One, two, three: What are we fighting for?

AdamReed's picture
Submitted by AdamReed on Tue, 2006-10-03 23:10

I was an early advocate of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, under the impression that our government would not sacrifice American and allied soldiers without a coherent plan for achieving a permanent victory. In the case of Iraq, it turned out that Bush was sacrificing American and allied soldiers to establish another Islamic Republic, with Muqtada al Sadr and other theocratic goons taking orders from Iran in the new US-imposed government of Iraq. Of all possible outcomes, our soldiers were sacrificed for the one outcome most inimical to the freedoms and lives of civilized men.

Now for the next export of faith-based government, this time to Afghanistan. It may be, and I hope that it is, just a "trial baloon:" US senate majority leader Bill Frist supports efforts to bring the Taliban and their allies into the Afghan government.

Bush's use of Frist, rather than Rice, to float the idea may indicate that this is not yet policy - and that Rice is against it. I hope that she is, and that she prevails. But still, we must face the fact that "American Taliban" is no longer either a caricature or an oxymoron. The world is being made into a more dangerous, more evil place for us by people like Frist and the head of his party. One, two, three, what are we fighting for?


( categories: )

Americans in Fear, Not

Jeff Perren's picture

"The 'current environment' must refer to the constant state of fear in which Americans now live." Kevin 10/18/2006 17:03 (PST)

I lived in California until a few years ago. I now live in Northern Idaho and visit Washington and Montana regularly. I just came back from a two week trip to NY, DC, Boston, and New Hampshire.

I've yet to find Americans living in 'constant fear', either of the Federal Government, or of the terrorists. (It would be better if they were a little more concerned than they are, actually.)

I rode airplanes, trains, subways, and buses to and within (most of) those cities. I didn't see anyone fearful of traveling on any those. Nor did I see fearful people while walking along the streets of NY, DC, or Boston, nor at the shopping malls, museums, nor anywhere else.

As concerned as every American, and every freedom-loving person everywhere, should be about fighting any form of oppression or terror activity, I can tell you with a high degree of confidence that almost no one in Idaho (I extrapolate here from a wide acquaintence, plus monitoring the newspapers) has any fear whatsoever of being attacked.

I'd suggest you visit the U.S. and see for yourself, but we already have too many leftists.

Kevin says:

LWHALL's picture

BTW, I believe that the Democrats are no better that the GOP,

That's about as funny of a thing as I have heard on here lately. You act like a (Dem)duck and you talk like a (Dem) duck, so if your not one you are definitely missing your calling and I am sure they would welcome you with open arms. Maybe you and brother Jesse could share a bunkbed and scheme of new ways to beat the productive out of their money. By reading what you write, I believe you would fit right in with that bunch.

L W

Typo

Fred Weiss's picture

That should have said, "So the left had better prepare themselves for MORE hand-wringing and hair-pulling in the years and decades to come." Hopefully the hand-wringing and hair-pulling won't be by me. Smiling

As for "voter fraud", to the best of my knowledge nothing has been proven and it amounts to nothing more than Democrat paranoia and sour grapes. Furthermore they are the last ones to be complaining since the *known* cases historically (Chicago being the most notable)have been entirely on their side.

But for political hypocrisy what I saw on a documentary last night really takes the cake. It was one of the Discovery channels shows on "Decisions that Shook the World" and this one concerned Roosevelt's blatant lying to the American public - to the possible extent of justifying impeachment to the extent that he was in clear violation of the law - concerning his continued proclamations that he would keep us out of the war while at the same time he was building up American military might and openly and massively supporting Britain in the period leading up to our entering the war (including extensive correspondence with Churchill throughout this period which was kept secret and which would have blown-up his administration if it had been discovered). Arguably of course what he did was right and in the country's interest, but to hear Democrat after Democrat - including Walter Cronkite, Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter - apologizing for his lying in the light of attacks from the very same people against Pres. Bush for precisely the same thing was truly astounding. (And in Bush's case it is arguable whether he actually lied. There is no doubt that Roosevelt did.)

Blather? Fred..

Kevin's picture

Could it be that you are speaking "WM" and applying "LW" thinking?

"If the 20th Century was the left's and the statist's, the 21st will be ours.
Incidentally, I believe it is unstoppable and inevitable."
The above makes sense, BUT...

"So the left had better prepare themselves for my hand-wringing and hair-pulling in the years and decades to come." !!!

BTW, wishful thinking methinks! Either way the USA is screwed!

As for vote fraud, the Republicans won that "battle" hands-down.

This guy could have had a little something to do with it in Ohio.

Ohio's Republican Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell boasted of helping "deliver" Ohio for President Bush and said he was "truly pleased" to announce Bush had won Ohio even before all of the state's votes had been counted in his own fundraising letter.
He also was the chief election official for Ohio, a supposedly nonpartisan position.

Crooks, the lot of them!

More Kevin Blather

Fred Weiss's picture

It's not just the "Democratic Underground" site. It is dozens of Democrat and other leftwing sites which are still obsessing about the 2004 election. In fact I understand HBO will be showing a Michael Moore style documentary, i.e. a hatchet job - not coincedently prior to the election - which will raise all of these questions anew, including I suppose the ones surrounding the Gahanna, Oh discrepancy. As for Gahanna, Oh, it is a known and acknowledged glitch and was factored into the official Ohio recount - a recount which confirmed Bush carrying the state by over 100,000 votes.

Whatever glitches may have occured - and Democrats aren't quite as eager to acknowledge when they occured in Democrat districts and where the vote favored Kerry - Bush won the popular vote by a margin of over 3 million. This was not a close election where vote tampering here or there would have made much difference either way.

The real issue is that the Democrats had simply accepted it as an inherent truth of nature that the wave of history was on their side, that the leftwing agenda here and abroad was unstoppable and inevitable. Marx and their Marxist professors in college had promised it.

The clear evidence that the political landscape is shifting against them has made them crazy. They may make sizeable gains in these midterm elections here in the US, but in my view that will simply be a "one-step back" in an overall trend going against them both here and abroad.

If the 20th Century was the left's and the statist's, the 21st will be ours.

Incidentally, I believe it is unstoppable and inevitable. Smiling

So the left had better prepare themselves for my hand-wringing and hair-pulling in the years and decades to come.

Are you related to WM?You

Kevin's picture

Are you related to WM?
You may not know but the 'election" I referred to was in 2004, that should have given you a clue.
Plus, did this not make it clear?
"I can see why someone like you would vote for this idiot! (twice?)You really are a slow learner LW."

As you seem to have problems with comprehension, being a slow learner, I will in future spell-it-out.

BTW, I believe that the Democrats are no better that the GOP, that bunch of yellow-bellied weaklings were so afraid of being called un-patriotic,un-American, that they rubber-stamped the King George bullshit, which has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths.
Just your kind of folks, eh!

PS Is that "simple" enough for you to understand?

Kevin

LWHALL's picture

I don't believe even you are *that* dumb. However just in case you missed it, he ran in two different election years.

By the way aren't you being missed on the Democratic Underground site?

L W

LW voted twice...

Kevin's picture

Not a surprise to me, were you living anywhere near Gahanna in Ohio?
(If not, maybe you could move there for the next "election.")

This infamous precinct in suburban Columbus registered 4258 votes for George W. Bush where just 638 people voted. The blessed event occurred at a fundamentalist church run by a close ally of the Reverend Jerry Falwell.

How could you not be completely happy with King George?
He gets his "instructions" from God, never tells a lie! and utters the most profound statements, as in:

"I'm also not very analytical. You know I don't spend a lot of time thinking about myself, about why I do things."
—Bush, reassuring us that the wartime president of the most powerful nation on earth does not think too much

I can see why someone like you would vote for this idiot! (twice?)You really are a slow learner LW.

Fred , frightened Fred...

Kevin's picture

I agree that the S.S. should take, seriously, threats to King George - there must be many millions of Americans who hold him in contempt. In light of such potential threats, one would assume that the 'absolutely absurd' would be ignored.

The "current environment" must refer to the constant state of fear in which Americans now live.

The incident I mentioned 'is' indicative of a general pattern, Fred has chosen to ignore the "mountain of evidence" which has been presented over the last six years, culminating in the recent Military Commissions Act. He refuses to open his eyes to the fact that the USA is fast becoming a Fascist State. Until he observes his neighbours being loaded onto trucks and railway cars, Fred will fail to 'see' but at that point he will be too afraid to speak out.

Fred, again finds the need to introduce Israel, impling that the 'factoids' (FACTS) I presented in a recent post, were not accurate - they are and are verifiable, Fred of course will do the usual, stick his fingers in his ears and start "humming."

