Iraq > World War II

posted by Ari Berman on 08/18/2006 @ 12:56pm

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx it!
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (231)

Subscribe Now

The war in Iraq has lasted three days longer than US involvement in World War II.

Germany declared war on the US on December, 11, 1941, four days after Pearl Harbor. The US announced victory in Europe on May 8, 1945. That's one thousand, two hundred and forty-four days.

We've been in Iraq one thousand, two hundred and forty-seven days---and still the Administration has no exit strategy, no plan for victory and no clue what it is doing. In case you'd forgotten, George W. Bush declared "Mission Accomplished" aboard an aircraft carrier over three years ago.

"In the battle of Iraq," Bush said, "The United States and our allies have prevailed."

Perhaps that pronouncement was a little premature. Twelve hundred and four days later, our troops are still paying the price.

Comments (231)

This IS a key anniversary or "days past", that I've been waiting for.

It really does drive the last nail into the "It's just like World War-2" analogies.

Posted by Mask at 08/18/2006 @ 1:09pm
Wow, I think I agree with Masky again.

chimpy can't win a war against a 3rd rate 3rd world army in the time it took a democrat to beat Germany/Italy/Japan. But people still think he is a Great Leader and should be remembered as a "war president". Quagmire.

Posted by crabwalk at 08/18/2006 @ 1:16pm
Yeah, lets compare WWII to Iraq since they are so similar...

Total US deaths in WWII.... over 400,000. In Iraq... under 3000.

Each and every death of a US soldier is painful and regrettable, but since Ari wants to compare the two wars, why not compare more than just the number of days. Lets also not forget civilian casualties in Germany (about 1.8 million) and Japan (about 600,000), when making comparisons to civilian deaths in Iraq.

If we used the same rules from WWII in Iraq, the war would have been over three years ago.

Posted by John B at 08/18/2006 @ 1:24pm
Honor and dignity - restore honor and dignity - thats what the Republican Conservatives said they would do, and restore the "crumbling" military, and get rid of nation building. Kosovo - the mission Republicans didnt support - is not the meat grinder with no exit strategy - no strategy - that is the Disaster of Iraq.

Can you imagine if the Marshall Plan had been carried out in Germany with the incompetence and malign intent with which George Bush has waged the Disaster in Iraq?

Posted by LiberalPride at 08/18/2006 @ 1:27pm
Posted by JOHN B 08/18/2006 @ 1:24pm | ignore this person

JOHN....you didn't have Nazi sympathisizers or "former members of the SS" blowing up markets in Munich or Bonn in June 1945....

or former militarists kidnapping and killing democratic Japanese and throwing their mutiliated bodies into the streets of Tokyo in October of 1945.

Take the analogy further, if you like. Say "Iraq is 'France', we've liberated it but there are still 'Nazis' in Iran and Syria"

Okay, you want the analogy, when do we launch our move "across the Rhine"?

Posted by Mask at 08/18/2006 @ 1:29pm
If Bush were around in WWII, he'd be lucky if they let him be the cook in one of those battleships in the Pacific. If he were too old to serve, then he'd be lucky to just get a job on an assembly line making planes or trucks. Assuming he would have been man enough to report for duty.

But today, his stupidity is mistaken for principle. His claim to hear the voice of God is taken as a sign of faith. His stay the course swagger is taken for courage. It amazing how things can change over 50 years. Back in the day, Bush would have been recognized for the below-average work ethic, failed businessman he is. Only a fool would have given him an ounce of responsibility. Just think what we can accomplish in the next 50! George W. Bush's grandson will inherit the throne and continue the brave fight against the terrorists!!

Save us Georgie! Save us Dicky!

Posted by BlueTexan at 08/18/2006 @ 1:43pm
Mask... I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Please clarify for me. I apologize in advance for not understanding it to begin with.

My post was intended to point out to the author the stupidity of his article. The point was that we are not fighting this war as we did WWII.

Posted by John B at 08/18/2006 @ 1:57pm
I don't think time comparisons matter , rather, results....if you do the dems and run home now and wait for the real blood bath take to take place in Iraq, then watch Iran take over Iraq, spread this "euphoric islamic victory" over the US, Israel and the west in general, you will indeed have peace for as long as it takes France and others in the appeasement classes,to OK the nuclearzation of the Islamic world of the President of Iran.

Now, at this time, you might want to start the clock and compare how long it takes a nuclearized ME to attack Israel, Europe and the US...then also time how long it takes the US to retaliate after suffering a nuclear loss here..this is a more realistic time line to compare with WW2....and then count the deaths, years, bullets,.....

In the mean time all here celebrate the federal ruling by a Carter judge in favor of a muslim run ACLU case to prevent the US from stopping events like the UK last week(involving muslims), the plotters HAVE to be cheering this ruling and have to believe Allah is on their side(in the form of lib judges)..because of paper work...anyone wonder how the case ened up in Detroit with a muslim ACLU group in front on a Carter(who let Kohmeni run to Iran and take hostages)..

I have a real problem with history repeating itself here and the left and the media following the Chamberlain model.....

Posted by john maasch at 08/18/2006 @ 2:04pm
Ari,

Again, the referrence to the USA's occupation of Iraq as still at "war" is not only false, but gives legitimacy to the neo-con claim of the Unitary Executive. In other words, it is dangerous to democracy. Please refrain from calling the occupation a "war".

Posted by freedomplease at 08/18/2006 @ 2:05pm
Posted by JOHN B 08/18/2006 @ 1:57pm | ignore this person

Well, my point JOHN is that too. But the claims are made that it IS somehow "analogous" to World War-II, when it obviously is not.

Ari Berman isn't making this up out of whole cloth. I've heard Limbaugh, Hannity, Kristol, etc. try to stake out a "World War-II analogy" for Iraq and it falls apart.

Not just on number of days (or your take on troop losses to somehow counter the counter-argument), but on the fact that if you're going to analogize Iraq to WW-2, you DO have to fight it like WW-2, which even the neo-conniest of neo-cons is unwilling to call for....that is TOTAL WAR against Iran, Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian terrtories (likely Pakistan and Saudi Arabia) with millions of troops.

Why? Because they want the IMAGE of "World War-II" with none of the costs or political will. They couldn't get such support in 2003, so they went into Iraq "on the cheap" and claimed "victory" in the first month.

The "World War-2" analogy reversed would be Roosevelt invading Norway with 50,000 troops, claiming "Victory over Hitler", and then allowing Hitler to funnel troops and support through Sweden and Denmark into Scandanavia for 3 years.

Posted by Mask at 08/18/2006 @ 2:09pm
Maasch,

Like I've said on another thread....I (like you) am so terrified of the terrorists that I could give a crap about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the rule of law or the three seperate but equal branches of government.

Please Georgie....I trust you, and Hillary after you, will do whatever is best to keep me safe.

Posted by freedomplease at 08/18/2006 @ 2:10pm
Ok Mask... then we agree. Because I also believe it is idiotic to make comparisons between the two wars. No matter who is doing it.

Posted by John B at 08/18/2006 @ 2:18pm
FREEDOMPLEASE,

Kidding, right?

MASK and ZERO have performed an unlikely but effective two-step in discussing the beginning and end of the meaning of this thread. I'm not sure why I'm writing because I have nothing to add.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/18/2006 @ 2:19pm
Mask... I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Please clarify for me. I apologize in advance for not understanding it to begin with.

My post was intended to point out to the author the stupidity of his article. The point was that we are not fighting this war as we did WWII.

Posted by JOHN B 08/18/2006 @ 1:57pm

John -

Again, you haven't been here long enough to know that not understanding Mask's blah-blah-what-if-blah-blah-postulating requires no apology...

We rarely understand what point Mask is trying to make...

Posted by New Dawn at 08/18/2006 @ 2:19pm
;) to Mask

Posted by New Dawn at 08/18/2006 @ 2:19pm
TJ -

I had less to add to the discussion than you - do I get a prize?

lol

Posted by New Dawn at 08/18/2006 @ 2:20pm
If we used the same rules from WWII in Iraq, the war would have been over three years ago.

Posted by JOHN B 08/18/2006 @ 1:24pm

John,

Before everybody walks away in happy agreement, I think you still have to explain this.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/18/2006 @ 2:20pm
Free,

I see you missed the point entirely...again...my constitutional protections and my rights will not matter if in the process of protecting me from the government listening to your wife and I describe your short comings, we miss the plot to blow up your place of work ...or your early trip home on a plane to catch me with her..

"Please Georgie....I trust you, and Hillary after you, will do whatever is best to keep me safe."

I understand why you and all here don't trust Bush or the Repubs.....BUT DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHY JUST AS MANY MAY NOT TRUST YOU OR YOUR VISION OF AMERICA AND HER SAFETY?

Posted by john maasch at 08/18/2006 @ 2:20pm
how could an intellectual, even a right wing intellectual, characterize syria and iran as fascist?

furthermore, did anyone care to notice that many of the perpetrators of terrorist acts outside of the middle east (bali, london, nyc, and madrid) were secular muslims?

Posted by darladoon at 08/18/2006 @ 2:22pm
AMERICA AND HER SAFETY

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 08/18/2006 @ 2:20pm

I guess the understanding of our country as a female is what makes it possible for many of us to see our administration as a bunch of rapists.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/18/2006 @ 2:24pm
Free,

I see you missed the point entirely...again...my constitutional protections and my rights will not matter if in the process of protecting me from the government listening to your wife and I describe your short comings, we miss the plot to blow up your place of work ...or your early trip home on a plane to catch me with her...

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 08/18/2006 @ 2:20pm

You're an asshole, moob-boy.

Posted by New Dawn at 08/18/2006 @ 2:25pm
Maasch,

I wonder whose breasts are bigger.....my wife's or yours? But in any event, the two of you should have fun. I recommend using our Jacuzzi on the back deck!

If the current FISA Law is inadequate it should be changed. It should not be broken. BY ANYONE. PERIOD.

Posted by freedomplease at 08/18/2006 @ 2:26pm
Zero, I agree with your 1:50pm comment and would add that the use of the term Islamo-fascist is perceived by Muslims as referring to all Muslims as fascists (even though it doesn't mean that) and guarantees that their terrorist ranks will only increase. (Calling people fascists doesn't exactly endear them to you.) So why are Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney seemingly hell bent on at least maintaining terrorist's numbers and, better yet, increasing them? Because terrorists are the life's blood of today's Republican Party. It's a pretty simple technique of rulers - been around for thousands of years - choose an enemy (create one if necessary) domestic or foreign and watch your subjects flock to your side.

Posted by felicity at 08/18/2006 @ 2:28pm
The battles in WW2 and the actual fighting in WW2, (time lines are really nuts),....with Iraq can not realisticaly be described as similar..one with guerilla war and the other a nation state in a declared war...however, the rhetoric, goals, desires and intetnions as well as the events, speeches and skirmishes ARE leading up to a world inclusive catastrofy

..how would the many here fight the mother who willingly would board a plane with her baby and blow it up?

Posted by john maasch at 08/18/2006 @ 2:29pm
Yeah, I've got to agree-with the contention that there is NO-CONNECTION between WWII and Iraq whatsoever. You can compare, but that's it. The differences are what matter--FDR was a statesman, while George W. Bush is...I don't know what. Not a President, and not a leader in any-sense. What a joke. What amazing incompetence. http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com/

Posted by Dr. Mabuse at 08/18/2006 @ 2:34pm
.."I wonder whose breasts are bigger....."

Really....wow...maybe I should call her and see how she is doing?

...Jr high isn't really all that far from here and the deep thoughts generated here are about on the same level...

...boobs...Jesus...

Posted by john maasch at 08/18/2006 @ 2:35pm
The Marshall Plan, the re-building of Germany, was a success. Thats what Conservative Republians called it, they called it the Marshall Plan for Iraq.

There is no rebuilding in Iraq - there are rebuilding scandals, and there are vast palaces being built far ahead of schedule so that American diplomats can lounge in luxury.

We have a Shiite theocracy in Iraq - that is what Americans are dying for. We have a "Salvadoran Solution" for Iraq - that is what the ogre John Negroponte calls it.

