Kristol, Cheney and Rumsfeld obviously have access to the same scrip. Two years ago C. or R. argued – on prime-time news no less – that the step-up in insurgency was proof that we were winning the war. It goes something like this: When the enemy thinks it’s losing, it increases its carnage and so the insurgents think they’re losing and if they think they’re losing they are. Case closed. Anybody ever hear a military man vomit that nonsense?
That aside, why is Kristol getting so many media jobs? I’m not talking guest stuff, I’m talking jobs. He’s been the designated driver for any and every neocon-leaning nut bunch on the planet for a long time, but now their fellow-travelers in the media are hiring him. Very scary.
Whereas, if I was a terrorist/insurgent and not at all worried, I’d just sit home and do nothing at all. My enemies would know by the peace and quiet that I was winning.
Thanks Kristol for that anti-logic.
Yeah, the insurgents now have about 50,000+ American troops tied up in Baghdad for as long as they want them. Just lob a mortar round into some neighborhood once a week to keep them in check, and keep the costs of maintaining a force that size in the field at about a billion dollars a week..Also..If the Americans are conducting a surge, it’s in response to a threat and it is reactionary. My understanding is that when an enemy can force you to fight a reactionary war…they have the advantage and control the battlefield.
Maybe Kristol is on to something…But it seems to me that once someone commits to die as a suicide bomber, the notion of worrying about what your enemy is going to do becomes kind of pointless. I don’t think the insurgents are sitting around wringing their hands worrying about what the Americans are going to do. Their situation is fixed and and all they can do is come at it, as it comes to them. Allah akbar! It’s only pudgy-assed keyboard comandos who worry about the possiblity of an impending death, real warriors are at peace with the prospect of meeting eternity.
This clears up a question I had about the comment Cheney made last week about the ‘successes’ in Iraq. If an increase in the violence is a barometer of our progress, then the conditions are proof of steady victory. STAY THE COURSE! WE ARE WINNING!
That smug little bastard sickens me beyond belief. He wouldn’t last an hour in battle, yet he refers to our soldiers as “we”.
The only thing Kristol represents is the desperation of the neocons to drag this out long enough to try for the Iraqi oil contracts and to get their shot at Iran.
Absurd logic is all that the PNAC guys have to grab ahold of at this point, and it is pathetically all they have left on the table to ‘feed’ the wingers who need their latest fix from Faux News. Poor Kristol and his buddies, they devoted years of their sorry intellects to laying out this grand plan ideology, just waiting for the right dumbed-down-one [Bush] to manipulate into trying it out as policy. Neocon is today’s worst label.
Kristol doesn’t need to learn to tie his shoes because he either (a) wears slip ons or (b) wears shoes that use velcro instead of shoelaces.
Kristol, Cheney and Rumsfeld obviously have access to the same scrip. Two years ago C. or R. argued – on prime-time news no less – that the step-up in insurgency was proof that we were winning the war. It goes something like this: When the enemy thinks it’s losing, it increases its carnage and so the insurgents think they’re losing and if they think they’re losing they are. Case closed. Anybody ever hear a military man vomit that nonsense?
That aside, why is Kristol getting so many media jobs? I’m not talking guest stuff, I’m talking jobs. He’s been the designated driver for any and every neocon-leaning nut bunch on the planet for a long time, but now their fellow-travelers in the media are hiring him. Very scary.
Whereas, if I was a terrorist/insurgent and not at all worried, I’d just sit home and do nothing at all. My enemies would know by the peace and quiet that I was winning.
Thanks Kristol for that anti-logic.
Yeah, the insurgents now have about 50,000+ American troops tied up in Baghdad for as long as they want them. Just lob a mortar round into some neighborhood once a week to keep them in check, and keep the costs of maintaining a force that size in the field at about a billion dollars a week..Also..If the Americans are conducting a surge, it’s in response to a threat and it is reactionary. My understanding is that when an enemy can force you to fight a reactionary war…they have the advantage and control the battlefield.
Maybe Kristol is on to something…But it seems to me that once someone commits to die as a suicide bomber, the notion of worrying about what your enemy is going to do becomes kind of pointless. I don’t think the insurgents are sitting around wringing their hands worrying about what the Americans are going to do. Their situation is fixed and and all they can do is come at it, as it comes to them. Allah akbar! It’s only pudgy-assed keyboard comandos who worry about the possiblity of an impending death, real warriors are at peace with the prospect of meeting eternity.
This clears up a question I had about the comment Cheney made last week about the ‘successes’ in Iraq. If an increase in the violence is a barometer of our progress, then the conditions are proof of steady victory. STAY THE COURSE! WE ARE WINNING!
That smug little bastard sickens me beyond belief. He wouldn’t last an hour in battle, yet he refers to our soldiers as “we”.
The only thing Kristol represents is the desperation of the neocons to drag this out long enough to try for the Iraqi oil contracts and to get their shot at Iran.
Absurd logic is all that the PNAC guys have to grab ahold of at this point, and it is pathetically all they have left on the table to ‘feed’ the wingers who need their latest fix from Faux News. Poor Kristol and his buddies, they devoted years of their sorry intellects to laying out this grand plan ideology, just waiting for the right dumbed-down-one [Bush] to manipulate into trying it out as policy. Neocon is today’s worst label.
Kristol doesn’t need to learn to tie his shoes because he either (a) wears slip ons or (b) wears shoes that use velcro instead of shoelaces.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/chartier/chartier60.html
Gawd, erinyes—that is a great find. Thanks for the link.
My pick of Chartier’s essay is this sentence:
“America’s white hat is splattered in blood.”
I think the makeup goes with his eyes.