"zero in on one mistake or flaw and blow it out of all proportion to its actual significance" !!!
How did you manage to say that without choking on it?
Tell me Fred, how deep a hole have you been living in this last six years?
Bush et al have constantly lied, blown everything out of proportion and are then defended by 'useful idiots' such as Fred.

Thought for the day: "They admire those who tell them the biggest lies and despise those who tell them the truth."

On threats to the President

LWHALL's picture

Fact one- I voted for Bush, Twice.

Fact two- I am a long way from being happy with his job performance.

Fact three- When you voice or otherwise put up material which calls for the death of the POTUS then you can expect a visit or an investigation from those who are charged with protecting his life. This is true whether he is a Rep, Dem, or Independent. Kids are perfectly capable of killing others(see Columbine), and threats of any kind should be taken seriously.

Whether the words that were supposedly spoken to the mother are in fact the truth is left open for discussion, and seeing as how this report has a decidedly anti-Bush slant to it as evidenced by the heading: "Bush’s S.S. Grills 14 Year-Old", I would put no great stock in it's accuracy.

Kevin, your agenda is clear as evidenced by your many ABB posts and they are now leaning heavily to the superfluous.

L W

A Thousand Cuts

Fred Weiss's picture

The Secret Service is obligated, as part of the basic statement of their purpose, to investigate all threats against the President's life. I'm imagine that no more than a tiny handful of the cases they investigate represent actual serious threats. The problem is that it's not possible to be sure which ones those are until it is investigated.

In the current environment, when the negligence of our intelligence agencies has been in the forefront of the news, I assume they are being extra careful - possibly even to the point of pursuing the absurd - to eliminate even the most remote possibilities.

But you can notice a pattern here with Kevin's mode of operation. This one single incident is supposed to be taken as part of a more general pattern and Kevin possesses a veritable cornucopia of such incidents and other isolated, out-of-context factoids in regard to any of the issues toward which he chooses to direct his propaganda. He can literally drown you in them. It's pretty standard propaganda methodology and it's a basic principle of the art of the smear at which he is expert.

You know, it is possible to caricature anyone, even a genuine hero or "saint". Look for example at what they have done to the Founding Fathers. All you have to do is exaggerate or zero in on one mistake or flaw and blow it out of all proportion to its actual significance - or elevate that mistake or flaw to the equivalent of their accomplishments. We all know how that is done toward Ayn Rand. Or toward ARI, e.g. Robert Campbell, or ARI scholars, e.g. Fred Seddon.
Well, that's what Kevin does toward the United States and Israel. It is precisely the same thing.

It's of course slimey and disgusting. But if you can't attack the good at the level of general principle, you revert to the level of the ultra-concrete bound, i.e. you do it by means of "death by a thousand cuts" - or as many as you think you can inflict and get away with.

Wm, the patri-idiot!

Kevin's picture

The S.S. took the "threat" so seriously that they did not know that the "art" was removed by the child, last summer. As the article suggested, the "swoop" was designed to "send a message," don't be critical of King George.

As for the S.S. you know, if they take THIS seriously, all I can think of is that they are as paranoid as you and others of your ilk.

Proof positive that you are in need of deprogramming.

PS it's encouraging to see that 13 year olds can see that which you refuse to, good for her, sad for you.

Funnyman, Strawman

I would expect the Secret Service to consider any threat on any President dangerous. That is their job and the ones I know take it very seriously.

Wm

Mr Cathcart..

Kevin's picture

"He can come over to my house and fuck my sister."

What, again!
Does she "work" a particular street corner these days or does she now run the business from home?

BTW, how are you finding her, do you prefer her with her teeth in or out?

On second thoughts I can think of a better use for $9.80 + gst.

Thanks for the offer.

(for pics go to www.aquickyfromcathcart.com)

Well, what do we got here, a fucking comedian

Chris Cathcart's picture

Kevin the Joker. I admire his honesty. Hell, I like him. He can come over to my house and fuck my sister.

*POW*

Wm, see if you get

Kevin's picture

a laugh from the following,(THIS is where you live!)

Bush’s S.S. Grills 14 Year-Old

By Stephen S. Pearcy

10/17/06 "Information Clearing House" -- -- Two super-sized adult male U.S. Secret Service (“S.S.”) agents banged on the front door at 14 year-old Julia Wilson’s home last Thursday during school hours, but Julia wasn’t home. Predictably (except to the S.S. agents), the straight-A student was in her microbiology class at school.

But Julia’s mother, Kirstie, was home. When she opened her front door, she was a little taken aback, not only by the sizes of the agents and the official nature of the visit, but also by their questions and demeanor after she welcomed them inside.

The S.S. agents told Kirstie that they were investigating her daughter’s role in setting up a MySpace Web page. In particular, they were troubled because the Web page included the creation of art (pictured above) that the agents felt was extremely threatening to the life of the President of the United States.

The agents told Kirstie that since the art included the words, “Kill Bush,” and since it was accessible to anyone on the Internet, there was a very strong likelihood that someone—possibly a terrorist from a foreign country—might see the image and be inspired to act upon it. Thus, they reasoned, even if Julia only meant to be funny, the art put the President in grave danger.

For full story and "offending" picture, go to: http://www.informationclearing...

When you stop laughing, realy give the article some thought and then start crying for that which is yet to come for you and the rest of your countrymen/women.

Kevin the Joker

Kevin I laugh at nearly every line you write.

Wm

Wm, I knew I could not get past you...

Kevin's picture

I know that humor probably needs to be basic and obvious for you but you seem to have missed the fact that my reference to the "one stone" was intended to be a joke. (I thought it was funny!)

Your comment also bears out my contention that,If, in order for Craig to retaliate, he needed to be effected in a dramatic way, such effect would have prohibited (incapacitated) him from taking "shoot to kill" action.
Therefore he is "not apologising" for an attitude which he does not have.
(makes sense to me!)

Sticks, Stones, and Kevin

I would gladly demonstrate the potency of a single, well placed stone and I find your denial of its strength humorous.

Wm

Craig...

Kevin's picture

You say that the 'agents' are not entitled to claim legitimate combat status under the conventions.
They see themselves as legitimate as any people who try to drive out those they see as invaders of their country. There are many examples of such "resistance" throughout history, would you suggest that these also were not "legitimate?"

The Palestine I refer to is the same Palestine which Ben Gurion was referring to when he said "We have taken their country..."

Regarding that which you offer no apology for.
You imply that if the stone had hit your chest, you would not have shot the guy. If the stone had hit your face, can I suggest that you would be in no position to shoot him, due to the whole "broken jaw/teeth" thing. Had you been blinded, you , of course, would be unable to shoot anything. And the being dead position speaks for itself.
This all boils down to "I would not shoot dead, a person who simply threw a stone at me."
You are , most definately, NOT IDF material! That's a good thing!

BTW, In order to be "stoned to death" one would require more than the one stone, unless of course it was picked up repeatedly and thrown again and again - could work!

Mr Weiss...

Kevin's picture

I said,
"...if the positions in Israel/Palestine were reversed, I would be condemning the Palestinians."
You said,
"Oh, isn't he the objective, fair-minded soul?"

My statement would be considered egalitarian (fair-minded) not objective, you really should check with someone before you give 'voice" to your "wankerism."

So you think that the Palestinians should just vacate their country simply because a bunch of immigrants have driven them into "prison-camps" thanks to the massive economic and military assistance of a superpower?

As for the Palestinians "passively accepting" their squalor for decades, you might just be stupid enough to not have noticed that they have "passively" accepted nothing imposed on them by the aforementioned immigrants.
You will, no doubt, with this new-found knowledge, be supportive of the Palestinian struggle to defend themselves from such "outright persecution."

Your comparison to the Japanese-American situation is nothing short of unadultrated nonsense.

"Wealthy Arab states have not helped them..." Do you propose the same "help" as is given to the Israelis by the USA? How "fair-minded" of you.

Let's not get into just which "Nation" wallows in it's "victim status," shall we.

"Israelis have never wanted anything but to live in peace with their neighbours."
You really must be speaking of some other Israelis, not the guys who live in Israel!
Do you mean these guys?
"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population." Israel Koenig, "The Koenig Memorandum"

"Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment... Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly." Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist Organization, speaking of the Arabs of Palestine,Complete Diaries, June 12, 1895 entry."

Could it be that attitudes have changed? Not fucking likely!