Conservative Republicans said, the rebuilding cannot fail. America cant afford for it to fail, we need a Marshall Plan for Iraq. Then, as the neo-cons congratulated themselves, the Marshall Plan morphed into the "Salvadoran Solution". Death squads roam free, taking people by night, drilling holes in people, pouring acid on people, and dumping people in the street.

Posted by LiberalPride at 08/18/2006 @ 2:35pm
.."I wonder whose breasts are bigger....."

Really....wow...maybe I should call her and see how she is doing?

...Jr high isn't really all that far from here and the deep thoughts generated here are about on the same level...

...boobs...Jesus...

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 08/18/2006 @ 2:35pm

You're the one who brought up sleeping with his wife.

Posted by New Dawn at 08/18/2006 @ 2:36pm
" add that the use of the term Islamo-fascist is perceived by Muslims as referring to all Muslims as fascists (even though it doesn't mean that) and guarantees that their terrorist ranks will only increase."

...But doesn't this mean that all muslims will then become all islamo-facists eventually?...using that arguement?

Posted by john maasch at 08/18/2006 @ 2:38pm
I guess a sexual reference in synical point gets turned around to focus on ..the one word that was never even mentioned(her boobs?), hell, I don't ebven know if Free is a man or a woman, or married, I was just trying to make a point with interest,...is it that difficult here?...

Posted by john maasch at 08/18/2006 @ 2:42pm
Oh, well, off to the airport to surrender my shampoo and then home...I feel so much safer now...

Posted by john maasch at 08/18/2006 @ 2:43pm
felicity,

and i would add to that that the republican party depends on terrorist attacks not only to increase their power, but as a mean to project and expand their military force throughout the region.

ironically, it is the republican party who are the fascists, as they exhibit all the hallmarks of fascism.

1. undermining democracy

2. projection of constant military power

3. hostility towards intellectuals, science and the arts

the only hallmark that is somewhat questionable is the merger of the State and Corporate power....but when we think about Big Oil, Big Energy, Defense, we begin to see it...

Posted by darladoon at 08/18/2006 @ 2:43pm
Aren't you one of the Christian sanctity of marriage guys, JM?

Where does implying that you're committing adultery with someone else's wife fit into your morals?

Posted by New Dawn at 08/18/2006 @ 2:43pm
Before everybody walks away in happy agreement, I think you still have to explain this.

Posted by TJBEHRENS1

Now why would you want to ruin a happy agreement.... cause my answer will do just that.

Posted by John B at 08/18/2006 @ 2:46pm
;) to Mask

Posted by NEW DAWN 08/18/2006 @ 2:19pm | ignore this person

NEW...you DO realize we're probably "on the same page" on this issue, don't ya?

Posted by Mask at 08/18/2006 @ 2:47pm
Maasch,

Who cares?

This blog is about whether you want a person to be the supreme law of the land or whether you want a document commonly known as the Constitution to be the supreme law of the land.

Patriotic American's have always chosen the former. You are scared, and I get that, and are therefore now willing to become unpatriotic.

I'm here trying to tell you, that whether we use legal surveillance or illegal surveillance there will always be a danger from terrorists. That is how it is going to be forever. The question is, are we going to let that terrorist threat stop us from being Americans?

Posted by freedomplease at 08/18/2006 @ 2:48pm
"Aren't you one of the Christian sanctity of marriage guys, JM?

"

My religon is between me and God..I don't usually partake in religious arguements....

Posted by john maasch at 08/18/2006 @ 2:49pm
oopps....patriotic americans have always chosen the LATTER not the FORMER!!!

Posted by freedomplease at 08/18/2006 @ 2:50pm
NEW...you DO realize we're probably "on the same page" on this issue, don't ya?

Posted by MASK 08/18/2006 @ 2:47pm

Yep, thus the wink.

Posted by New Dawn at 08/18/2006 @ 2:54pm
when one types in bush + fascism, one gets 15.2 million results.

Posted by darladoon at 08/18/2006 @ 2:54pm
Maasch - I wondered how long it would take for that "babies as bombs" thing to show up. One source was Norah O'Donnell on MSNBC who reported that one of the people arrested by British intelligence was a mother with a 6 month old baby. PERIOD. O'Donnell's take, "Are they using babies as bombs now?" Of course the media get's off on sensational news, sells a lot of soap too. (They really get off on headless bodies.) The lily-white West NEVER commits atrocities except when they're off on a Holy Crusade and can't find the jewels and gold they really went to the ME for so they cut open the stomachs of 3,000 Muslims convinced that the loot has been swallowed. Terribly disappointed at finding nothing, they and their leader, Richard the Lion-hearted, proceed to slaughter thousands more just out of sheer frustration. And it must remembered that Richard was a devout Christian just like George.

Posted by felicity at 08/18/2006 @ 2:55pm
"You are scared, and I get that"

Again,..miised the point,

I am "scared" that you are incapable to get anything I am saying.....oh, well.

I am concerned about us losing our common sense and our freedoms ...."scared", not of becoming unpatriotic, rather, I am afraid of guys who believe they have the entire truth and what the rest of us have to pay for their version of it...I fear your vision is hazardous to my country as a whole...and we are not talking a point of law here...I am talking about what the world will look like with your vision implemented....... we disagree on everything and looks like we always will.

Posted by john maasch at 08/18/2006 @ 2:56pm
"Aren't you one of the Christian sanctity of marriage guys, JM?

"

My religon is between me and God..I don't usually partake in religious arguements....

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 08/18/2006 @ 2:49pm

Riiiight. So no admission will be forthcoming that your intimating adultery with someone else's wife was crude and stupid.

Imagine my boundless surprise.

Live with yourself, bro.

Posted by New Dawn at 08/18/2006 @ 2:56pm
And incidentally, John - that God thing you mentioned and how you handle it - that's just how it should be - that I don't fault your for at all.

Posted by New Dawn at 08/18/2006 @ 3:00pm
Ferlicity,

Never heard the story you quote, but I am not surprised it had occured....consider the celebrations the mothers show when their son or daughter blows up a bus full of innocents and the family believes they are in paradise with Gods loving arms around them congradulating them for doing His work....this is my point....and you really want to discuss the Crusaders 500 years ago? May be you, like the muslim fanatics, are stuck in the 11th century...

Posted by john maasch at 08/18/2006 @ 3:00pm
no, I don't condone adultry..it hurts all sides involved. common sense should ....ah, well, never mind...bye

Posted by john maasch at 08/18/2006 @ 3:02pm
no, I don't condone adultry..it hurts all sides involved. common sense should ....ah, well, never mind...bye

Posted by john maasch at 08/18/2006 @ 3:04pm
America fought for independence against a Christian Nation, Americans died fighting a Christian Nation in world war 2. The Confederacy was Christian, Spain was Christian, Mexico was Christian. Moslems have been far, far, far less of a problem - historically speaking - as it is Americans are dying to help set up a Shiite theocracy in Iraq and Chaldean Christians living in Iraq since ancient times are no longer safe thanks to George Bushs Disaster in Iraq.

Posted by LiberalPride at 08/18/2006 @ 3:08pm
My religon is between me and God.

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 08/18/2006 @ 2:49pm

And that's the way it should be. Then the dreaded ACLU would not have to argue for or against someones right to have or not participate in religion or religious activity. I hope LUVIRONY(1) and Usama (I know he reads this stuff 'cause the trolls say he follows the left closely) read your message, John.

Posted by crabwalk at 08/18/2006 @ 3:24pm
LP, you must really hate America!! Robert E. Lee was pretty sure G-d was on his side, who are you to argue he was wrong? Don't you know the Church of England is The One True Religion?

Posted by crabwalk at 08/18/2006 @ 3:27pm
Posted by NEW DAWN 08/18/2006 @ 2:54pm | ignore this person

Okey-doke...didn't want you getting all "LILLIAN" on me.

I swear if I said the sky was blue, she'd say "HA! More 'Maskian' 'truth'...it actually just scatters the blue portion of sunlight with more intensity!!!"

Posted by Mask at 08/18/2006 @ 3:29pm
Proof that Ari doesn't get it.

Posted by woodyee at 08/18/2006 @ 3:33pm
"Moslems have been far, far, far less of a problem - historically speaking -"

Posted by LIBERALPRIDE 08/18/2006 @ 3:08pm | ignore this person

True, but as a point of historical note though, we DID have a few "run-ins" with Muslim nations before.....the 1801-1815 Barbary Pirates wars and the Ion Perdicaris Incident in 1904.

Just to note

Posted by Mask at 08/18/2006 @ 3:37pm
True, but as a point of historical note though, we DID have a few "run-ins" with Muslim nations before.....the 1801-1815 Barbary Pirates wars and the Ion Perdicaris Incident in 1904.

Just to note

Posted by MASK

And of course that little thing we like to call World War I. Ottoman empire ring any bells????

Posted by John B at 08/18/2006 @ 3:42pm
The Ottomans? Turkey is still Moslem and now Turkey wants to kill the Kurds. Turks arent blamed for having the intelligence to not join in with George Bushs Disaster in Iraq, yet France - the Christian Nation that helped America get independence from Christian England, why those dirty guys, how dare they not join in our folly?

There is no strategy, no common sense, no rebuilding but only rebuilding scandals. 100s of Iraqis turn up dead in the streets, holes drilled in them, acid poured on them. The Marshall Plan for Iraq has died of incompetence and malign intent and as the Conservatives chant "liberal, liberal, liberal" - the Salvadoran Solution rages on.

Posted by LiberalPride at 08/18/2006 @ 4:12pm
Posted by ZERO 08/18/2006 @ 4:09pm | ignore this person

Standby for ZERO to declare "this thread is dead"....

meanwhile everybody else keeps going with it!

Posted by Mask at 08/18/2006 @ 4:13pm
Roosevelt didn't say we would probably get out under the next president. Hell I just hope he doesn't attack Iran or Syria.

Posted by darby1936 at 08/18/2006 @ 4:21pm
Posted by DARLADOON 08/18/2006 @ 2:43pm: the only hallmark that is somewhat questionable is the merger of the State and Corporate power....

That hardly seems questionable. The merger of State and Corporate power is fairly well developed, in both parties.

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/18/2006 @ 5:23pm
Posted by ZERO 08/18/2006 @ 4:28pm: They won't attack Syria or Iran.

I hope you are right. But, the whackjobs are certainly agitating for an attack on both Syria and Iran.

They cannot realistically set up the casus belli,

Nuclear Iran

Support for Hezbollah

Aid to the Iraqi insurgency.

and produce a workable strategy for victory

Workable strategies do not seem to be much of a concern for Dear Leader.

and neutralizing the huge negative consequences of further expanding their Mideast war,

That was not a concern w.r.t. Israel/Lebanon. Why would it be a concern w.r.t. Syria and Iran?

as well as getting Iraq under control, before end of business in 2007.

Dear Leader has already said that solving these problems will be the work of future presidents.

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/18/2006 @ 5:33pm
Posted by ZERO 08/18/2006 @ 6:13pm: The political process on "nuclear Iran" will need to go much longer. The US no longer has the stomach for unilateral attacks and it will need to garner unequivocal UN support for any attack. The world is weary of US attacks.

I agree. But the Bush administration maintains that they do not need any additional Congressional (and certainly UN) authority to launch an attack on Iran.

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/18/2006 @ 6:25pm
Posted by ZERO 08/18/2006 @ 6:13pm: Support for Hizbullah hardly enrages most of the world the way its specifically upsets the US and Israel.

I don't think they give a damn about the rest of the world. They do care about domestic political opinion. But, the Hezbollah thing plays well with the Fox News viewers and helps them tie everything to the War on Terror.

With regards to the last point, the Bush team will not create a disaster that goes into a presidential year. They don't want to doom the Republican candidate.

I think they would see it as helping the Republican candidate. They appear to believe that war is good for republican candidates. Any war. Regardless of whether it is going well or not.

