Pennsylvania by a Bush appointed judge. Also note that the fanatics trying to save Terri Schiavo had their case dismissed by — a Republican judge, a southern Baptist nonetheless!
I’m sorry. I’m disrupting your fragile worldview with *facts*. Carry on sloganeering if it makes you feel good — anything but *thinking*.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
One of the reasons why I don’t worry about the school yard taunting is because it’s an indication that they really don’t know who they are talking to.
The dangerous people are those who see into your soul and seek out the weak points in your psyche and technique.
You can kill a true believer, but you can’t make him stop short of killing him. What you can do, is to destroy his internal beliefs. Once you do that, his identity matrix shatters, and then it’s all over for him.
Senseless and random violence like what the terroists use or what mobs use, are unprofessional. They are crude, rude, implements of bludgeoning. No Art, to the Art of War. Not a big fan of art, but there’s beauty in lots of things still.
You really have to feel sorry for people like steve j. They’re reduced to one word phrases. Look at the above recently written comment if you don’t believe me. Stupid and ignorant seems to make up stevej’s use of wording by at least 25% total. These are the people that’s going to come and assassinate my belief structure? These are the people who are going to taunt me into getting mad and showing them I’m a coward? Who are they kidding.
*shakes head*
It’s not even propaganda. I could respect propaganda, a good propaganda project designed to persuade people like Al Qaeda talking about the strong horse vs the weak horse. But it doesn’t even rise to the “persuasion” level.
There’s no wall. A wall you can hit. This isn’t even an obstacle. It’s a bunch of bees that you can’t get rid of. Annoying perhaps, even fatal if you are allergic as the West is allergic to pride and patriotism in Western values.
As Bush said, Bring it On. Bush’s polls would be a lot higher if he had kept repeating it every year and every month.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Marxism is thus the most radical of all reactions against the reign of scientific thought over life and action, established by Rationalism.
Young Earth Creationism. Intelligent Design.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Ymarsakar: I agree that there’s something about the word “neocon” that’s like waving a red flag in front of a bull. The comments about deleting comments are about on the level of playground taunting, rather than anything substantive about left or right. I’m on the far right when it suits them, and on the left when it suits them. Of course, the truth is I’m neither.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
I think it has something to do with your name Neo, that they think you’re far right.
In their minds, neo-cons stand for if not fascism, then at least totalitarianism. Just look at the comments talking about deleting comments.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
I dont care that anybody’s viewpoints are to the left of mine, just be sane. Christ, thats all Im asking.
With some of the comments here, I can see how anybody could get burnt out. Its like talking to the wall.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
nyomythus: I’m an independent, too. I don’t think I’ll ever join a political party again. I consider myself liberal in many ways, but I no longer wish to align myself with what the movement has become. Of course, liberals now consider me the far right. Go figure.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
It was really funny remembering the promises of communism, in which they said “isn’t it worth to fight against oppression to get bread”? Well, in the end, the communists really didn’t get any bread now did they?
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
France walks the walk of tolerance. But you tend to get jihad and riots. Britain walks tolerance, but then you tend to get home grown suicide bombers.
Don’t think most Americans would trade their lives in for fake tolerance. It’s not even real tolerance, it’s actually fake. Most French hate the immigrants and don’t see them as French cause of whatever reasons.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
I’m coming from the same angle Jack. Although I have shaken the Democrat tag, I still can’t refer to myself as a Re ree rrrrrre …publican, Republican [i did it!] I’m comfortable as an Independent — straight ticket Pro-American Conservative. And personally I very liberal, I’m an artist, I work in academia – I mean gah that’s Liberal. All of our freedoms are simply best secured under a greater Conservative society. The Left talks tolerance, but they sure as hell don’t walk tolerance.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
FWIW, I consider myself an ex-leftist and no small part of that change was discovering how irrational and unpleasant my leftist comrades were in the face of disagreement.
I still say I’m a liberal in the classic and dictionary senses of the word.
I remain a registered Democrat because I can’t quite give that up yet.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
By the way, the Left’s reaction to what I say and have said, is like their reaction to Amanie. THey tend to think it’s some kind of propaganda trick like they would do, pure rhetoric and for show like they would do.