Then you mention the "impoverished desert" which the immigrants converted to a "land of milk and honey."
Again it would appear that you only "see" that which you wnat to see, not very "objective" of you, eh!
Try this bit of info.
As early as 1891 one of the first zionists, Asher Guinsberg (writing under the pseudonym Ahad Ha'am) "one of the people" visiting Palestine, gives this eye-witness account:

"Abroad, we are used to believing that Eretz-Israel is today semi-desert, desert without cultivation. and that whoever wants to acquire land can come here and get as much as his heart desires. But the truth is nothing like this. In any part of the country, it is difficult to find uncultivated fields. The only uncultivated places are expanses of sand and stony mountains where only fruit trees can grow, and even then, only after a lot of heavy preparatory labor."

Makes a mess of your "belief" don't you think? And that was in 1891!

"Arabs applaud the holocaust" - bullshit!

"Arabs supported Hitler" (just gotta slip old Hitler in, don't ya)
Maybe you should check out the "Ha'avara Agreement" between the Zionists and the Germans (Hitler)

Looking forward to "the usual" by return.

I suggest reading up on fact

Craig Ceely's picture

"Did the Europeans travel across the globe to take over "most" of Palestine?
What do you think?"

No, I think they took over all of Palestine, and then gave most of it to an Arabian family and called the result Trans-Jordan. That's what I think. What was left of Palestine was called "Palestine" and, later, Israel, and has been regarded by some as the greatest crime in the history of mankind.

"Re. your edit. That you see the killing of another human being in retaliation for being "hit" with a rock (stone)as justifiable, is beyond my understanding, especially when the rock was thrown, more likely at that which you represented than at you, personally."

Oh, I'm sure it was. As I said, I'd never met or seen him (to my knowledge) before. Still, it wouldn't have injured President Reagan, that rock, nor the Commandant of the Marine Corps, nor would it have dented the Capitol Building or anything else I represented. Only me.

Now, had that thing hit me in the chest, I'd have been okay: the newer body armor available in 1983 was pretty good stuff. My face, however, would have been a different story: a rock that size could easily have broken my jaw, busted a few teeth (or more), or blinded or even killed me. You still sympathize with those who throw rocks, Kevin? You've heard of stoning, have you not, a method of execution which employs the throwing of stones?

It's my impression that I have more sympathy for the Geneva and Hague conventions and the responsibilities they impose on military operators than do many others at this site. That's fine with me: I'm no pacifist, but as a Marine I was trained to avoid civilian casualties whenever possible. I still think that's the right way to go, and most professional military men agree with me. So I can admit that I'm glad I didn't shoot that guy -- but then, that rock of his, while it came close, didn't hit me. As I wrote before, I'm not offering an apology for anything.

And let's get real about the Geneva and Hague conventions, shall we? As you admit, Palestine is not a recognized state and cannot sign on to such agreement. True enough: and therefore its agents are not entitled to claim recognized, legitimate combatant status under those provisions. Anyone who takes up arms for a non-state actor, and hides behind faux "civilian" behavior, deserves what he gets. Even from a Marine lance corporal.

Kevin

jtgagnon's picture

You are, quite possibly, the Kook of all kooks.

"...if the positions in

Fred Weiss's picture

"...if the positions in Israel/Palestine were reversed, I would be condemning the Palestinians."

Oh, isn't he the objective, fair-minded soul?

Except for the little fact that the Jews would never accept the "Palestinian" situation. They would either have relocated long ago and found better lives elsewhere and/or made the best of the situation just as they have down through the centuries when faced with "ghetto-ization" or outright persecution. You can be sure that they wouldn't be living in the squalor that the Palestinians have passively accepted for decades. Nor for that matter would many other groups who have faced similar hardships. Consider for example Japanese-Americans after WWll or overseas Chinese in many countries (including our own in the 19th Cent.) who were subjected to profoundly unjust persecution.

The Japanese-Americans are a particularly good case in point because after their internment in WWll many of them returned home to find their property either destroyed or confiscated. They were also subjected to various legal restrictions and other humiliations. Nonetheless they immediately went to work to rebuild their lives - casting aside the hardships they encountered - and soon after were prospering, becoming a minority with one of the highest average income and educational levels in the United States.

The Palestinians have not done this - and other wealthy Arab states have not helped them sufficiently to achieve it- because it is far more important for them to retain the image of victims - as a club which they can swing against Israel and because their primary mission in life under the dictates of jihad is to annihilate Israel, not to achieve prosperity. Given the chance, of course, they would do the same to western civilization in general. Israel is just a particularly offensive and humiliating symbol of it right in their own backyard. It has become a convenient scape-goat and rallying point for Muslims through-out the Mideast, if not the world.

The Israelis have never wanted anything but to live in peace with their neighbors and for them to achieve prosperity. Such was the case prior to the state of Israel when Jews migrating to the region converted a impoverished desert into a "land of milk and honey" and in the process drawing thousands of Arabs into the region. The Arab antipathy to the Jews however existed even then. It did not start with Israel. The Arabs supported Hitler and openly applauded the Holocaust. Mein Kampf remains a best-seller in Arab countries.

Craig, are you suggesting that the

Kevin's picture

Are you suggesting that the barbaric actions of the IDF are acceptable because their government is a signatory to the Geneva Convention? Palestine is not recognised as a state and therefore cannot ratify treaties.

"I believe you had mentioned power being turned off."

This would indicate that you are unaware of the reality, that the only power-station in Gaza, serving the needs of over one million people, was "blown to bits" by Israeli missiles for no other reason than to punish the civilian population. This action proves that the Israelis do no give a shit about the Geneva convention, never have, never will!
Re. the PLO and Hamas.
"Do they have a history of such "military" tactics as hijackings, kidnappings, and attacking civilians? They do, don't they?"
Yes they do!
Do the Israelis? Yes they do!
Do the PlO and Hamas have top of the line military hardware, supplied by the USA?
NO! They have a lot of crap supplied by K-Mart, Damascus,
Did the PLO and Hamas travel across the globe to take over a part of Europe?
NO!
Did the Europeans travel across the globe to take over "most" of Palestine?
What do you think?

As for the Beirut situation, the US had asked the Israelis to not vacate positions until the Lebanese army could take over, the Israelis REFUSED, (nice friends) this refusal left the Marines caught in a crossfire between the opposing factions.
There might yet come a time when the US, in particular, will realise that Israel is "friend" to nobody. For examples of this "friendship" cast your mind back to the USS Liberty, the Lavone Affair and Mr Pollard, to name just a few.

Re. your edit. That you see the killing of another human being in retaliation for being "hit" with a rock (stone)as justifiable, is beyond my understanding, especially when the rock was thrown, more likely at that which you represented than at you, personally.

Finally, I would like to point out that if the positions in Israel/Palestine were reversed, I would be condemning the Palestinians.

Gaza and Beirut

Craig Ceely's picture

Kevin, are the PLO and Hamas signatories to the Geneva Conventions or the Hague Convention? They aren't, are they?

Do they have a history of such "military" tactics as hijackings, kidnappings, and attacking civilians? They do, don't they?

Also, we were not speaking of the "destruction" of the people of Gaza, were we? I believe you had mentioned power being turned off, and that's what I responded to.

My rock-throwing incident in Beirut was in November or December of 1983, which was after the Bowen fired into the interior. Let's be careful about language such "against Muslim positions." The Marines were already taking fire from a number of different groups, such as the Amal, the Druse, and others.

EDIT (update added late Friday night): Just to be clear, Kevin: I don't, and didn't at the time, know that rock-throwing guy, or who he was. I have no idea whether he's still alive. I do know when he didn't die, and why: because that rock did not hit me. I am in no way apologizing for this attitude.

Craig, you could also add

Kevin's picture

Craig, you could also add that you are not IDF, given the fact that shooting kids who throw rocks is "in the line of duty" for the IDF.

BTW, did this rock-throwing incident occur before or after the US joined the war in Lebanon, on the side of the Isrealis/Lebanese Christians, by having four of it's warships deliver the heaviest navel bombardment since Vietnam, which kept up for three solid days, against the Muslim positions.

Marine commander Colonel Timothy Geraghty, strenuously argued against the bombardment because, in the words of correspondent Thomas L. Friedman, "he knew that it would make his soldiers party to what was now clearly an intra-Lebanese fight, and that the Lebanese Muslims would not retaliate against the Navy’s ships at sea but against the Marines on shore."

Also, it's interesting to note that while you "feel" for some of the people of Gaza, you believe they deserve their "destruction" because they voted for a Government which Israel and the US don't accept, so much for democracy.
Collective punishment is forbidden by the Geneva Convention, or is that just another "goddamn piece of paper?"