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/18/2006 @ 6:29pm
Hey, war is war and war is hell. I think WWII was bigger and faster, but had a lot less media in our face about it than even especially Vietnam, as similar as it is to Iraq it hadn't as much media coverage as Vietnam its first 3 years. Can you imagine having today's media coverage during WWII? Witnessing all the death both in the cities and rural, civilian and soldiers, on wide screen HD sense around 100's of channels and instead of occasional 10's to 100's a day to seeing 10's of 10,000 a day in your face for 4 years...

Not to diminish the horror of the WTC tragedy, but how many equivalent type WTC's events happened during WWII over and over again? See:

http://bostonreview.net/BR20.4/Forbes.html

http://members.iinet.com.au/~gduncan/massacres.html

http://www.boogieonline.com/revolution/multi/war/WWII/japan.html

A major upside to the MSM (even if it is a little wacky right now with infotainment whack job talkshowboaters), it does get us a little closer to seeing the death and helps lessen our tolerance to the killing, even the thick skinned still wince when those slaughtered are their own.

And thus the unfortunate decision of the hsuB admin to lie us into Iraq in the mad rush and look away from yet another preventative:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/berga/crimes/mt2.html

Whatever gives war a bad name, delays it for another day, prevents it, is good.

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/18/2006 @ 6:42pm
Meant: ...as 'Iraq' its first 3 years.

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/18/2006 @ 6:48pm
chimpy can't win a war against a 3rd rate 3rd world army in the time it took a democrat to beat Germany/Italy/Japan. But people still think he is a Great Leader and should be remembered as a "war president". Quagmire.

First of all, it's not a "3rd rate 3rd world army" or any organized army that we are fighting today. Also, if we used the tactics we used in WWII (Carpet bombing civilians, cities, and infrastructure, along with 2 very big bombs) throughout the ME (Syria, Iran, etc.) and had a leftist establishment that supported such actions, rather than subverting them, things would most likely be over.

But Hey...a guy can dream, can't he?

Posted by Sliver at 08/18/2006 @ 7:37pm
But Hey...a guy can dream, can't he?

Posted by SLIVER 08/18/2006 @ 7:37pm

you control all three branches of our government and all you can do is dream.

how much more do you have to control before you can finally turn the dream into the nightmare?

Posted by Will C. at 08/18/2006 @ 8:13pm
SLIVER - BAM!!! You nailed it.

Posted by woodyee at 08/18/2006 @ 8:15pm
SLIVER - BAM!!! You nailed it.

Posted by WOODYEE 08/18/2006 @ 8:15pm

even with chimpy's finger on the button, evangelic conservatives are still powerless to nuke the middle east.

(must it be a dream button before he can nail it)

Posted by Will C. at 08/18/2006 @ 8:30pm
Posted by ZERO 08/18/2006 @ 7:13pm: We'll have to see - I hope I am right.

I hope you are right, also.

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/18/2006 @ 8:30pm
Posted by SLIVER 08/18/2006 @ 7:37p: Also, if we used the tactics we used in WWII (Carpet bombing civilians, cities, and infrastructure, along with 2 very big bombs) throughout the ME (Syria, Iran, etc.) ... things would most likely be over.

At which point, we would have achieved exactly what, S. Liver?

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/18/2006 @ 8:32pm
Posted by WOODYEE 08/18/2006 @ 8:15pm: SLIVER - BAM!!! You nailed it.

You should be impressed, S. Liver. WOODYEE agrees with you.

That's quite an accomplishment. He never agrees with me.

You da man S. Liver.

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/18/2006 @ 8:33pm
I heard a great point that made a lot more sense than anything the hsuB admin ever stated or will for that matter considering hsuB actually stated out loud that the cause for why the terrorist are going after the US is that they hate our freedom-- then one has to question why even consider sending our blood to be wasted in battle anywhere when we fear away our freedom without a fight here at home! We're asked go abroad to fight and die because of hate, but to give up at home because for fear! We are cowards to fall for that crap. Not even the elderly, fragile and senile, may have the excuse to roll over and get screwed by hsuB, but what's everybody else's excuse that are perfectly healthy. We should be willing to die for our freedoms here at home-- especially if our own government wants to take them from us. Isn't that the reason for our nation and its laws, the constitution, the separation of powers and the bill of rights--our freedom? Fear should not be the reason we give up--whether it's terrorist or a �new con' job by the hsuB admin/GOP/MIC--if we fear at home, we've lost our freedom. Why bother going to war?

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/18/2006 @ 9:37pm
Meant: ..., but to give up at home because of fear.

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/18/2006 @ 9:41pm
hsuB asks for nothing of us but our freedom. Notice he doesn't consider our courage to fight the terrorist here at home without giving up our freedom. Is that because it requires no courage from him?

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/18/2006 @ 10:10pm
Maasch:"a muslim run ACLU case"

are you nuts? and what is a lawyer for the ACLU WERE a muslim, what difference would that make. you are paranoid and muslims are your boogie man. grow up.

Posted by johannesrolf at 08/18/2006 @ 10:34pm
Maasch, this is not the first time the US has faced a foe who was willing to use suicides as a weapon. Rather than surrender, thousands of Japanese jumped to their death, women and children included.

Posted by johannesrolf at 08/18/2006 @ 10:37pm
what if, not what is.

Posted by johannesrolf at 08/18/2006 @ 10:42pm
irst of all, it's not a "3rd rate 3rd world army" or any organized army that we are fighting today. Also, if we used the tactics we used in WWII (Carpet bombing civilians, cities, and infrastructure, along with 2 very big bombs) throughout the ME (Syria, Iran, etc.) and had a leftist establishment that supported such actions, rather than subverting them, things would most likely be over.

But Hey...a guy can dream, can't he?

Posted by SLIVER 08/18/2006 @ 7:37pm

Sorry Sliver, that is in fact what was there before chimpy and rummy rode in on the cheap/fast/smallest possible horse. Then, when their plans failed to materialize, an insurgency crept into the void created by chimpy and rummy. It was plain to see that is what would happen. But noooo, the left was wrong about it becoming an urban guerilla war. Oh, wait, they, we, were right about that too.

Carpet bomb Iraq? Good idea, backed by legal rules of war, a solid moral underpinning and the blessing of Jesus, americas favorite hippy long hair radical peacenik. Yep, good way to win the hearts and minds, another Dresden.

----

Westmoreland- "I don't get it. You should have lost that war. We never lost a battle, and you never won one."

General Giap replied simply, "This is true. It is also irrelevant."

Posted by crabwalk at 08/18/2006 @ 11:22pm
move'em out!

Posted by Will C. at 08/18/2006 @ 11:40pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 08/18/2006 @ 11:38pm: The country has turned overwhelmingly against the war largly out of a sense of guilt.

And a strong sense that the whole damn thing was one catastrophic mistake. From the very beginning.

And we'd like to take a mulligan.

But, we can't.

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/18/2006 @ 11:49pm
Lack of courage, guilt, but first denial and isolation: "This is not happening to me.", then anger: "How dare hsuB do this to me.", bargaining: "Just let me vote again.", then depression: "I can't bear to face going through this, putting my country through this.", finally acceptance: "I'm ready, I don't want to be a repub anymore."

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 12:28am
Major differences between Iraq and WWII,

WE WERE ATTACKED AND FOUGHT THE COUNTRY WHICH ATTACKED US, JAPAN. WE ALSO FOUGHT A COUNTRY WHICH ATTACKED OUR CLOSEST ALLY

sorry, the only similarity is with Vietnam.

Posted by johannesrolf at 08/19/2006 @ 12:47am
It's interesting that the current war-du-jur has lasted longer than WWII but reality says that this war is a non-sequitur to the events and causes of WWII.

This war was created for one reason to destabilize the oil enriched mid-east nations for corporate access to the regions, there was no real consideration for humanity but it did make a semi-plausible excuse to get the ball rolling.

Per reality the actual deaths, destruction and mayhem are nothing more than minor annoyance's to those who created this fiasco their "goal" is to gain more for those who need it less.

It's really sick and hypocritical that they have used those whose beliefs in God, and them that be self-reliant con-ser-va-tives to excuse reality to instigate and continue this war, of course they have read their history books and in their effort to cash in on history they have found suckers in these religious & idealogical circles who will stand on "their" particular beliefs to justify any "WAR" in the name of their religious or anally retentive beliefs. See massch's posts as positive proof of the clulessness nature of the conservative values.

What this has to do with any comparison of WWII and the current fiasco is almost totally irrelavent to the current worlds situation!

Thank God for good 12 yr old scotch!

Posted by dycel8r at 08/19/2006 @ 12:47am
Okey-doke...didn't want you getting all "LILLIAN" on me.

I swear if I said the sky was blue, she'd say "HA! More 'Maskian' 'truth'...it actually just scatters the blue portion of sunlight with more intensity!!!"

Posted by MASK 08/18/2006 @ 3:29pm | ignore this person

You know Mask...first, let me appologize to you....for the hypocrit comment over on the NSA ruling thread.

You see, I actually LIKE the fact that for once you stated your own opinion right up front...that you thought the ruling was GREAT. It was a VERY refreshing change from your usual instantaneous, knee-jerk, the-Nation-author-is-a-hypocrit post. I just couldn't resist doing to you, what you constantly do to EVERYONE else. I think it's wrong when you do it, me doing it was just as wrong, and I shouldn't have done it.

Second, I'd bet money that you and I agree on much more than you think. A while back, we BOTH agreed that what the Republicans did trying to blackmail the Dems on the minimum wage until they got their estate tax cut ransom...that sucked! And, as you admitted late in that thread, you and I both support an increase in the minimum wage itself. And, I have seen in the past couple of days, signs that you are reaching out to find common ground with others here...Mal, LOC, New Dawn. That's a good thing Mask.

What I (and many others here, from what they've all been saying) find frustrating is that you 1) always start your posts with some criticism of whoever the Nation author happens to be, 2) consistantly misread and/or misrepresent what authors and posters are saying in order to "tag" them, rather than respond with your thoughts reagrding what they are actually saying, 3) mis-quote or worse yet, make up quotes from individuals for the same purpose, and 4) rarely, rarely give your OWN opinions on any subject, prefering instead to attack the opinions of others.

What you don't like about me is that I tend to make a habit of catching you at it. You might be surprised to know that the reason I do so, is that I am REALLY hoping you'll stop! I think your posts would be so much...better...if you didn't try so hard to be a knee-jerk contrarian.

Posted by Lillian at 08/19/2006 @ 12:59am
it's late here on the east coast, and I'm feeling a bit frisky, so here goes:

http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/1JwtmHDE933261Tnb

warning: definitely off topic

Posted by johannesrolf at 08/19/2006 @ 01:01am
Another dif:

"So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself--nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.": FDR

VS

"We have seen our vulnerability - and we have seen its deepest source. For as long as whole regions of the world simmer in resentment and tyranny - prone to ideologies that feed hatred and excuse murder - violence will gather, and multiply in destructive power, and cross the most defended borders, and raise a mortal threat. There is only one force of history that can break the reign of hatred and resentment, and expose the pretensions of tyrants, and reward the hopes of the decent and tolerant, and that is the force of human freedom." hsuB

And then he said:

"There's an old saying in Tennessee; I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee that says �Fool me once� shame on� shame on you.' *gesture with hand in the air* �If fool me can't get fooled again!"

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 01:42am
Posted by ZERO 08/18/2006 @ 7:13pm: We'll have to see - I hope I am right.

I hope you are right, also.

Posted by ORWELL2005 08/18/2006 @ 8:30pm

Let's all hope so. However, Seymour Hersh doesn't share your optimism. Hersh has described Bush as a man who sees himself as some kind of Winston Churchill figure. Just as Churchill was voted out of office after the conclusion of WWII, Bush sees himself as a great but tragically misunderstood public figure. Bush is absolutely convinced that even though right now most Americans are skeptical of his policies, he will be completely vindicated by history. Hersh has stated that an attack on Iran will probably take place after the Nov. �06 elections, as Bush now has a democratization "legacy" to fulfill.