Unfortunately for them, they don’t really have the multicultural understanding to comprehend true believers. Which is what Hitler, patriots, Von Stauffenberg, Amanie, Massoud in Afghanistan, and Komeini are. We are all true believers, the only difference is in what we believe in.
It’s is incredibly amusing to hear the Left talk about religious fanaticism and how many wars were started about religions, and then you see how they walk the walk in Real Life.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
it makes no sense
it is beyond mockery
my god two lunatics
5:26 PM, May 17, 2006
See what I mean? Tell them the truth, from the heart, without ridicule, and you will realize the quality of difference between you and them. For people who are confident of their beliefs, their cause, and their country what need we have for lying to our enemies and opponents when they can’t even get their propaganda straight? Even if you tell the truth, they’ll never believe you. They can’t. It would terminate their identity matrix. You ever tried to terminate your identity matrix? You would get as much success as trying to choke yourself by holding your breath. Doesn’t work, based upon one principle, self-survival instinct.
The lies and the propaganda spewed by the jihadists are necessary, because nobody would freely choose to live under them as opposed to live in the US of A. If you can’t win the argument fairly, then you bring out the baseball bats and the crow bars. Time to break a few knees and hands. The jihadists believe if you rape a few women, then hang them when they talk to the police, everything will be peachy. They got another thing coming.
By the way. Speaking about loonies. The only loons are those who are so paranoid they will either fabricate a blogger profile link to make people think they are really registered or people who simply hide their blogger profiles out of paranoia (higher chance for this one since it is consistent).
Here you go, nnnnnnn’s profile link.
Nothing to see here, move along. Stage magicians might be impressive, but that doesn’t mean they can kill you with magic.
May 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
No, I am not suggesting Jack or you, SB, are leftists. But it was a distinction that I felt had to be made. Regardless of your political positions or belief, I believe it is wise to exclude unintended targets from any overt incendiary statements.
When you (I) choose selective attacks, you must also selectively choose your targets with as much care. In all honesty, I don’t have any solid beliefs about whether SB or Jack Trainor are Leftists, but I did know that what I was refering to did not include you all. I believe as Bruce Lee did, that forms and patterns are as much a hinderance as it is an aid to organization and learning.
I have no problem with you, SB, talking to Spank. If people want to argue and debate, I can only suggest, giving a command you know won’t be followed is something you learn not to do when studying military history.
About shame, I was just asking because I didn’t know what you were really asking. When people ask me questions, I feel it is important to know their reasoning and their beliefs that power their questions, since knowing why they ask helps knowing what to answer with.
Like with liberal societies, I function best on maximum amount of information. A lack of such information, can cause problems for me. Not least of which is misunderstanding or jumping to the wrong conclusions.
About the disgrace part. My sense of America is perhaps contextual. Meaning, I know there are people with this kind of honor code. They keep their word, even to those criminals who violate their word all the time. Meaning, in negotiating with hostages, Honor Type A person would keep his word even when he knows the terroists do not. Perhaps you are of that persuasion.
Me, I operate with slightly different rules of conduct. It’s still an honor code of course, but it is contextual. Meaning, it is like the virtue of honesty. You are honest with your friends, but I see no problems lying to our enemies. As they say, the Bill of Rights is not a suicide pack.
How this applies to this situation is rather simple. I don’t see it as disgraceful because I don’t expect dishonorable people to fit into my expectations of behavior. I expect people of honor to act with honor, and if they do not, then that is a disgrace. People who never have had any honor or loyalty in the beginning? They’re outside the social group, the statistical curve, so to speak.
It’s a tribal behavioral pattern. Not high ideals. The French really made a big deal about high ideals being the core of honor, the Age of Chivalry. But what I’m talking about really is more like a Wild West kind of behavior. If Indians attack women and children, and mutilate the dead, well I probably wouldn’t give them Geneva Conventions protection. And the Wild Westerners did not, as you can imagine. Blood vendettas, remember.
Do you see, most of the institutions we have in the 21st century, are conditional honor types. Not Absolute hardline honor types.
The Honor A types featured by Honor Harrington by david weber is very rare. You’ve see it in the Belisarious series as well.
The world would be a better place if everyone behaved according