Words and more, Kevin

Craig Ceely's picture

"Regarding your honesty, I have no problem in withdrawing the word, maybe you could provide me with a more acceptable term which would describe an attitude which sees the devastation of the lives of over a million people as "good" and then justifies it because of the behaviour of a few?"

Okay, how about "objective?" The people there overwhelmingly support Hamas and voted them into power. When Hamas agents attack Israel and Israelis, what result is to be expected?

"NB. There was a time when you would have had no problem being an American in the Middle East, I wonder what changed that?"

Hmm, when was that time, Kevin? First time I was in the Middle East, all sorts of people were shooting at me, rocketing me, firing mortars at me. Dear oh dear, but it was noisy. One afternoon, riding in the back of a jeep, I waved at a young guy who responded by throwing a sizable rock at me. I could hear the damn thing zing past my ear.

He survived that incident, Kevin. I'm not Hezbollah or PLO, you know.

Kevin the Evader

Again Kevin, it is Mr. Green. Bush is not a businessman, he is a politician. Politicians don't create jobs (unless they get out of the way) they destroy them. If you are too stupid to understand that then there is no hope for you.

Wm

Exploitation

Fred Weiss's picture

"...doesn't more manufacturing productivity just mean that the capitalists are squeezing more product out of each laborer's hour?"

Yes, of course.

"Only sounds like more exploitation to me."

It is. But it is precisely why workers can be paid more - and couldn't otherwise be. That is why labor unions have had absolutely nothing to do with increasing the standard of living of workers. In fact, arguably, they've decreased that standard of living. (I can't wait for the first brave soul to prove that and to get a Nobel Prize in economics for it).

As for "exploitation" in general, in the sense in which Marxists mean it, if it were true then when capitalists were eliminated - as for example in communist revolutions - the overall wealth should greatly increase and the lot of average people should significantly improve. Except the exact opposite happens.

And of course, for the very same reason, if capitalists withdrew their factories from "third world" countries - so as to stop "exploiting" them - it would plunge those countries into even greater squalor. Yes,
capitalist go to these countries to take advantage of lower labor costs. But it is not the capitalists who created those conditions and it is precisely therefore those very same capitalists who offer the best hope to improve them.

The battle cry throughout the third world should be "Capitalists of the world come and exploit us!"

No, no, Fred

Chris Cathcart's picture

It just can't be, I won't hear it. Of course, doesn't more manufacturing productivity just mean that the capitalists are squeezing more product out of each laborer's hour? Only sounds like more exploitation to me. More machinery can't be good -- it dehumanizes things and displaces and alienates the workers. Incidentally, this is why more jobs in the manufacturing sector -- under capitalism, that is -- would be a bad thing.

Ah, now having argued capitalism into a corner, I'm all ready to go troll pro-capitalists on the internet. I'm so proud of myself!

I'm curious: if Marx were alive today, in what ways would be be spinning things so as to reach his desired anti-capitalist conclusion? The "more service sector jobs is bad" does seem like an interesting route, though I'm also thinking that it's globalization that's the bad thing. You know how third-world poverty was the result of developing-world exploitation before, but now that the third-world is developing, how can this be spun as a result of first-world exploitation? And at the same time, how can we spin the loss of first-world jobs to the third-world also as a result of exploitation? Oh, wait, I know: we already know that capitalism is synonymous with exploitation. (Never mind if the labor theory of value works. Exploitation is a nice enough anti-concept that we can spin it from any number of other things.) That conclusion's already determined ahead of time. It's just shifting back of exploitation onto third-world workers and impoverishing first-world workers. And we already know that the only ones who benefit in this process are the capitalists. So what if the U.S. has a lower unemployment rate than the other industrialized nations at just 4.5%. That's just a result of a lot more workers being exploited, i.e., a larger quantity of lower-paying jobs. Higher unemployment? Well, that's just fewer workers being exploited more each. It's still lower-paying jobs, just in lower quantity this time. Just remember, if it's capitalism, it means lower-paying jobs because of exploitation, except when it's higher-paying jobs, then someone's being exploited somewhere else to make it happen. Higher unemployment rates in the more socialist EU? Well, that's just different. It's gotta be, if the people there put up with it.

Just remember: Third-world poverty? Exploitation. Third-world development? Exploitation. There's still inequality; they're not as developed as the first-world. Inequality means exploitation. Globalization, i.e., greater equalization between first- and third-world workers? Exploitation.

Hey, it's fun being a fuck!

Chris

Fred Weiss's picture

"I could think of any number of ways that fewer manufacturing and more service-sector jobs could be painted in a positive light."

Of course, once you know the reason for it. For one thing, there has been a vast increase in manufacturing productivity in recent decades in major part due to computerization. The same number of widgets can now be produced by a fraction of the number of workers.

This is simply a repeat of the same process which went on in agriculture last century. At the start of the 20th century I believe there was something like 50 million farmers in the US. By the end of the century there were only a few million - and yet those few million were actually producing more food than the 50 million were previously! Is anyone - other than possibly a dumb fuck like Kevin - going to argue that that it wasn't a good thing? This shift was accompanied by an enormous increase in the standard of living. Just compare how the average worker lived in 1900 vs. 2000.

If there has been an increase in service sector jobs, who is being serviced and why has there been an increase in the demand for servicing them? Isn't a good thing that people have more disposable income for eating out or staying at hotels or travel?

If there has been a decrease in manufacturing jobs in the US, where has there been at least a comparable increase? How many millions of jobs are now available in computer and computer related fields which didn't even exist a few decades ago? Or in communications and entertainment, such as cell phones or the internet or cable/satellite television? Or in health care as new cures and treatments become available for conditions which couldn't be treated before? If there has been an increase in jobs in financial services, e.g. banking, mortgage lending, what does that tell you if not that people's disposable income has increased and they are in need of such services.

How many young women now working in the mortgage dept of a bank or as real estate brokers would rather be working in a steel mill - assuming they could even get a job in a steel mill? Not to mention that they probably already make more - or have the potential to make more - than dad did in the mill.

Incidentally, it's not as if dumb fucks like Kevin thought manufacturing jobs were all that great before. Read their comments back then. Why were workers always striking? Why were they always inciting them to strike even more? You might also pause and ask how much of that union activity actually provided the very incentive to reduce the number of workers needed. Computer driven precision machinery doesn't go on strike. It's not going to file an harassment or discrimination law suit. It doesn't demand a pension and require that you support it for dozens of years after it has stopped working.

"Kevin"'s user description

Chris Cathcart's picture

Click on "Kevin"'s name and you get his user page with the following description:

Fifty-eight years old, Irish. Have lived many years in Ireland, England. Australia and New Zealand. Have developed an interest in world affairs and various areas of history.
Have also developed the "irritating habit" (to some) of asking questions. Have strong belief that if something does not stand up to the results of analysis, evidence and logic, then it is "crap". Regardless of who declares "it" to be the "truth".

This is language typical of a troll with a disingenuous agenda. These types of scumbags crawl all over Usenet, so they're easy enough to spot.

"Kevin"'s credibility

Chris Cathcart's picture

Would the following have anything to do with the "choices" people make to become "terrorists"?

Neighbors report that Israeli soldiers had been beating her husband because he wasn't answering their questions. Foolishly or valiantly, how is one to say, the 35-year-old woman had interfered. She tried to explain that her husband was deaf, screamed at the soldiers that her husband couldn't hear them and attempted to stop them from hitting him. So they shot her. Several times.

Her name was Itemad Ismail Abu Mo'ammar.

She didn't die, though. That took longer. It required her life to flow out of her in the form of blood for several hours, as Israeli soldiers refused to allow an ambulance to transport her to help. Her husband and children could do nothing to save her.

Finally, after approximately five hours, an ambulance was allowed to take her to a hospital, where physicians were able to render one service: pronounce her dead.

Does this give you the warm fuzzies?

I'm sorry, but I simply can't believe that "Kevin" is relaying this story without some perhaps-incredible degree of bias that selectively distorts or leaves out important facts. His agenda is transparently anti-Israeli, and so the presumption is that he's spinning this story accordingly.

Kevin, you fuck!

Chris Cathcart's picture

I'd like to see a competent economic analysis of the shift in the number of manufacturing jobs to more service-sector jobs. The usual drive-by media spin on this is that it's a bad thing. Oh, jeez, manufacturing jobs are down, it's gotta be bad; service sector jobs up, that's bad! It's just gotta be.