And Zero, don't forget Bush is an anti-intellectual. He admitted as much to Woodward when he said he makes policy decisions "from his gut." You have made several excellent points on why an attack on Iran should not take place. But you are assuming that Bush makes decisions by using his critical thinking skills. When has he ever had a need to know the facts? He doesn't need to know the facts because his "gut" tells him what he needs to do.

Also, the Jerusalem Post recently published an article that stated that the U.S. was giving signals to Israel to attack Syria during its bombing campaign in Lebanon, though Olmert did ultimately veto the idea.

Perhaps the bombing campaign in Lebanon is the first stage of an imminent assault on Iran. Perhaps Bush envisions the following scenario: with the Lebanese army and UN troops entrenched in southern Lebanon, Iran's ally, Hezbollah, been knocked out of the equation. The U.S. Air Force will begin a bombing campaign in Iran. The Iranians will get angry at their current regime and overthrow the Islamic government. Hezbollah and Hamas will then lose their patron. Israel will be able impose a unilateral solution on the Palestinians. Then for all practical purposes, what is left of Palestine will be "wiped off the face of the earth," in the sense that Israel will annex most Palestinian land. The areas they don't annex will turn into Israeli controlled reservations where Palestinians will be used solely as cheap labor for Israel.

Now, there are so many things in this plan that can go disastrously wrong. However, we are dealing with an administration that does not look at worst case scenarios.

Who knows? May Sliver will get his wish after all.

Posted by blue photon at 08/19/2006 @ 01:54am
Oops. I meant to write: mayBE Sliver will get his wish.

Posted by blue photon at 08/19/2006 @ 01:56am
"Yeah, lets compare WWII to Iraq since they are so similar.."

Yeah also the fact that WW2 started about 2 years before America got kicked into it. So Iraq still has a few years to go to run as long as WW2 in Europe. The Brits declared war on Germany on 3rd September 1939 and Canada, South Africa. New Zealand and Australia one week later. America didn't get into the act until late in 1941 so as usual the propandists fudge the figures. The Brits carried the European War almost alone until the US declaration of war. Bush broke ranks with this US tradition of (WW1 and) WW2:

"Roosevelt, declaring war on December 8, 1941, declared the previous day a "date that will live in infamy," and listed all of the places in the Pacific that the Japanese attacked. Still, the serious condition of the US Pacific Fleet was kept a secret, partly out of the desire to not panic the public, especially the west coast. Also, the War Department did not wish to give information to the enemy, which they assumed was reading American papers. A serious crisis had befallen the Americans.

Should they begin to pull back the buildup on the Atlantic? Roosevelt, who wanted war with Germany, particularly worried that the European war, a far greater threat in his estimation, would be seen in the United States as a European problem and Japan as the Americans' sole concern. Within days, Hitler would alleviate his concerns.

In Berlin on December 8, 1941, Adolf Hitler was elated. "We have an ally that has not been defeated in 1500 years!" he told Minister of Propaganda Josef Goebbels. On December 11, 1941, Hitler gave a speech to the Reichstag. Confused and rambling, he compared his own childhood of poverty to that of the wealthy Roosevelt. He declared war on the United States.

In doing so, he ensured his own destruction. UK Prime Minster Winston Churchill, when he heard of Pearl Harbour, remarked, "so we have won after all!" The American public would have been quite content with dealing with Japan and leaving the European War to the Europeans. The treachery of the Japanese attack burned bright in the minds of most Americans, and they wanted revenge. If not for the declaration of war by Germany, Roosevelt would have had a hard time justifying declaring war on Germany until Japan was destroyed. But Germany did declare war, and the U-boats moved to the US Eastern seaboard in January 1942."

What's changed ? Nothing! The Ari Berman's of this world had progenitors in abundance in the 1940s.

Posted by lrjones4 at 08/19/2006 @ 04:59am
THIS ONE IS MOST SIGNIFICANT:

AUGUST 20, 2003: Attack on United Nations Headquarters in Baghdad.

The U.N. special representative in Iraq [Sergio Vieira de Mello] and at least 16 others died Tuesday in a bomb explosion that ripped through the organization's headquarters in Baghdad. � At least 100 people were wounded. [CNN, 8/20/03]

Think like a criminal.

What was the result of this attack?

The UN Pulled out.

Then What?

Other nations pulled out of the coalition over time - as each of these countries were threatened and attacked.

By whom?

Cui Bono?

Who else do we know that brazenly attacked a UN observer position just recently?

Israel.

On whose behalf are we in Iraq?

Israel.

How many Mossad Operatives are operating within Iraq? Hundreds?

Who blew up the Mosque that lit the spark for the civil war?

Cui Bono?

Open your mind.

Posted by plunger at 08/19/2006 @ 08:16am
Posted by LRJONES4 08/19/2006 @ 04:59am

You're right Jones, if we had left Saddam with 1/3 of his country, his massive terrifying army, his wmd's, his ties with Alqaida and his 8 year hold on Kuwait we would have been in terrible danger! Just like WWII. Now we have peace in the middle east, democracy running rampant and a Marshall Plan for Iraq that is working perfect. But all the failures have been because people ask questions like "Are you sure he has wmd?" or "This is going to bog down our army for years isn't it?"

Posted by crabwalk at 08/19/2006 @ 10:03am
Hersh has described Bush as a man who sees himself as some kind of Winston Churchill figure.

Posted by BLUE PHOTON 08/19/2006 @ 01:54am

On December 11, 1941, Hitler gave a speech to the Reichstag. Confused and rambling, he compared his own childhood of poverty to that of the wealthy Roosevelt.

Posted by LRJONES4 08/19/2006 @ 04:59am

I think anyone who watched or heard a portion of Bush's sad, exhausted attempt yesterday at Camp David (another vacation already?) to re-re-re-explain why he needs to break the law to protect us and why he believes that a bigger court down the line will tell him to damn the torpedos knows which one of these two great historical figures he is emulating most closely.

Perhaps all Bush needs is a great portrait photographer like Karsh to give him that rugged Churchillian bulldog appearance he imagines he has. All the rest of us see is a combination of wide-eyed beagle puppy and a junkyard mutt that will bark and bite indiscriminately. Toss into the mix a little pampered fluffy white cat who hasn't an honest interest in anything beyond his personal gratification and we have quite an inspiring portrait.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/19/2006 @ 10:06am
The president refused to address reports that North Korea may be preparing for an underground test of a nuclear bomb.

"It's a hypothetical question and you're asking me to divulge any intelligence information I have and I'm not going to do that, as you know. I'm not going to break tradition," he said.

From the AP article on yesterday's Camp David press conference.

Of which tradition is he speaking? The one that has existed since yesterday of not engaging in hypotheticals or the other one, also instituted yesterday, of not leaking intelligence? Of course, what we have learned during this administration is that much of what has been sold to us as intelligence is nothing but hypotheses, so the tradition, whatever it is, seems internally consistent. If only the tradition had a little more age to it...

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/19/2006 @ 10:15am
Tradition: "What chimpy says it is"

The Law: "What chimpy says it is"

Victory "What chimpy says it is"

oops, wrong post.

Posted by crabwalk at 08/19/2006 @ 10:24am
"This is going to bog down our army for years isn't it?"

C,

What did you have in mind for "our" army if it was not bogged down? Very good at the military bang, crash, Mission Accomplished thingo but quite hopeless at dealing with insurgencies.

As insurgencies and "Asymmetrical Warfare" are the wars of the future (so we are told) it seems "our" army is getting a bit of belated training in the real thing. It can't do it any harm from a training perspective and as a bonus it will keep the Great Leader happy. That's if the New Iraq Government thinks "our" army is up to the challenge of dealing with quagmires and doesn't send it home before it gets skilled in the contemporary necessities.

What do you think?

Posted by lrjones4 at 08/19/2006 @ 10:34am
http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/1JwtmHDE933261Tnb

warning: definitely off topic

Posted by JOHANNESROLF 08/19/2006 @ 01:01a

You are a strange man. Damn this 28k dial up connection! Ahh, life in the sticks, monster trucks, fireworks at 4:00am, rednecks blasting rap, racoon poop in my forge, smashed mailboxes, destroyed political signs and glacial speed internet!!

Posted by crabwalk at 08/19/2006 @ 10:38am
Crabwalk, I'm sorry, did I offend you? that goes for anyone out there. I am truly sorry if I offended anyone with this bit of foolery. I got a chuckle out of it, and thought others might also. I will think twice before posting anything off topic.

Posted by johannesrolf at 08/19/2006 @ 10:45am
Posted by TJBEHRENS1 08/19/2006 @ 10:06am

Yes TJ, I see what you are saying but I still think I like the way he walks best of all. It is a swagger that could easily accommodate a cigar. Now a swagger and a cigar would, I think, out do the great man himself.

Perhaps Bush's genius has elements of serendipity as well as the other embellishments.

Posted by lrjones4 at 08/19/2006 @ 10:47am
Bush's genius

hahahahahah, never in a million years did I think I would see these two words together.

Posted by johannesrolf at 08/19/2006 @ 10:49am
it seems "our" army is getting a bit of belated training in the real thing. -LR

so is the medical staff at Walter Reed. How about actual training, without the 2000+ dead 20,000 wounded "trainees"? Whereas Alqaida used to have training camps in the desert where they would blow up rocks and sheep, now they get their timing and technical specs just right "training" on our boys and girls.

Instead of being bogged down "training" in Baghdad, they could have been helping in New Awleans, or more in Pakistan, or actually rebuilding Afghanistan. Or using the limited language specialists to listen in to all the NSA conversations instead of standing on a corner trying to make a kid from Grand Rapids understand a man from Tikrit that just wants soem clean water, not to be shot at because he is in the wrong place at the wrong time

Sorry LR, I think it is a bad idea. Insurgencies are not beaten with solely military means.

Posted by crabwalk at 08/19/2006 @ 10:52am
JR, no offense taken here. The human figure is only offensive when blasted into tiny bits or packed to morbid obesity. Two things we Americans excel at. Still waiting to see the end, it willl take about an hour for the whole thing to creep through

Posted by crabwalk at 08/19/2006 @ 10:54am
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 08/19/2006 @ 10:49am

Where've you been. Thought you must have gone to the great forum in the sky (or joined the GOP).

Posted by lrjones4 at 08/19/2006 @ 10:55am
Bush's genius- he means Bush's brain, Turd Blossom.

Posted by crabwalk at 08/19/2006 @ 10:56am
Posted by LRJONES4 08/19/2006 @ 10:34am: What do you think?

If you are serious, Black Knight, you are a complete and total lunatic.

And, by the way, you are not from the United States. Hence, you should NOT refer to "our" army. If you love this war so much (for its wonderful training opportunities), you are your Aussie mates should go to Iraq to personally revel in the destruction that you orgasm over.

You are a jackass.

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/19/2006 @ 11:11am
Jones, the reports of my demise have been greatly exaggerated, to quote Mark Twain, but thanks for noticing. I was getting bogged down in trivialities here, and also felt the icy wind of mortality, I am after all the same age as our two last presidents, just an old draftdodging hippie am I.

Posted by johannesrolf at 08/19/2006 @ 11:32am
What do you think?

Posted by QuagmireJONES408/19/2006 @ 10:34am

You're right about the quagmire

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 11:54am
Posted by CRABWALK 08/19/2006 @ 10:38am

Were it not for my highspeed, I'd guess we were neighbors.

Posted by LRJONES4 08/19/2006 @ 10:47am

I suppose that Bush does benefit from being in the video age, so his wide-armed gait can impress the boys at the gym, ust as Winston's waddle would probably have elicited much more giggling than respect or fear. As for me, the fixed image of a good snarl and a resolute stare conveys a force that all of my president's accomplishments on the bench press cannot touch.

I love the story of the Karsh photo of Churchill: coming out of a meeting and heading into another in Canada, Churchill allowed Karsh only a few minutes to snap a shot or two. Karsh requested Churchill to remove his cigar. Churchill refused. Karsh reached to Churchill's mouth, removed the cigar, snapped the shot. By the time he was ready for shot number two, Churchill was already starting to grin.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/19/2006 @ 11:58am
ORWELL

There is a small (about 1,400?) Aussie contingent in Iraq. Not agreeing his post but thought it worth mentioning.