You have your head jammed so far up your ass, much like a typical socialist who spins everything about capitalism in a negative light. You pulled this nonsense with the 34 million in poverty because a few billion a year were spent on foreign aid, some of it to Israel.

I could think of any number of ways that fewer manufacturing and more service-sector jobs could be painted in a positive light. (Not the least of which is that this is the result of voluntary decisions of actors on the market, who find some avenues of expenditure more productive than others. "Kevin" would have it that all kinds of money be sunk into the manufacturing sector to subsidize a given employment level, in terms of quantity rather than quality no less. All of a sudden, it sounds more like the way a budget-sucking, make-work government bureaucracy thinks.) But you choose not to do this. Because you have an agenda, and you're not exactly honest about spinning things to suit it. Like the lazy piece of shit that you are, you just assume that it's a bad thing without thinking through it further, and move on. Once again, you're exposed for the intellectual filth that you are.

Craig...

Kevin's picture

Firstly, because we were "located" in the palestine/Israel area, I did honestly assume that you were inferring that you were the holder of "Israeli citizenship." This assumption is due entirely to the fact that as I do not see American citizenship as "dispicable" I believed you were "playing" to my much-stated hostility towards the Israeli Government and it's policies. My mistake.
Just for the record, I do not see Israeli citizenship as dispicable, either. (So as to "save" me from the mandatory anti-semitic crap which would fly)

Regarding your honesty, I have no problem in withdrawing the word, maybe you could provide me with a more acceptable term which would describe an attitude which sees the devastation of the lives of over a million people as "good" and then justifies it because of the behaviour of a few?

NB. There was a time when you would have had no problem being an American in the Middle East, I wonder what changed that?

Also, try to not get so offended so easily, as you say you are not 15, nor am I and we both know that there is no shortage of truly offensive things to react to...

Zionism & the Statute of Limitations

Ted Keer's picture

If the Basques and the Chechens argue that the Indo-European horse riders came sweeping out of the Russian Steppes, 6,000 years ago, swinging their swords and usurping all the land from Ireland thru Armenia to Iran, conquering them in the name of an Aryan aristocracy, should we sympathize with the aims of Basque and Chechen terrorists on that basis? What about the Hungarians who only conquered the Danubian plain a millenium or so ago? Should the effects of the Battle of Hastings be reversed? Should the 99% of the U.S. population be moved back to the Old World? Should Puerto Rico become a Spanish terrirory? Should Gaza revert to Egypt, and the West Bank to Jordan? (Now, wait a minute...hm...) And into whose hands Babylon?

The Balfour Declaration was a vicious bit of nonsense. There are plenty of Racist Jews in Israel and the world today. And plenty more murderous muslim bigots. After how many wars in the last six decades does it come to the point where its just plain time for the would-be throat slitters to shut up? Non-Jews by religion and race are subject to the same protections and the same disabilities whether Christian, Arab, apostate or Reform. The "Palestinians" turned down 98% of the land they said they wanted, and declared war instead. Ariel Sharon withdrew form the "occupied territory" and Israel was rewarded with what - peace? No, war on four fronts, the northern, southern, internal and world fronts.

If the Israelis refrain from doing to the muslims what the muslims have sworn for six decades (and 14 centuries) and on every inhabited continent on earth to do to them, then that must certainly mean that they are doing something wrong.

Ted Keer, 11 October, 2006, NYC

Kevin, you are almost beyond belief...

Craig Ceely's picture

...except that, as noted, I am not 15 years old and I have seen a thing or two in my life.

When I referred to my "despicable" citizenship status, I meant that I am an American and hold, and travel on, an American passport. You do that in the Middle East.

Unless, however, you retract your comment on my honesty, you'll not read another response from me. That can be added to your beliefs.

Craig , my belief is,

Kevin's picture

Craig, my belief is, support for the policies of the Israeli Government is tantamount to support of tyranny - Absolute power, especially when exercised unjustly or cruelly.

The collective punishment of the people in Gaza and the West Bank cannot be seen as anything short of tyranny.

The "terrorists" are not under the control of the people but Israel delivers devastating punishment to all Palestinian.

As for how Gaza is being used, it is used for the launching of crappy home-made rockets,for the most part, which in most cases don't reach outside the area and when they do, they do little or no damage, let alone take life.

Your comment of "good" shows me that you are not prepared to view the realities of the situation with any degree of honesty.
You might take a look at the statistics regarding "damage" to Israelis as against Palestinians.
Bottom line is, the Israelis want the Palestinians gone and they don't care much about the "methods" used to achieve a result.

I assume, yet again, that by "dispicable citizenship status" you mean Israeli. If this is the case, don't you mean "nationality", surely only Arab-Israelis hold "citizenship."

Okay, Kevin...

Craig Ceely's picture

"My misspelling of your name was unintentional, surely you were not offended by such a trivial error?
"But, given the way in which attention is focused on the insignificant at the expence of the significant, maybe you were."

Don't know if I should be offended or not, Kevin, but let me say this: I'll be 50 in a few years. I've seen lots of dishonesty and dishonest language coming from the left -- from which I presume you are operating (the left, not the dishonesty) -- and some of your approach reminds me of that. As for "insignificant at the expense of the significant," no, that's not a proper claim here. The written language has its standards, and I don't apologize for maintaining them. Ditto for claiming that major Israeli newspapers and political parties are more mainstream than many of the Arab-hating quotes you've produced.

You say the misspelling of my name was unintentional. Okay, I take it at that, and that matter is closed. It was never that big a deal anyway, but I accept your explanation, no problem.

As to the tyranny quote: why would I fit that, and what evidence do you have that I do? This irks me, Kevin, because I've been hearing for decades -- usually from ill-informed idiots on the left -- that Ayn Rand advocates "rule by the strong," and such rubbish. Who among the serious commenters around here advocates any sort of tyranny at all?

If, in exploring that, you find that your values are not exactly the "opposite" of mine, then please accept my congratulations.

No, I would not enjoy visiting Gaza. I fear I would be blamed for everything that has ever happened there, given my despicable citizenship status.

"You will have to take a torch, the (moral)IDF have blown the shit out of the only power station there."

Good. I have to feel for many of the inhabitants of Gaza, but let's look objectively at how that area is being used, shall we?

Craig...

Kevin's picture

My misspelling of your name was unintentional, surely you were not offended by such a trivial error?
But, given the way in which attention is focused on the insignificant at the expence of the significant, maybe you were.

As to my "values", they are, in relation to the particular topics I comment on, the opposite of yours.
You, I think, fit the following (while I try to ensure that I don't)

"The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves." ---attributed to Dresden James

BTW,would you like to spend a little time in Gaza? I'm sure I could arrange somewhere for you to stay, which still has a roof and maybe a wall or two. You will have to take a torch, the (moral)IDF have blown the shit out of the only power station there.

Kevin

Craig Ceely's picture

Never said I'd been to Gaza. I haven't.

West Bank I can do, but I've never lived there.

Can't tell you how thrilled I am to be addressed by my real name, a privilege you have always been accorded.

Finally, Mr Gagnon...

Kevin's picture

Would the following have anything to do with the "choices" people make to become "terrorists"?

Neighbors report that Israeli soldiers had been beating her husband because he wasn't answering their questions. Foolishly or valiantly, how is one to say, the 35-year-old woman had interfered. She tried to explain that her husband was deaf, screamed at the soldiers that her husband couldn't hear them and attempted to stop them from hitting him. So they shot her. Several times.

Her name was Itemad Ismail Abu Mo'ammar.

She didn't die, though. That took longer. It required her life to flow out of her in the form of blood for several hours, as Israeli soldiers refused to allow an ambulance to transport her to help. Her husband and children could do nothing to save her.

Finally, after approximately five hours, an ambulance was allowed to take her to a hospital, where physicians were able to render one service: pronounce her dead.

Does this give you the warm fuzzies?

Mr Ceely, not Creely...

Kevin's picture

I would be interested to know how much time you maight have spent in the West Bank and Gaza, over the last few years?

If none,would you like me to direct you to the "pics" from these places?

Put up or shut up

Craig Ceely's picture

Kevin bleated, "As for the "values" of people who post here. What values?"

Why, Kevin, you post here. Why don't you share some of your values, and why you hold them?

Little Willie...

Kevin's picture

Is this the kind of "wealth" you are referring to:

"Last Friday's payroll jobs report was a continuation of Bush's dismal record. Only 59,000 net new private sector jobs were created during September. That is about 90,000 less than would be needed to stay even with population growth. Like all jobs that the US economy has created in the 21st century, the September jobs are in domestic services.

Waitresses and bar tenders accounted for a quarter of the new jobs.
The remainder were in health care and social assistance, wholesale trade and transportation, financial activities, and accounting and bookkeeping services.

US manufacturing lost another 19,000 jobs. Since Bush took office, the US has lost 3 million manufacturing jobs."

The US did export a lot of death in the last few years!

Landon...

Kevin's picture

"The west is far more secualr and thus far less murderous"

You are a little young to be suffering from Alzheimer's disease!

BTW, could you tell me who was the first to "gas the Kurds"?

As for the "values" of people who post here. What values?

Craig's Linguistic Skills

Craig Ceely's picture

Ted,

Believe me, if I demonstrated my linguistic skills, you would not be impressed.

What's the difference between Kevin & Kenny?

Ted Keer's picture

Landon,

The proper way to spell Noam Chomsky's name is Nim Chimpsky.

William,

Kevin is no dailykos'er, he's Kenny's Irish alter-ego.

Craig,

I am impressed with your implied linguistic skills.

Ted

Kevin

Craig Ceely's picture

It's funny how you come to "assume" that I restrict my "incoming information" only to that which is pro-Israel. I presume you speak and read Arabic and Hebrew, or at least one of the two, and that you have lived and moved throughout the Middle East? Why, of course you have.

Otherwise, perhaps you're the one who restricts, and has been restricting, his incoming information?

Your continuing attitude about spelling and punctuation, including the spelling of my name, merits by this time nothing more than contempt.

Wanker.

Kevin

Landon Erp's picture

Outside of the Moore/Chomskey induced indoctrination do you have any legitimate grasp of the values of anyone posting here?

Faith and irrationality are baneful ideas and the only value of westernized jews/christians along the lines of thier faith is the fact that most don't take it seriously. Muslims take their faith very seriously and feel legitimate in committing acts of mass murder. Save for the occaisional abortion clinic bombing, the west is far more secualr and thus far less murderous.

As to the zero-sum view of economics a good place to start erradicating that rubbish from your warped mind would be blog entries by George Reisman. And I'm sad to say but this view of property and value is depressingly not shared by the neo-conservatives in any worthwhile manner which makes them of contunuiously less value on the political scene.

---Landon

Inking is sexy.

http://www.angelfire.com/comics/wickedlakes

kook Kevin

Kevin, I also note that my initial comparison referred to you as a kook from dailykos or some equivalent website. It is not been refuted as yet, by anyone.

Seriously though, if you can't understand how businessmen create wealth or that man is a volitional being then you are welcome to start your de-indoctrination by picking up Atlas Shrugged and Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. I would start the process of checking your philosophical premises in order to form a reasoned argument. Those are the only kind that typically get honest responses here.

Wm

Mr Gagnon, your belief that

Kevin's picture

Mr Gagnon, your belief that terrorists "create" themselves coupled with the belief that American oil execs create wealth, provides, without doubt, sufficient evidence that you are thoroughly indoctrinated and "imune" to reality. (hence the warm fuzzies)
Also,with a President who has "little chats" with God, you should be careful with the use of the term "irrational faith-based dogma" ("God told me to smite...")

BTW, if I were as petty as you and Mr Creely, I would point out that the term is "rifle-SIGHT" - I'm not, so I won't!

Mr Creely, you are most definatley correct, spelling and punctuation are of great importance, possibly to the exclusion of all else.

You might note that my initial comparison referred to the "Enabeling Act" and the Patriot/Military Commissions Acts. This comparison has not been refuted as yet, by anyone.
As for your remark regarding the Palestinian Arabs/Israelis. I can only assume that you restrict you incoming information to that which is pro-Israeli.
Colour me surprised!

BTW,could it be that I am not as sesquipedalian as you would like? I also try to avoid other forms of "wankerism", sorry.

Kevin

jtgagnon's picture

Kevin writes: "You are fighting for a desire-for-Empire driven, bunch of arseholes who have created more 'terrorists' than a thousand 'Bin Ladens' could have managed, if given fifty years. But on the up-side, it sure has produced a dollar or two for the fortunate few - none of whom will ever look down a rifle-sight. Gives you that warm fuzzy feeling, eh!"

Nevermind Kevin's atrocious grammar and piss-poor punctuation. That Kevin is an idiot is obvious enough. Being the benevolent individual I am, I feel pity for poor Kevin. Nevertheless, I feel like addressing a few of his remarks.

First, the Bush administration doesn't create terrorists. Neither does Bin Laden. Terrorists create themselves. That is, individuals who become terrorists choose to do so. They are not forced to - not by Bin Laden, not by Bush, not by Allah. The individuals who choose to become terrorists need not do so. They only do so because they choose to be driven by an irrational faith-based dogma. Frankly, such people should be held accountable for their choices - they should be eliminated. And Bush is doing just that - though with not nearly enough gusto.

Second, I applaud every individual who makes a dollar or two - whether or not they will ever look down a rifle-site. Fact is, the people who figure out how to make the bucks are the ones who epitomize what is good in the world. They create wealth. Just imagine if the world was a place where the homicidal terrorists and conspiracy nut-jobs gave up their idiotic past-times and instead focused on productive achievement. Now THAT would give me a warm fuzzy feeling. In the meantime, I'll just have to keep getting my warm fuzzies from watching the American oil execs do what they do best - create wealth.

One criterion: grow the hell up

Craig Ceely's picture

Kevin, my criteria include spelling and punctuation. I know you've scorned such standards before, but I don't give a damn. If you're writing to be read, and you wish to be taken seriously, then learn to take responsibility for communicating as an adult.

By the way, those of us who do have legitimate and serious problems with the incumbent president are not served well by ludicrous "Bush = Hitler" comparisons such as yours. And your "got what you wanted!" accusation illustrates only that you have not read much by Ross Elliot, Adam Reed, or me. If nothing else, I have never voted for anyone named Bush in my life, and make no secret of it.

Your puerile blatherings have added nothing to any of the discussions to which you have posted here. As far as I can tell, your view is that every Israeli wonders, upon arising, "What can I do today to grind more Palestinian Arabs into the dirt?" and the Bush White House, apparently, has a copy of Mein Kampf on every desk.

Let me guess: once more, your response (if any) will be that spelling and punctuation don't matter. Color me shocked.

Adam and co...

Kevin's picture

The fact that you thought that because I referred to your quote regarding "America-the dismal reality" that I was not aware you were bemoaning the fact that King George hasn't killed enough Arabs for your liking, speaks more to a flaw with your cognitive abilities, than with mine.
As for "What are "we" fighting for?" - "You" are fighting for a desire-for-Empire driven, bunch of arseholes who have created more "terrorists" than a thousand "Bin Ladens" could have managed, if given fifty years. But on the up-side, it sure has produced a dollar or two for the fortunate few - none of whom will ever look down a rifle-sight. Gives you that warm fuzzy feeling, eh!

Perigo, you said ... "derives solace from Adam, Ross & Craig. And from my own preparedness to acknowledge that Bush is not hard-assed enough. Calls it "progress." Go figure."
You also seem to have a problem with "understanding". Just how the hell did you come to that conclusion? My sarcastic use of the word "progress" referred to the fact that you and others, completely ignored the comparison I made between the "Acts". NOTHING to do with you being miffed at King George and his "too-low body count".
Your, well-worn, accusation of anti-semitism is without value, in light of the reality that to criticise Zionism and Israeli policies is just that which it is and has nothing to do with Jews. As for "anti-freedom", I can only assume that you carry a lot of "baggage" which requires frequent "venting" so as to keep you from having yourself "commited".

Cathcart, your attempts at abuse are a little tired, try harder! Now you can return to playing with your GI Joes...
BTW, your idea of "nailed" is vastly different to mine but I will defend to the death your right to be a self-deluding, foul-mouthed little creep.

Wm,
"Kevin draws moral equivalency between Bush and Hitler, US Government and the NAZIs, and a general hatred of all things Israel."
I do, despise most things Zionist, I thought you bright enough to see the difference, perhaps not!
As for Bush and Hitler, if you take out the Holocaust, where is the fucking difference? King George may well kill a great many more than "six million", give him time, but keep on "cheering" it could help.
Ask Cathcart if you can come over to play....

Ross, what can I say to you, you are our own "Elmer Fudd, who won't be truly happy untill all those "wascally Iswammo-wabbits" are all dead.
Ross, don't let the lid...

In conclusion, it appears to me that the criteria employed by the above bunch of wankers to any arguement is "Does it make me "happy" or does it make me "angry", fuck the validity".