LR

Re WWII, bear in mind that Roosevelt had already been aiding Britain, including providing convoy escorts as far out as Iceland. There had already been a couple of shooting incidents between US escorts and German U-boats and I suspect that would've lead to war w/Germany (as in WWI) even without a German declaration. Of course, it would likely have taken place later, with interesting consequences.

Posted by brunowe at 08/19/2006 @ 12:19pm
SLIVER

Also, if we used the tactics we used in WWII (Carpet bombing civilians, cities, and infrastructure, along with 2 very big bombs) throughout the ME (Syria, Iran, etc.) and had a leftist establishment that supported such actions, rather than subverting them, things would most likely be over.

Right, because that's how you fight a counter-insurgency war.

Posted by brunowe at 08/19/2006 @ 12:51pm
Right, because that's how you fight a counter-insurgency war.

Posted by BRUNOWE 08/19/2006 @ 12:51am

that's how nazi germany and imperial japan fought counter insurgencies

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 12:59pm
isn't amazing that regardless of time or place... fascists advocate the same tactics?

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 12:59pm
Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 12:59am

Simpleminded bender warning:

Seems that strategies have not advanced much beyond killing until one side says "uncle". As we moved past the anniversaries of glories past like Hiroshima and Nagasaki, some must have sighed at the reminder that there was a time when we could obliterate cities in a single moment and smile at the result. We are also reminded that since we have little understanding of non-English languages, we will never understand the word "uncle" even as it is shrieked by the survivors of whatever ill-conceived plot our masterminds concoct.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/19/2006 @ 1:21pm
Posted by LRJONES4 08/19/2006 @ 10:47am

The image of a mad-looking hsuB seated next to 'The Button' in a darkened room with a cigar and his pet India on his lap-- trying his best to look like a Karshian Churchill, but as in all his attempts at success-- to a majority of the people he will always appear analogous to:

http://home.comcast.net/~johnrhoward/alfbush.gif

http://www.n24.de/images/2005/07/11/2005071109231500030.jpg

http://blog.nrwspd.de/archives/img/bush_whatmeworry_blog.jpg

http://boortz.com/images/funny/bush_alfred_e_newman.jpg

http://blog.reidreport.com/uploaded_images/bush-alfred-703427.jpg

http://www.texaschapbookpress.com/magellanslog4/bushneuman.jpg

http://growabrain.typepad.com/growabrain/images/alfred_e_newman_1.jpg

http://radar.smh.com.au/0105/alfred.jpg

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 1:34pm
Posted by TJBEHRENS1 08/19/2006 @ 1:21pm

It must burn up evangelic conservatives that the generation we recognize as "the greatest"... was liberal.

You'd think that the hamsters, in pursuit of the same designation for themselves, would have focused on certain rather simple concepts like winning and rabidly avoided others... like quagmire.

But then when a people prefer to think with their gut instead of the good mind that god gave them, there is an ultimate inevitable outcome that they will wind up producing deep shit...

somewhere

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 2:06pm
do we really want to emulate how the Nazis fought insurgents? when Heydrich was assassinated in Czecholslovakia, the Germans eradicated a village, killed all the men and sent all the women to concentration camps. the inhabitants of that village had NOTHING to do with the killing of Heydrich.

Posted by johannesrolf at 08/19/2006 @ 2:18pm
Posted by BRUNOWE 08/19/2006 @ 12:19am: There is a small (about 1,400?) Aussie contingent in Iraq. Not agreeing his post but thought it worth mentioning.

The Black Knight was clearly referring to the US military. Read his post.

And I was not suggesting that other Aussies be sent on his behalf. I was suggesting that he himself, along with the other knights from his fantasy war club, go forth to bring the battle to Iraq.

After all, he is the Black Knight. And the world needs him.

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/19/2006 @ 2:28pm
Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 12:59am: that's how nazi germany and imperial japan fought counter insurgencies

Actually, its how we fight insurgencies also. And, as we can see, it doesn't work too well...

Especially if your aim is to bring freedom and democracy to the people...

S. Liver is just upset that we haven't used the "big" bombs.

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/19/2006 @ 2:31pm
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bush%2C+George+W.

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 2:36pm
Ooops, wrong page.

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 2:38pm
Especially if your aim is to bring freedom and democracy to the people...

Posted by ORWELL2005 08/19/2006 @ 2:31pm

So true

It's time for the great Liberal Center of America to reestablish is leadership to both bring traditional American values back to our own people and continue the gentle advocacy of those values to the peoples of the world

Excerpts from "Four Freedoms" address [tinyurl.com]

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 2:50pm
correction... it's leadership

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 2:50pm
Crabwalk, I'm sorry, did I offend you? that goes for anyone out there. I am truly sorry if I offended anyone with this bit of foolery. I got a chuckle out of it, and thought others might also. I will think twice before posting anything off topic.

Posted by JOHANNESROLF 08/19/2006 @ 10:45am

Any time - do that any time - that was freaking riotous.

Talk about "nothing up my sleeves"!

BWAHAHahhahHAHahahahahhaah

Posted by New Dawn at 08/19/2006 @ 3:00pm
I find it interesting, despite the ongoing problems in Iraq, many conservatives appear interested in expanding the war in the Middle East beyond the borders of Iraq. Conservative Fox News is a great example of this. Witness this [eyesonfox.org].

Posted by sknabt at 08/19/2006 @ 3:04pm
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bush%2C+George+W.

Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/19/2006 @ 2:36pm

I'm going to start referring to him as Chimpy McDumbass in public, I swear.

I haven't laughed so much at the Nation since ever. :)

Posted by New Dawn at 08/19/2006 @ 3:11pm
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bushed-up

More very funny stuff. Sad, pathetic, but funny.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/19/2006 @ 3:27pm
Bush's Second Term

Proof that god punishes us for masturbating.

Bushitosis

A condition which compells the afflicted to spew right wing moralistic judgements, fundamentalist "conservative" views, and make statements inferring blind support for the Bush administration.

MaryAnn just can't shut up about the "sanctity of the family". She has a really bad case of Bushitosis.

Paul has the worst case of Bushitosis I have ever seen. He yells "Hell yea, bomb the fuckers" every time he hears Bush say the word Iraq.

Bushspeak

Words or phrases spoken or speeches given by the Bush Administration that can be construed as Orwellian Doublespeak

"The economy is strong" "Heckuva Job" "Healthy Forests" "Clear Skies" "No Child Left Behind" "Judicial Crisis" "We are winning the war on terror"

Bushslap

When someone realizes that voting Republican has caused them terrible harm.

Workers at Lear Seigler Services Incorporated in North Carolina, a company that repairs huge gas-guzzling Hummers, were just Bushslapped with a massive layoff on the day they were supposed to get Christmas bonuses.

He was a proud Republican, until he was Bushslapped back into the army fifteen years after he'd retired from service.

After her husband was killed in Iraq, she felt Bushslapped when she saw the President making a joke about looking for Weapons of Mass Destruction under his office desk.

Posted by New Dawn at 08/19/2006 @ 3:33pm
I'm leaning right towards sad and pathetic with you, TJ.

Posted by New Dawn at 08/19/2006 @ 3:35pm
Sad and pathetic is the proper description for leaning right, ND.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/19/2006 @ 3:37pm
anybody want to split a bottomless bowl of quagmire fries?

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 3:43pm
the taste lingers on and on and on and on

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 3:43pm
The willingness to endure physical suffering, material sacrifice, and jail for the sake of justice was a singular mark of the American character that earned respect as it infected the world.

What is the United States infecting the world with today?

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1120.shtml

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 4:04pm
Dawn, the hand is faster than the eye.

Posted by johannesrolf at 08/19/2006 @ 4:07pm
The willingness to endure physical suffering, material sacrifice, and jail for the sake of justice was a singular mark of the American character that earned respect as it infected the world.

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1120.shtml

Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/19/2006 @ 4:04pm

and then he left

Ruppert longs for the day when people stood their ground, but then when the going got tough... he hits the road

You know something fellas, anyone that doesn't have the backbone to stay and fight this thing out with the hamsters will not be missed by me at all.

And I advocate their immediate departure using the most expedient mode to get their ass across the border... whatever it takes so they are not in our way

This asshole thinks he's going to send us some hope.

Ha Ha Ha Ha

Our hope lies in our hearts, our heads and our hands� and it's still here

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 4:43pm
Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 4:43pm

Are you saying that he's lost hope by leaving? Or is it that because our great liberal multitudes aren't marching in protest against the war/occupation, unconstitutional spying, torture, MIC take over of our gov., etc., actively sacrificing for what we believe in, that perhaps we've already left our nation?

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 5:05pm
Are you saying that he's lost hope by leaving?

Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/19/2006 @ 5:05pm

I'm saying... he left.

And now I won't be tripping over his sorry ass

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 5:10pm
Will,

What does it matter if no one is doing anything about it anyway? I don't see very many people tripping over anyone standing in anyone's way for much of anything...

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 5:15pm
Or is it that because our great liberal multitudes aren't marching in protest against the war/occupation, unconstitutional spying, torture, MIC take over of our gov., etc., actively sacrificing for what we believe in, that perhaps we've already left our nation?

Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/19/2006 @ 5:05pm

I've never marched a day in my life and I never will. All the conservative sleeze media will do is pick out the the most wild eyed member of the crowd and play that image over and over again.

Blogs are the new battle ground. That's where I take the fight.

but if you want to take it to the streets, do what people used to do when I was a kid... knock on doors and advocate for a candidate or a cause.

but dress nice... and get a haircut

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 5:15pm
...and have doors closed because neighbors think you're a Witness or Mormon?

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/19/2006 @ 5:17pm
What does it matter if no one is doing anything about it anyway? I don't see very many people tripping over anyone standing in anyone's way for much of anything...

Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/19/2006 @ 5:15pm

What makes you think we're not doing anything? I spent the last year poking and prodding the hamsters on this site to see what makes them move... and what doesn't.

and that's far superior to some mindless chant in a faceless throng flashed for 5 seconds on the ten o'clock news.

We fight for the mind of America and it's been corrupted by hamster conservatism for thirty years now.

Bank that it's going to take just as long to uncorrupt it

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 5:20pm
...and have doors closed because neighbors think you're a Witness or Mormon?

Posted by TJBEHRENS1 08/19/2006 @ 5:17pm

then knock on the next one... and while you're doing it, learn how to keep that door open

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 5:21pm
Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 5:21pm

A hint of scruffiness and a well-chilled 12-pack goes a long way.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/19/2006 @ 5:24pm
A hint of scruffiness and a well-chilled 12-pack goes a long way.

Posted by TJBEHRENS1 08/19/2006 @ 5:24pm

Ha Ha Ha Ha

:)

yeah, but I don't have the money to be the friend that everyone gets high with a little help from

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 5:30pm
Wait for Seahawks Sundays to begin so you can attack your neighbors in groups. A few cases of Milwaukee's Best won't set you back too much, but they could go a long way toward opening the doors of otherwise unwelcoming people.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/19/2006 @ 5:33pm
Will,

Not saying that blogging isn't doing something, but perhaps that's why the hsuB admin and the far right minority 'new cons' think they should continue pulling their crap-- no one is physically there willing to sacrifice to oppose their crap. They sent their goons to Florida to stop the count. What would have happened if there were more of the majority there to stop them-- would've the count continued? But, of course it didn't happen, so we'll never know. And what happens to the media who's headquarters get picketed, they pay attention, (not that I see much of that here in the states), but notice other countries where they still do. I do believe that the repub far right chickenhawks are cowards, but until they're called out in real life-- they'll continue to BS behind their wizard of oz screen.

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 5:36pm
Posted by TJBEHRENS1 08/19/2006 @ 5:33pm

I'm going to start playing with the concept this fall. That way I can learn something for the next election.

but my community has about eighty thousand people. I don't think I can drink that many beers.

(besides... wouldn't it be better to equate the republicans with intoxication)

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 5:42pm
they'll continue to BS behind their wizard of oz screen.

Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/19/2006 @ 5:36pm

What you are seeing is the end result of thirty years of organization. We're just starting.

Read Kennedy's book "Why England Sleep". Liberalism is always a little slow out of the gate. The commies and the conservatives will always have the initial edge.

But once were out... god help whatever got us moving.

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 5:48pm
sorry... Why England Slept

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 5:50pm
Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 5:42pm

Now that's a strategy. Target Republican football parties, bring the beer, and bring up Pat Tillman.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/19/2006 @ 6:01pm
Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 5:50pm

Got a copy? Looks like a copy goes for $70-80 on-line. Guess if I wait 6-7 years I should be able to just download it. Did a search of my local library and 3 copies may be out, 2 are just for in the library use, signed-in for a loaner. We'll see.

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 6:41pm
Posted by TJBEHRENS1 08/19/2006 @ 6:01pm

The beauty of liberalism is that it allows for all of us to explore the ways that work best for each of us.

In a face to face I will always portray myself as competent, clean cut, knowledgeable and friendly.

Because that is exactly how our domestic enemy doesn't want me to be viewed.

But whatever you ultimately decide to do, avoid falling into the stereo type that they would have you be

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 6:46pm
Got a copy?

Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/19/2006 @ 6:41pm

Yeah I do. It's not a big book. It's essentially a paper that Kennedy wrote when he was in college.

You could very easily take it in, in the nice comfy chair, in just a couple hours... if it even took that long.

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 6:50pm
You can sign up for a seven day free trial and read it here

no risk even

:)

Why England Slept [questia.com]

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 7:01pm
But whatever you ultimately decide to do, avoid falling into the stereo type that they would have you be

Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 6:46pm

Exactly! That's why my Benz is always immaculate, my Hugo Boss shirts freshly starched, my Ferragamos polished to a blinding shine, and my Bible always handy.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/19/2006 @ 7:13pm
Posted by TJBEHRENS1 08/19/2006 @ 7:13pm

I'm more of a Toyota Tacoma, Outer Banks Pique Polo shirt, Redwing Workboots kind of guy.

and I only tote a bible if I'm in any danger of some wild eyed drunken conservative mistaking me for a small caged raised quail tard and shooting me...

in the face

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 7:43pm
the good book will absorb the blast

:)

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 7:43pm
I see very few comparisons between Iraq and WWII. However, there are certainly analogies in some of the details, as there is in most wars. For instance, there were established anti-war movements against going into WWII. They were silenced when the Pearl Harbor attacks took place, especially after the Hitler-Stalin Pact dissolved. Compare that to today, when the anti-war movements came to life just days AFTER being attacked on 9/11.

Zero -

The term Islamofascist has been used for some time because it is appropriate. These people represent fascism in every sense of the word - just look to the goals of Al Qaeda in Iraq. Even the anti-war movement during the Nazi threat was opposed to fascism (at least after Stalin began to fight it). Today, they are ignorant or indifferent to the threat.

The term 'Islamofascist' is appropriate because it separates our perspective of the radical terrorists we want to kill and the mainstream Muslim population that we don't if we don't have to. Liberals have often complained that when we criticize Isam, we are being unfair or insensitive to innocent, peaceful Muslims. So why in the world would anyone be opposed to labeling the sects that we do consider threatening?

The fact that our enemies are not representing a state makes them more dangerous indeed and all the more reason to confront them. If we weren't stationed in Iraq we would instead be engaged in a half-a-dozen mini conflicts in various parts of the world. The Iraq war is not ideal or perfect (neither was much of WWII), but it is one of the more preferable theaters in this terror war. There is no living in peace with this fascist ideology we are fighting. Iraq war or no Iraq war, it is inevitable that a bloody and catastrophic regional war is in the future and if Iran has its way, a global war. This is the time for America and Europe to make it's intentions known and so far, we are merely propagating the real possibility that this nation doesn't have the stomach to fight or the backbone to win and that is going to prove disastrous for us down the road.

Wake up, peace-at-any-cost people! There is no sustainable anti-war position that is going to work for our benefit. None that I have heard. Weakness (what you promote) amounts to tying, putting on a blindfold, tying our hands behind our backs and waiting for the firing squad. War is here whether we engage it or not and your positions don't allow us to prepare for that fact, militarily, mentally or psychologically. And bin Laden knows this.

Posted by The OttO Show at 08/19/2006 @ 8:04pm
Posted by THE OTTO SHOW 08/19/2006 @ 8:04pm

You really think that a loosely knit group of Arab extremists can destroy the western world and replace it with a sunni muslim fascist state?

Perhaps I can interest you in a steaming hot plate of quagmire fries

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 8:29pm
And I'm all ears to hear the precise mechanism that a loosely knit group of Arab extremists could use to pull off such a thing

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 8:32pm
Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 8:32pm

hsuB turns the entire Islamic world against us?

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 8:40pm
hsuB turns the entire Islamic world against us?

Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/19/2006 @ 8:40pm

the soviet block was against us and they actually had the power to destroy us.

yet here we are

"against us" isn't a mechanism for destruction and take over

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 8:45pm
Will,

Thanks for the link to the JFK book by the way. Slow going though as lots of self imposed disruptions... Should get through it tonite.

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 8:48pm
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/19/2006 @ 8:48pm

my pleasure bro

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 8:49pm
Posted by THE OTTO SHOW 08/19/2006 @ 8:04pm: the radical terrorists we want to kill and the mainstream Muslim population that we don't if we don't have to.

Otto, if we don't want to kill the mainstream Muslim population, why would we have to kill them?

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/19/2006 @ 8:55pm
Do we have to kill them because the radical terrorists are making us kill them?

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/19/2006 @ 8:56pm
Why do we let the radical terrorists turn us into murderers?

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/19/2006 @ 8:56pm
How strong is it to let a ragtag bunch of radical terrorists make us do thinks we don't want to?

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/19/2006 @ 8:57pm
How strong is it to let a ragtag bunch of radical terrorists make us do things we don't want to?

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/19/2006 @ 8:57pm
Maybe if you weren't so scared, Otto, you would not think that we have to kill people that we don't want to kill.

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/19/2006 @ 8:59pm
Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 8:45pm

Yes, I know. Felt a little sorry for the guy. Thought I'd give him a running start w/a hsuB enabling US weakening for another two years and thus making us vulnerable to the least effort of a billion or so angry Islams all jumping up and down at the same time... Could get destructive if timed well!

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 9:03pm
oH ha--my bad, Islamists...

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 9:14pm
Could get destructive if timed well!

Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/19/2006 @ 9:03pm

Earthquake! induced by temper tantrum

Interesting idea

They would have some initial problems generating a crisp wave because of the cushioning effects of sand beneath stomping feet� and then there's the limited total stomp time as they held their breath and turned blue... and then we have to consider the problems of trying to focus the shock wave as it travels through the mantel around the core... and then of course it would reflect back their way again.. weakened but still vibrating.

hmmmm

I say they should give it the old college try but warn them against expecting any result more devastating then a case of sore feet

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 9:21pm
Posted by ORWELL2005 08/19/2006 @ 11:11am

We can take it that English wasn't your favourite subject at school O. "our" doesn't mean mine. In a funny sort of way it means yours. But that is probably a nuance too subtle for an anti-Bushie. BTW way are you or are you not. Chivalry is my forte. I don't mind kicking a few guys (male variety) heads but female guys? Never!

Posted by lrjones4 at 08/19/2006 @ 9:53pm
Posted by LRJONES4 08/19/2006 @ 9:53pm: We can take it that English wasn't your favourite subject at school O.

Are you actually a plural being, Black Knights? Or, do you just think of yourself as multiple beings?

"our" doesn't mean mine.

Right. Good point. "our" doesn't mean mine. It means belonging to us. And you are not American. So, you are not part of the us that the US military belongs to. So, you shouldn't say "our" military when referring to the US military.

But, you are a hubristic fool. So you will probably continue to do it anyway.

In a funny sort of way it means yours.

No, it doesn't. Yours means yours. Ours means ours. They are different words, that mean different things.

They only mean the same thing in a funny sort of way if you have a bad sense of humor. Which you undoubtedly do. Since you are a whackjob. And whackjobs are well known for their ineffective attempts at humor.

But that is probably a nuance too subtle for an anti-Bushie.

Actually the nuance that ours means yours (in a funny sort of way) is too subtle for most native speakers of English. What is your native language, Black Knight?

BTW way are you or are you not.

Yes.

Chivalry is my forte.

Really. That's quite becoming of a knight. How do you demonstrate your chivalry, Black Knight?

I don't mind kicking a few guys (male variety) heads but female guys? Never!

They're words, BN. They don't have gender. And they don't kick heads, male or female.

Why are you wasting your time here, Black Knight? Don't you have a world to save?

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/19/2006 @ 10:04pm
We can take it that English wasn't your favourite subject at school O. "our" doesn't mean mine. In a funny sort of way it means yours. But that is probably a nuance too subtle for an anti-Bushie.

Posted by QuagmireJONES4 08/19/2006 @ 9:53pm

our

1. belonging to us

indicates that something belongs to or is associated with the speaker or writer and at least one other person

2. belonging to everyone

indicates that something belongs to or is associated with people in general

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 10:08pm
but lets not get all bogged down in the subtlety ok quagmire

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 10:10pm
"Chivalry is my forte. I don't mind kicking a few guys (male variety) heads but female guys? Never!

Posted by LRJONES4 08/19/2006 @ 9:53pm"

"Female guy"?

You have more than language issues, don't you.

FWIW, reading your posts over the past few weeks, makes one wonder if you are really austrailian, or just a domestic wingnut, hoping his points might get more credence if your a foreigner.

Was "our" a freudian slip?

Eric

PS. Chivalry is dead. Is death your forte, too?

Posted by Malcontent at 08/19/2006 @ 10:23pm
Chivalry is not dead, yet. It is called chauvinism now.

Posted by crabwalk at 08/19/2006 @ 10:34pm
Wow, leave for a few and rhetorical battles ensue. But back to real destruction--

Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 9:21pm

Per butterfly effect coupled with that of unintended consequences, I'd contend then that the 'intended consequence' could actually occur! However, not from the landing, but rather from the initial force of pushing off; thus creating inertia! The subsidence friction caused by this on one plate could trigger a 'datum' shift thousands of miles away... Funny that you said "Earthquake! induced by temper 'tantrum'"

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/19/2006 @ 10:38pm
....just wondering aloud, where chivalry fits in with female suicide bombers.

....and why some peolple value concepts like chivalry, over liberty.

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 08/19/2006 @ 10:48pm
Posted by MALCONTENT 08/19/2006 @ 10:23pm: FWIW, reading your posts over the past few weeks, makes one wonder if you are really austrailian, or just a domestic wingnut, hoping his points might get more credence if your a foreigner.

He may be Australian.

He may be American.

Whatever he is, he is certainly stupid. And scared.

And, unfortunately, he is "ours".

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/19/2006 @ 10:48pm
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/19/2006 @ 10:38pm

the datum that the stratum could be spasmed by a tantrum still leaves this one to think that that one would make no difference when it's all done

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 10:50pm
let me see if I can clean that up a little

The datum that the stratum could be spasmed by a tantrum still leaves think one thinking that one wouldn't rumble when it's done

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 10:59pm
JOHANNES, you have solved the mystery of The Missing WMD'S!! That video is of Dr. Anthrax!

Posted by crabwalk at 08/19/2006 @ 10:59pm
much better

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 10:59pm
shit... this one

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 11:02pm
This is going to bog down our army for years isn't it?"

Posted by CRABWALK 08/19/2006 @ 10:03am |

Oh dear you are a lot of lazy little buggers. One last time.

"our" is not the same as our. ("our" is crabwalk's our not my our).

" " denotes context so if you were following the thread or understood what " " means, you wouldn't have made such an elementary langauge mistake.

Posted by lrjones4 at 08/19/2006 @ 11:31pm
"And, unfortunately, he is "ours".

Posted by ORWELL2005 08/19/2006 @ 10:48pm"

Perhaps. But, according to his definition, ours means theirs too. So....