Reach-around

Chris Cathcart's picture

The story as I heard it was that Ermey used the reach-around line, SK asked him what it meant, and Ermey told him to use his imagination.

Oh, dear...

Craig Ceely's picture

Please, Joe: I'm always right. Smiling

The Kubrick-Ermey story is a great one, though. Love it.

No, you're right Craig. I

JoeM's picture

No, you're right Craig. I was saying the adlib took him by surpise when Ermey said it...but Kubrick loved it.

Spontaneity

Craig Ceely's picture

Joe,

I can believe that line was spontaneous. I laughed every day at Parris Island. Really. Those guys said the most outrageous things.

"The reach-around line was

JoeM's picture

"The reach-around line was spontaneous? Wow!"

I read that it took Kubrick by surprise when he heard it. And Kubrick's not one to let go of control!

Chris

Craig Ceely's picture

The only "intend" you know
Is in "Nintendo!"

Craig

Chris Cathcart's picture

Of course, you must realize that the Drill Instructor's job isn't to be right; it's to be hard.

"And hard I intend to be! :-)"

I got your ten mile run, long and hard, right here

Craig Ceely's picture

And your Senior Drill Instructor, too.

No convincing some people, Chris, once they take a notion into their heads. Guess I'll send back my Combat Action Ribbon, too. Smiling

Dr. Frist is fitting right in with other senior Republicans on "war" related matters. Read about Secretary Rice's trip to the middle east?

Stirring stuff ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... so to speak.

The reach-around line was spontaneous? Wow!

[BTW, would the SOLO Drill Instructor turn SOLO into a "homoerotic paradise?"]

Some think it already is. Smiling

Will the Drill Instructor be marketing his own action figure?

Chris Cathcart's picture

This was apropos.

Excerpts:

"Just like the original, this tiny bastard spews searingly cruel but totally kick-ass catchphrases on command ("You are the asshole in charge of your own destiny!")."

From the interview:

You were in the Marines for 11 years and were wounded in Vietnam. What do you think of people making comparisons between Iraq and that war?
That's kinda cute. I think whoever says that is a fucking idiot. That's where I come down on that.

So we're going to pull it out in Iraq?
I've been over there a couple of times. We're doing just fine. The problem is, the Communist News Network and all of the media—which is run by totally off-the-wall, clear-off-the-deep-end liberals—are on the wrong side. They're with the bad guys.

You think the media is siding with radical Islam? That's kinda weird.
Every time I turn around the media is screwing something up. Here we are, hot on the trail of Bin Laden, right up his ass. He makes a phone call, and we know exactly where he is. Well, one of the embeds shoots a message to his boss saying that some PFC told him they're tracking Bin Laden using his cell phone. Then it's all over the New York Times and every liberal paper in America. Well, Bin Laden hasn't made a cell phone call since, has he? The media is taking the tools of the military away from us.

[...]

You haven't had trouble getting work from the so-called Hollywood liberal elite?
There are a lot of logical people in Hollywood. But a lot of nitwits too. I've had actors look me in the eye and tell me that no matter who was in charge of government—say, China or Russia took over this country—life would be just the same, and their government wouldn't be any worse than the one we have now. That is sick. So I just keep politics out of it. I don't talk politics with anyone in Hollywood.

These have to be challenging times in the military. How's everybody holding up?
Morale is second to none. I go to Bethesda/Walter Reed Hospital a couple of times each year, and those kids are laying there with their legs shot off and can't wait to get a prosthetic so they can get back to their unit and keep fighting the war. They're patriotic kids. One thing I can tell you: You don't find any lefties in the military. Lefties are not patriotic people. Remember the '50s, when we put the kibosh on the communist party in America? I think all they did was change their name to liberals. Shame on those people.

[And more . . . click the link]

[BTW, would the SOLO Drill Instructor turn SOLO into a "homoerotic paradise?"]

Chris, please...

Ross Elliot's picture

I hold the rank of Obersturmbannführer with the Illuminati. Tread carefully. We have a long reach.

[click]
Sturmbannie Elliot

Senior Drill Instructor Perigo

Chris Cathcart's picture

This is the Drill Instructor going into "Fuck you, you didn't convince me, let me see your real KASS face!" mode. Privates Reed, Elliott and Ceely are hard-ass by civilian standards, but aren't quite hard-core enough for the Senior Drill Instructor. Much like military-level strength-training, they need to master the 10-mile run so that 5 miles is a piece of cake. "Work on it!" Don't you know, you all are supposed to be like "Nessun Dorma!" and manic all the fucking time, not just some great piece that just falls a bit short or spread too long and thin. Smiling

As to the thread subject, Sen. Frist is disputing reports about what he said about the Taliban, but his pussified PC KASSlessness shows plenty enough, when he says that the war can't be won militarily. Bull fucking shit. The U.S. has the technology to win any war, and can win if it has the will to. If these lesser means fail, we've always got the really big bombs. Frist just doesn't pack what it takes to deliver the high hard one. And Bush better fucking be the brunt of the Drill Instructor's tirades if he were to go along with this attitude.

Every time you see some KASSless PC ninny saying that we can't do this or that, just remember those Trade Center towers coming down and be very pissed.

BTW, I already nailed "Kevin" for the puke piece of shit that he is when he railed against foreign aid to Israel in light of 34 million Americans being in poverty. This fuck is not arguing in good faith.

Halle-bloody-lujah!

Ross Elliot's picture

"If the man is too dull to understand that I am advocating a more intransigent and more clearly anti-Islamist occupation policy in Iraq and Afghanistan, not less, then he's not worth paying any attention to." [Underlining mine]

It is unfathomable to me why so many persist in responding to the bait & wait tactics used by the likes of Kevin Malone. It's perfectly proper and necessary to engage an opponent if they seem to be offering genuine though perhaps incorrectly reasoned arguments. Even if they appear a little confused, or subject to the occasional flight of fancy, as long as the debate is intelligent, keep going.

Here you have none of that. You are dealing with a child. And as some children are wont to do, they get a kick out of annoying the adults. All they understand is stimulus and response. They irk, you jerk. And most adults understand that the best solution is to ignore the tantrum-throwing imp. Or better yet, subject them to a little time out. SOLO does have that option.

Craig - programmer's habit

AdamReed's picture

I wrote it in the form of an "If.. then.." clause out of programmer's habit. The antecent is, as you note, redundant.

Adam...

Craig Ceely's picture

"If?"

On the subject of Kevin...

AdamReed's picture

If the man is too dull to understand that I am advocating a more intransigent and more clearly anti-Islamist occupation policy in Iraq and Afghanistan, not less, then he's not worth paying any attention to.

Slimebucket anti-freedom anti-Semite Kevin ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... derives solace from Adam, Ross & Craig. And from my own preparedness to acknowledge that Bush is not hard-assed enough. Calls it "progress." Go figure.

William, may I say you're one of the few folk on SOLO who give me hope, as opposed to the large number of posters here who are gutless, KASSless, equivocating appeasers. On SOLO!!!! Again I say, go figure. But William, you're on the highest rung of Objectivist Heaven in my book. Bless you!

Linz

It would appear that Kevin

It would appear that Kevin agrees with me that he is a kook and the equivalent to the readers and contributors of dailykos and moveon.org. I draw this conclusion from the fact that he draws moral equivalency between Bush and Hitler, US Government and the NAZIs, and a general hatred of all things Israel.

Wm

Progress...

Kevin's picture

It would appear that both Fred and Perigo agree with my contention that the Patriot Act/Military Commissions Act are, in fact, the equivalent of Germany's "Enabeling Act". I draw this conclusion from the fact that you did not refute the similarities - progress!

My concern for the American people is not "all of a sudden" but it is tinged with self-interest -that which happens in the US eventually spreads. I can see, even if you refuse to, the "slow-motion" dictatorship taking place in the USA.

Perigo says "Kevin despises freedom - loves Islamo-fascism". What can I say to such inane utterances? nothing really except to express my pity for the state of your sad mind.

Fred, I assume you know little of Israel, of the Israeli "Nationals" who come from Russia, etc, who enjoy better freedoms than the Israeli "Citizens" who just happen to be Arabs, and were born there.

As for "supporting Arab dictatorships" - I'll just leave that to the US Government, they have had heaps of practice.

Fred, could you try to be a bit more inventive with your abuse, "slimey bastard"! I know you can do much better if you really try. (foolish Fred)

Now, now ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Sensitive flowers ... Smiling

Maybe what is askew is me. I can't muster up the anti-Bush animus that you guys can. Yet.

Linz

O frabjous day

Craig Ceely's picture

"Something is amiss and askew in Ross', Adam's & Craig's protestations. Not, I hasten to add, Saddamy; just a misplaced emphasis (Ross' most recent post being an exception)."

Imagine my relief.

Linz - emphasis

AdamReed's picture

Linz - my emphasis at the head of this thread is on the fact that Bush sacrificed American and allied solidiers without having a coherent plan for getting to a permanent victory. How is this misplaced?

I should add that Poland, one of our allies in the initial invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq, did have a coherent plan for achieving a permanent victory, based on fairly recent experience with the aftermath of a military dictatorship in their own country. Then Bush effectively cut Poland out of the Alliance. Not because he had a better plan, or any plan at all - but in order to act without a plan, to act on his faith, and on his feelings and intuitions, and on his lack of confidence in the human mind.

And this is something that I ought to have been able to guess from knowledge of the man's character and faith. And I'll try my best never to evade such knowledge again.

Fred ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Understood, appreciated ... & applauded.

Linz

Fred Weiss's picture

What you are hearing from me - and if I may speak for the others (including ARI speakers and writers, etc) - is disgust at the way we are prosecuting (or maybe more precisely, not prosecuting) the war and handling the aftermath. Certainly not Saddamy.

Exactly, Fred!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

And the recoiling I refer to in my previous post has to do with succouring such unspeakably slimy bastards as Malone & rich men's versions thereof such as Moore & Chomsky, shedding crocodile tears for the loss of freedom in America and failure fully to implement it in Iraq & Afghanistan when they despise freedom as much as they love Islamo-Fascism. That's why I keep cautioning perspective. Something is amiss and askew in Ross', Adam's & Craig's protestations. Not, I hasten to add, Saddamy; just a misplaced emphasis (Ross' most recent post being an exception).

Linz

What a load of B.S.!

Fred Weiss's picture

What a load of B.S.!

Kevin is all of a sudden oh so concerned about freedom in America when all we ever hear from him is apologetics for Arab dictatorships and attacks on the one country in the Mideast which has a significant amount of freedom, Israel.

So much for his concern for "the truth", the slimey bastard.

"Deamonise America"

Kevin's picture

Ross has once again "lifted the lid" and guess what? the same old shit, "Kevin only wants to demonise America".
My "agenda" as you put it is to try to convey the truth as I believe it to be. As I have said before, I only despise the bastards who run the place! Has anyone a problem understanding this?

The constant chant of "liberty, freedom, democracy" is really starting to grate. Have Lindsay and the "perigonads" not noticed that while they are busy with the chanting, the US Govt. has been busy removing these very things from the American people/

FREE-SPEECH ZONES! In America? and thats just the tip.
Wm. remarks "What is a constitution without freedom, individual right and reason"
Maybe Lindsay, Ross and Wm might read the following and then THINK about that which they have read, before, abusing me.

"Government officials have known throughout history — that during extreme national emergencies, people are most scared and thus much more willing to surrender their liberties in return for “security.” And that’s exactly what happened during the Reichstag terrorist crisis.

Suspending civil liberties

The day after the fire, Hitler persuaded President Hindenburg to issue a decree entitled, “For the Protection of the People and the State.” Justified as a “defensive measure against Communist acts of violence endangering the state,” the decree suspended the constitutional guarantees pertaining to civil liberties:

Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications; and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.

Two weeks after the Reichstag fire, Hitler requested the Reichstag to temporarily delegate its powers to him so that he could adequately deal with the crisis. Denouncing opponents to his request, Hitler shouted, “Germany will be free, but not through you!” When the vote was taken, the result was 441 for and 84 against, giving Hitler the two-thirds majority he needed to suspend the German constitution. On March 23, 1933, what has gone down in German history as the “Enabling Act” made Hitler dictator of Germany, freed of all legislative and constitutional constraints".

You might get information from Mr Gagnon, who has read the Patriot Act, he may well have read the recent "Military Commissions Act" 3 times perhaps.

If between you, you can't see a problem, then all I can assume is that stupidity, like misery, requires company.

As Adam pointed out " America as it ought to be and was founded to be and the dismal reality...'

Ross! don't let the lid...

Well Adam ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I took that to mean a restraint on the directives that might inhibit freedom of expression, not on freedom of expression itself. But maybe you're right, & this is just thinly veiled Islamo-Stalinism. If so, I weep. I cannot disagree with anything Ross said in his last post, especially since it appeared to be informed by our private discussion. But something is still out of whack here. There is something in the thrust of his, your & Craig's posts that I recoil from, even though I elevated this thread to blue-sticky status. I realise I need to be clearer about what this "something" is, & I'll post again after I've thought about it some more.

Linz

Linz : Free - except as regulated by law....

AdamReed's picture

Linz,

Since you have seen fit to quote only three of the four sentences in Article 34 of the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, here is that Article's fourth and final sentence:

Directives related to printing house, radio, television, press, and other mass media, will be regulated by law.

As I remember, all four provisions of this Article also appeared in a previous constitution of a country bordering on Afghanistan, a constitution personally edited and promulgated by Yosip Vissarionovitch Dzhougashvili.

Mark - my evasion

AdamReed's picture

Mark, you write: "I have to ask you, if you look at the pervading philosophy of this country (the US), and who our leaders are, how was this outcome not predictibe to you?"

I was evading the now obvious disparity between my own idea of America - as America ought to be and was founded to be - and the dismal reality of an America led by a President eager to spread his "ideal" of faith-based democracy wherever he can. No excuse, just stating for the record that I learned from my error.

Adam, you said:

Mark Dow's picture

"In the case of Iraq, it turned out that Bush was sacrificing American and allied soldiers to establish another Islamic Republic, with Muqtada al Sadr and other theocratic goons taking orders from Iran in the new US-imposed government of Iraq."

Adam,

I have to ask you, if you look at the pervading philosophy of this country (the US), and who our leaders are, how was this outcome not predictibe to you?

Linz

Fred Weiss's picture

Linz, I agree with Rick that the supposed provisions in the Afghan constitution upholding freedom of speech really don't.

While it is true "Every Afghan has the right to express his thought through speech,writing, or illustration or other means", he can only do so "by observing the provisions stated in this Constitution". Remember that the key provision of their constitution is that Afghanistan is an Islamic state.

Also, while, "Every Afghan has the right to print or publish topics without prior submission to the state authorities", it can only be done "in accordance with the law". What law? Sharia law?

I'm afraid that I am also one of those whose enthusiasm for our efforts in the Mideast has almost entirely evaporated. We have not upheld the one principle which should have been our primary objective - to get these countries to accept *the separation of church and state*.

A few months ago the Afghans came within an inch of executing some guy who wanted to convert to Christianity. I think the only thing that saved him was international outrage and perhaps embarrassed and desperate behind the scene efforts from the United States.

"Someone has just argued

Ross Elliot's picture

"Someone has just argued with me privately, "I agree with the invasion of Aghanistan & Iraq. But if I can't enunciate concerns about the way the reconstruction is being handled for fear of being seen to give support to twats like Kevin, then what's the point? That's rhetorical.""

That "someone" was me. And there was no "argument" since there was no fundamental disagreement. What disagreement there was was over something which I can only describe as providing succor by omission, since it surely hasn't been by commission.

Faceless wetboys like Kevin Malone don't need any encouragement from me in order to spout their idiocies. They infest forums like SOLO for only one reason: to demonise America. And no amount of honest debate will change their agenda.

So, let's get it straight: The Bush administration was correct to remove the dictators in Afghanistan & Iraq. And Bush has been correct to promote a policy of peace through liberty through strength, as I would expect any American president to do. But none of that means anything, nor do the deaths of so many brave soldiers, if the goal of liberating those countries is put at risk by inadvertently creating a new Islamic theocracy-in-waiting.

As I said: America was able to beat two strong enemies in WWII "...because it was fired by a righteous indignation, had the clear goal of *annihilating* the enemy, gave unwavering support to it's allies, and had the guts to go hard and take some until justice prevailed."

A paternalistic, benign dictatorship, staffed by Americans and enforced with a ruthless resolve until the fruits of freedom are obvious to all, is the actual solution to this problem. And it's sure as hell the only honorable course to follow if the mindless brayings from the Kevin Malones of this world are not to resonate more than the heroism of young Americans.

obviously useless

Rick Pasotto's picture

Surely it should be obvious that "by observing the provisions stated
in this Constitution"
totally nullifies any supposed freedom of expression.

That's the same as saying "You can say whatever you want provided you agree with me."

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.