Posted by Malcontent at 08/19/2006 @ 11:42pm
Posted by LRJONES4 08/19/2006 @ 11:31pm: you wouldn't have made such an elementary langauge mistake.

Thanks for the explanation, Blackie. I get it. You were merely quoting crabwalk's use of ""our"".

Strange, though. Typically, one would merely change the pronoun appropriately for the response. To directly quote this particular word in isolation would denote some suspicion on your part of the appropriateness of Crabwalk's use of the word "our". What did you find inappropriate about Crabwalk's use of the word "our"?

And as for lazy, it is quote arrogant to blame the incoherence of your writings on the laziness of your readers. Rather then blaming the energy level of your readers, Blackie, you might consider that the fault lies in your inability to write or think clearly.

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/19/2006 @ 11:47pm
" " denotes context so if you were following the thread or understood what " " means, you wouldn't have made such an elementary langauge mistake.

Posted by QuagmireJONES4 08/19/2006 @ 11:31pm

Crabwalks original post worded it this way

"This is going to bog down our army for years isn't it?"

Posted by CRABWALK 08/19/2006 @ 10:03am

Which you then rephrased as this

What did you have in mind for "our" army if it was not bogged down?

Posted by QuagmireJONES4 08/19/2006 @ 10:34am

Which by your own definition of quotes means you took what crabwalk had to say out of context.

which leaves you... still a retard

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 11:56pm
and the way you took him out of context (such a feeble attempt at sarcasm) still leaves the definition of "Our" as yours and his

(you're still right about the quagmire though)

Posted by Will C. at 08/19/2006 @ 11:57pm
Posted by MALCONTENT 08/19/2006 @ 11:42pm

Mal,

It's a bit hard to know what you are trying to convey but do you really know anything about Australia? It may surprise you to know that you are in a defence treaty with Australia (many Americans, I'm lead to believe, confuse Austria with Australia but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt) called the ANZUS treaty. So in that potential sense your army probably is our army also. Boy it just occurred to me how far off the pace you fellas are in international affairs. Here's a bit of help with your education:

"The US-Australia alliance under the ANZUS Treaty remains in full force. Heads of defence of one or both nations often have joined the annual ministerial meetings, which are supplemented by consultations between the U.S. Commander in Chief Pacific and the Australian Chief of Defence Force. There also are regular civilian and military consultations between the two governments at lower levels. Annual meetings to discuss ANZUS defence matters take place between the United States Secretary of State and the Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs (AUSMIN). The 17th AUSMIN meeting took place in Adelaide in November 2005.

Unlike NATO, ANZUS has no integrated defence structure or dedicated forces. However, in fulfillment of ANZUS obligations, Australia and the United States conduct a variety of joint activities. These include military exercises ranging from naval and landing exercises at the task-group level to battalion-level special forces training, assigning officers to each other's armed services, and standardizing equipment and operational doctrine. The two countries also operate several joint defence facilities in Australia, mainly ground stations for early warning satellites, and signals intelligence gathering in South-East Asia and East Asia as part of the ECHELON network".

Posted by lrjones4 at 08/20/2006 @ 12:02am
Unlike NATO, ANZUS has no integrated defence structure or dedicated forces.

Posted by QuagmireJONES4 08/20/2006 @ 12:02am

if anzus has no integrated defence structure or dedicated forces, then our army really can't be your army...

can it

Posted by Will C. at 08/20/2006 @ 12:07am
Besides, I thought you denied calling it your army. Something about the quotes. Remember? You was just reminding us thit Crabwalk sed "our".

But now, yu tells Mal thit it iz your army. Its like yur two difrent peeple.

Is that why you refer to yourself as "we", Blackie?

Posted by orwell2005 at 08/20/2006 @ 12:15am
Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 11:56pm

Just a lazy Sunday afternnon in Melbourne Aus, Willie or I wouldn't bother. It's good to see you are starting to think. At least you, unlike a few others, have that capacity.

I understood C's lifted quote to be an invitation for a bit of lateral thinking. It just seems a little precious to me to have an army "bogged down" and all some of you want to do is belly ache about it. Are the belly achers true Americans or imposters? Where's the American can do attitude gone.

Just trying to help your military planners get on top of it. That's all.

(I saw your solution for handling the Iraq thing. Better than nothing but it did sound a bit RW to me. You haven't been pinching "our" stuff by any chance?).

Posted by lrjones4 at 08/20/2006 @ 12:18am
It just seems a little precious to me to have an army "bogged down"

Posted by QuagmireJONES4 08/20/2006 @ 12:18am

hey orwell

if a guy from down under refers to himself as "we" and starts mumbling about his "precious" bogged down army

should we throw him a fish

or hide the ring

Posted by Will C. at 08/20/2006 @ 12:24am
Just trying to help your military planners get on top of it. That's all.

Posted by QuagmireJONES4 08/20/2006 @ 12:18am

but quagmire, our miitary planners are your military planners. So maybe you can explain to us all how you got us bogged down in this quagmire...

quagmire

Posted by Will C. at 08/20/2006 @ 12:27am
Posted by WILL C. 08/20/2006 @ 12:07am

Willie I don't like being a smart arse all the time but did you notice that word potential. It ain't ours now but it might be in the future like it was in WW2.

Posted by lrjones4 at 08/20/2006 @ 12:28am
"Posted by LRJONES4 08/20/2006 @ 12:02am

A defense treaty (Not defence treaty. Is that what they're building on the Mexican border?), does not make the one country's army the other country's army.

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 08/20/2006 @ 12:29am
(I saw your solution for handling the Iraq thing. Better than nothing but it did sound a bit RW to me. You haven't been pinching "our" stuff by any chance?).

Posted by QuagmireJONES4 08/20/2006 @ 12:18am

my solution involved redeploying forces.

the quagmire party solution involves staying the quagmire

correction... adapting to quagmire

Posted by Will C. at 08/20/2006 @ 12:29am
Willie I don't like being a smart arse all the time but did you notice that word potential. It ain't ours now but it might be in the future like it was in WW2.

Posted by QuagmireJONES4 08/20/2006 @ 12:28am

ok quagmire. First you say it isn't yours. Then you say it is yours. Now you say it isn't yours but might once again be yours like it was once yours

(and you realize that you're the bitch in this relationship right)

Posted by Will C. at 08/20/2006 @ 12:32am
FWIW, putting the word "our" in quotes,:

"This is going to bog down our army for years isn't it?"

Posted by CRABWALK 08/19/2006 @ 10:03am

"What did you have in mind for "our" army if it was not bogged down?"

Posted by QuagmireJONES4 08/19/2006 @ 10:34am

...seems to imply to me, that Crab had no business, in your view claiming it as his army.

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 08/20/2006 @ 12:35am
Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 7:43pm

I have to ask. What is a "Outer Banks Pique Polo shirt"? And has your Tacoma ever been to Cape Point?

Posted by CRABWALK 08/19/2006 @ 10:34pm

Touche.

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 08/20/2006 @ 12:43am
Posted by MALCONTENT 08/20/2006 @ 12:43am

Outer Banks are a brand of polo styled shirt that I grew to like when I had a screen printing company many moons ago. Pique, pronounced "Pee kay", is just the style of cloth. It not flat but has a structured surface almost like that of a golf ball, but on a much smaller scale

and my Tacoma has not been to cape point... because I don't know where cape point is

Posted by Will C. at 08/20/2006 @ 12:52am
Posted by WILL C. 08/19/2006 @ 10:50pm

Creating an existential vacuum, Islamistasis! Perhaps that is hsuB's brilliant plan! Inflame as many Muslims as possible in order to make them all angry enough to focus all their physical/mental/spiritual energy into that one event-- to all jump up simultaneously-- believing that they'll create a datum stratum spasm per their tantrum, but ultimately not achieving their dasturdly Djehad-- they all psychologically implode! Brilliant!

(Use of brilliant here per previously noted comment about the word genius and hsuB used in the same sentence as being disgusting...)

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/20/2006 @ 01:02am
Posted by WILL C. 08/20/2006 @ 12:52am

I see. Outer Banks is also a nickname for coastal NC. (Which is where Cape Point is. A popular fishing spot, best accessed by dreaded SUVs and 4wd pick-up).

Just curious.

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 08/20/2006 @ 01:03am
Posted by MALCONTENT 08/20/2006

Mal,

I don't know what goes on inside C's head so I don't really have a view about whether he owns an army or not. But I want to further your education by observing spelling differences.

It's called detect a foreigner:

Q1 How do you spell defence. (That paste up used the American form but I did what comes naturally to me).

Yankee: defense

Brit and Aussie: defence

Q2 Same with centre.

Yankee: center

Brit and Aussie: centre

There are many more words spelt differently but I don't want to stretch you too much. This detective can very quickly pick up US or Brit/Aussie nationality by the spelling of certain words. Not sure about Canadians.

Posted by lrjones4 at 08/20/2006 @ 01:04am
Not sure about Canadians.

Posted by LRJONES4 08/20/2006 @ 01:04am

No one is.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/20/2006 @ 01:09am
Posted by MALCONTENT 08/20/2006 @ 01:03am

Skipping out on a small family reunion taking place this week in Duck. Vacationed a few times in Hatteras as a teen. Where is Cape Point?

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/20/2006 @ 01:10am
By the way, LR, we are self-centered (or, if you like, self-centred or self-centreed) folk by nature--you know this, I am certain. But just to point out, that by "The Nation" I believe the original publishers had in mind the US of A. So it is you who is the foreigner, welcome nonetheless.

You're an egotistical son of a bitch, which is to say that I enjoy reading your posts.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/20/2006 @ 01:14am
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/20/2006 @ 01:02am

If (and I'm using the term "if" in a purely hypothetical sense) if they were to orchestrate the datum stratum spasm of their tantrum so it was synchronized with the rhythm of the imperial selection "We Will Rock You"....

Then the seismic reaction to the stomping in the tantrum, could create a sympathetic system of tympanic expansions resonating through both the core and the mantel of the earths multilayered stratum creating havoc and mayhem in the good old US of A� um

But let's not forget that this is all a purely hypothetical presentation of a questionable abstraction

Posted by Will C. at 08/20/2006 @ 01:23am
Skipping out on a small family reunion taking place this week in Duck. Vacationed a few times in Hatteras as a teen. Where is Cape Point?

Posted by TJBEHRENS1 08/20/2006 @ 01:10

Between those two points. Closer to Hatteras.

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 08/20/2006 @ 01:23am
".....creating havoc and mayhem in the good old US of A"

Posted by WILL C. 08/20/2006 @ 01:23am

Or, at least, causing Freddie to roll in his grave.

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 08/20/2006 @ 01:25am
Posted by MALCONTENT 08/20/2006 @ 01:03am

I've been to both cape hatteras and cape look out... and wilmington

and I survived fran

Posted by Will C. at 08/20/2006 @ 01:32am
See? Now Thaaaaat's what I'm talking about...Curious George has no intention of gettig our boys out of Iraq...we're in Iraq, we're in Afghanistan...have you looked at a map recently? What's right, smack-dab between those two countries? Who is that Georgey-Boy has got surrounded? Hope you are ready for your next Flight-Suit-Photo-Op-War...

Curious George may be able to slip this one by we geography-challenged Americans, but you can bet the synchronicity is not lost upon the Iranians...else why all the saber-rattling and blathering out of Tehran and distractions they are fomenting in Lebanon?

Posted by DrBlizzardo at 08/20/2006 @ 01:35am
Posted by MALCONTENT 08/20/2006 @ 01:25am

Picturing Cheney skipping across the stage, barechested with skintight pants and a cape, with a dark mustache stuck under his nose. Gotta go puke now and go to bed.

You know that each night, Bush plays "We are the Champions" before turning out the light so that he can smile as he slumbers, knowing that he has carved a significant place in American history...at least as permanent as that of McKinley. Mt. Bush anyone?

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/20/2006 @ 01:36am
Mt. Bush anyone?

Posted by TJBEHRENS1 08/20/2006 @ 01:36am

Can't we just name a rhododendron or an azalea... George W.

Posted by Will C. at 08/20/2006 @ 01:41am
You're an egotistical son of a bitch, which is to say that I enjoy reading your posts.

Posted by TJBEHRENS1 08/20/2006 @ 01:14am

I like that TJ. I've never had anything but a smile on my face when posting and reading here. If I'm feeling nasty I send a few missives in the AL Jazeera direction and join such notoriety's as "loopy len from the milky way" and "bin Laden from USA". In a way I sort of feel at home there too. I keep these activities well hidden from my 9 to 5 associates who consider any interest in politcs as a sure sign of insanity. Apart from running and cycling (when I get the time) my excuse is it helps me unwind. Off for a jog now.

Posted by lrjones4 at 08/20/2006 @ 01:43am
Posted by WILL C. 08/20/2006 @ 01:41am

An indication that he is pretty rather than majestic? I can buy that. Plus, if we're going to start renaming national monuments, we need to start by naming the Washington Monument after 42.

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/20/2006 @ 01:48am
Posted by WILL C. 08/20/2006 @ 01:23am

Sounds like a Project for the New Islamic Century...

Posted by hsuBfools at 08/20/2006 @ 01:48am
Posted by LRJONES4 08/20/2006 @ 01:43am

To be honest LR, my little bit of sweet talk was just a way to worm a free room out of you whenever my honey and I should make the long journey to your side of the globe. How does February look on your schedule?

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/20/2006 @ 01:58am
Posted by LRJONES4 08/20/2006 @ 01:04am

True, Astrailians use more color... I mean colourful British spellings. But it is a distraction from the point. Do you really think anyone who posts here confuses Australia and Austria? Or was that a distraction too?

Either way, your usage of quotes clearly implied the possesive was inappropriate usage, when Crab used it to describe (my) army.

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 08/20/2006 @ 02:00am
Sounds like a Project for the New Islamic Century...

Posted by HSUBFOOLS 08/20/2006 @ 01:48am

code named: stomp

(coming soon to a playhouse near you)

Posted by Will C. at 08/20/2006 @ 02:14am
Plus, if we're going to start renaming national monuments, we need to start by naming the Washington Monument after 42.

Posted by TJBEHRENS1 08/20/2006 @ 01:48am

you dirty dog you

Ha Ha Ha Ha

Posted by Will C. at 08/20/2006 @ 02:15am
Posted by WILL C. 08/20/2006 @ 12:24am

Just been reading your stuff about mad Ruppert. Sounds a bit like the French Revolution. Liked the way you sort of spat on his memory too. Bloody disloyal coward he is. That's real revolutionary stuff man. Show no favours! Show no mercy! When the fate of the poor and downtrodden is at stake. Man you got soul. Seems fools is going soft and needs a good swift kick up the a-hole too. You're the comrade to do it. Show no mercy. I thought I had to go to Al Jazeera to meet the real maddies but lucky me I'm amongst them. Only trouble is I'm off to the UK and Europe for a few of months starting tomorrow. Business and pleasure (no Prague whorehouses on the itinerary for this neo-con,will leave that to the libs). I'm sure you'll miss my help with your thinking processes. Will try to get to a computer occasionally to see how Willie's Revolution of the Bloggers is proceeding. Meanwhile keep kicking arse comrade and Au Revoir! (to you too JR)

Posted by lrjones4 at 08/20/2006 @ 06:28am
From the NYTimes this morn:

Helicopter-borne Israeli commandos landed near the Hezbollah stronghold of Baalbek on Saturday and engaged in a lengthy firefight in what the Lebanese prime minister, Fouad Siniora, called a "flagrant violation" of the cease-fire brokered by the United Nations.

The United Nations issued a statement that Secretary General Kofi Annan also considered the raid a violation and was "deeply concerned."

The Israelis said "the aim of the operation had been to disrupt terrorist activities against Israel and to prevent arms from being transported to Hezbollah from Iran and Syria." Any such resupply effort would itself violate the Security Council cease-fire resolution.

The raid took place overnight under the cover of sonic booms from Israeli jets flying overhead, which occur often over Lebanon. But this time they masked the sound of helicopters bringing in the commando unit and two Humvee vehicles. Villagers said the soldiers were dressed in Lebanese Army uniforms.

So to prevent a violation of the ceasefire, the Israelis violated the ceasefire. Where do you suppose they learned this bit of logic? [tinyurl.com]

Posted by tjbehrens1 at 08/20/2006 @ 09:55am
I used "our" because it is the US of A's army. I am a US taxpayer and citizen. why you put in qoutes is still a mystery to me. Just like your tangential reasoning that would make OIF a training exercise fro the rush into Iran.

Careful in Europe LR. I hear they have socialists there. They are like Satan, only worse. Visit the hoochie palaces, please, it would do you some good. Look How happy Blily C is.

Posted by crabwalk at 08/20/2006 @ 09:55am
Posted by LRJONES4 08/20/2006 @ 06:28am

seems fools is going soft and need a good swift kick up the a-hole?

Ha Ha Ha Ha

man you really are retarded. I don't want to touch them. I don't want to hurt them. And if they want to leave. I want to help them.

I'd hate for them to be harmed... when we come after you

Posted by Will C. at 08/20/2006 @ 1:38pm
Posted by MALCONTENT 08/20/2006 @ 12:29am A defense treaty (Not defence treaty. Is that what they're building on the Mexican border?), does not make the one country's army the other country's army.

No, that takes rolling over and hoping W will scratch his belly by the PM.

Posted by BruceMcF at 08/20/2006 @ 9:52pm
Posted by LRJONES4 08/20/2006 @ 01:04am ...

What if they lived in ozzie neighbourhoods long enough to learn how to spell in Commonwealth English? Wouldn't that muck up the system? And another thing ... its not bloody fair for the Storm to be dominating the NRL ladder when most of you bloody Mexicans don't give a toss.

Posted by BruceMcF at 08/20/2006 @ 10:02pm
By the way, I did not have time to wade through all five pages of commentary ... did anyone poiint out that Ari was flat wrong? That is, timewise?

The military involvement in WWII lasted from the attack on Pearl Harbour, through to VJ day, and then until the occupations of Germany and Japan were completed.

Now, the war in Iraq lasted, what, 3 weeks? And its the occupation of Iraq that has lasted something more than three years.

The postwar occupation of Japan started in August 1945 and ended in April 1952. On my reckoning (not good in maths, you know) that's more than five years.

Posted by BruceMcF at 08/20/2006 @ 10:07pm
Bruce, the war in Iraq ain't over. Rove has sung, but he just looks like a fat lady. As pointed out earlier in the post, in occupied Japan/Germany there really was no insurgency. They were beaten. By a New Deal democrat, from the democrat party.

Posted by crabwalk at 08/21/2006 @ 09:17am
What if FDR admitted Pearl Harbor could have been-prevented? We almost got a similar-admission from George W. Bush yesterday, and the press is ignoring it. From the White House Press conference of 08/21/2006:

Q Quick follow-up. A lot of the consequences you mentioned for pulling out seem like maybe they never would have been there if we hadn't gone in. How do you square all of that?

THE PRESIDENT: I square it because, imagine a world in which you had Saddam Hussein who had the capacity to make a weapon of mass destruction, who was paying suiciders to kill innocent life, who would -- who had relations with Zarqawi. Imagine what the world would be like with him in power. The idea is to try to help change the Middle East. Now, look, part of the reason we went into Iraq was -- the main reason we went into Iraq at the time was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn't, but he had the capacity to make weapons of mass destruction. But I also talked about the human suffering in Iraq, and I also talked the need to advance a freedom agenda. And so my question -- my answer to your question is, is that, imagine a world in which Saddam Hussein was there, stirring up even more trouble in a part of the world that had so much resentment and so much hatred that people came and killed 3,000 of our citizens. You know, I've heard this theory about everything was just fine until we arrived, and kind of "we're going to stir up the hornet's nest" theory. It just doesn't hold water, as far as I'm concerned. The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East.

Q What did Iraq have to do with that?

THE PRESIDENT: What did Iraq have to do with what?

Q The attack on the World Trade Center?

THE PRESIDENT: Nothing, except for it's part of -- and nobody has ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a -- the lesson of September the 11th is, take threats before they fully materialize, Ken. Nobody has ever suggested that the attacks of September the 11th were ordered by Iraq. I have suggested, however, that resentment and the lack of hope create the breeding grounds for terrorists who are willing to use suiciders to kill to achieve an objective. I have made that case. And one way to defeat that -- defeat resentment is with hope. And the best way to do hope is through a form of government. Now, I said going into Iraq that we've got to take these threats seriously before they fully materialize. I saw a threat. I fully believe it was the right decision to remove Saddam Hussein, and I fully believe the world is better off without him. Now, the question is how do we succeed in Iraq? And you don't succeed by leaving before the mission is complete, like some in this political process are suggesting.

You read-correctly, the Bush administration is finally admitting there was NO CONNECTION between 9/11 and Iraq, none. Wonder when we'll ever read this in the press?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/08/20060821.html

http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com/

Posted by Dr. Mabuse at 08/22/2006 @ 12:47pm

About the Authors

Adam Howard (Posts | Bio)
Ari Melber (Posts | Bio)
Ari Berman (Posts | Bio)
Betsy Reed (Posts | Bio)
Christopher Hayes (Posts | Bio)
Dave Zirin (Posts | Bio)
D.D. Guttenplan (Posts | Bio)
Emily Douglas (Posts | Bio)
Esther Kaplan (Posts | Bio)
Eyal Press (Posts | Bio)
Greg Kaufmann (Posts | Bio)
Jon Wiener (Posts | Bio)
Kai Wright (Posts | Bio)
Laura Flanders (Posts | Bio)
Leslie Savan (Posts | Bio)
Maria Margaronis (Posts | Bio)
Melissa Harris-Lacewell (Posts | Bio)
Richard Kim (Posts | Bio)
Roane Carey (Posts | Bio)
Zephyr Teachout (Posts | Bio)

Iraq > World War II

posted by Ari Berman on 08/18/2006 @ 12:56pm

About the Authors

Adam Howard (Posts | Bio)

Ari Melber (Posts | Bio)

Ari Berman (Posts | Bio)

Betsy Reed (Posts | Bio)

Christopher Hayes (Posts | Bio)

Dave Zirin (Posts | Bio)

D.D. Guttenplan (Posts | Bio)

Emily Douglas (Posts | Bio)

Esther Kaplan (Posts | Bio)

Eyal Press (Posts | Bio)

Greg Kaufmann (Posts | Bio)

Jon Wiener (Posts | Bio)

Kai Wright (Posts | Bio)

Laura Flanders (Posts | Bio)

Leslie Savan (Posts | Bio)

Maria Margaronis (Posts | Bio)

Melissa Harris-Lacewell (Posts | Bio)

Richard Kim (Posts | Bio)

Roane Carey (Posts | Bio)

Zephyr Teachout (Posts | Bio)

Archives

» The Beat

» Editor's Cut

» The Notion

» The Dreyfuss Report

» Act Now!

» And Another Thing

» Altercation

Iraq > World War II

posted by Ari Berman on 08/18/2006 @ 12:56pm

Share this article

About the Authors

Adam Howard (Posts | Bio)

Ari Melber (Posts | Bio)

Ari Berman (Posts | Bio)

Betsy Reed (Posts | Bio)

Christopher Hayes (Posts | Bio)

Dave Zirin (Posts | Bio)

D.D. Guttenplan (Posts | Bio)

Emily Douglas (Posts | Bio)

Esther Kaplan (Posts | Bio)

Eyal Press (Posts | Bio)

Greg Kaufmann (Posts | Bio)

Jon Wiener (Posts | Bio)

Kai Wright (Posts | Bio)

Laura Flanders (Posts | Bio)

Leslie Savan (Posts | Bio)

Maria Margaronis (Posts | Bio)

Melissa Harris-Lacewell (Posts | Bio)

Richard Kim (Posts | Bio)

Roane Carey (Posts | Bio)

Zephyr Teachout (Posts | Bio)

Archives

» The Beat

» Editor's Cut

» The Notion

» The Dreyfuss Report

» Act Now!

» And Another Thing

» Altercation