Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditRemember when the globe's imperial policeman, its New Rome, was going to wield its unsurpassed military power by moving from country to country, using lightning strikes and shock-and-awe tactics? We're talking about the now-unimaginably distant past of perhaps 2002-2003. Afghanistan had been "liberated" in a matter of weeks; "regime change" in Iraq was going to be a "cakewalk," and it would be followed by the reordering of what the neoconservatives liked to refer to as "the Greater Middle East." No one who mattered was talking about protracted guerrilla warfare; nor was there anything being said about counterinsurgency (nor, as in the Powell Doctrine, about exits either). The U.S. military was going to go into Iraq fast and hard, be victorious in short order, and then, of course, we would stay. We would, in fact, be welcomed with open arms by natives so eternally grateful that they would practically beg us to garrison their countries.
Every one of those assumptions about the new American way of war was absurd, even then. At the very least, the problem should have been obvious once American generals reached Baghdad and sat down at a marble table in one of Saddam Hussein's overwrought palaces, grinning for a victory snapshot -- without any evidence of a defeated enemy on the other side of the table to sign a set of surrender documents. If this were a normal campaign and an obvious imperial triumph, then where was the other side? Where were those we had defeated? The next thing you knew, the Americans were printing up packs of cards with the faces of most of Saddam's missing cronies on them.
Well, that was then. By now, fierce versions of guerrilla war have migrated to the narrow streets of the poorest districts of Baghdad and, in Afghanistan, are moving ever closer to the Afghan capital, Kabul. U.S. troops are, at present, in block by block fighting in Baghdad's vast Shiite Sadr City slum and they're wheeling in the Abrams tanks and calling in helicopters, Hellfire-missile-armed drones, and jets for help in brutal urban warfare as the bodies pile higher.
As in Vietnam, so four decades later, we are observing a full-scale descent into madness and, undoubtedly, into atrocity. In 2003, American troops were heading for Baghdad. They thought they had a goal, a city to take. Now, five years later, they are heading for the heart of a slum city, which they cannot hold, in a guerrilla war where the taking of territory and the occupying of neighborhoods is essentially beside the point. They are heading for oblivion, while trying to win hearts and minds by shooting missiles into homes and enclosing neighborhoods in giant walls which break families and communities apart, while destroying livelihoods. No matter what the Bush administration has tried to do (including the already long-dead-and-gone "surge strategy," the last war, the one in Iraq, won't end (so that troops can be transferred to the even older war in Afghanistan that is, now, spiraling out of control). And oh, while we're at it, welcome to future wars in the slum cities of the planet. Inside the Pentagon, some are thinking not about how to get out of Sadr City, but about how to fight Sadr City wars more effectively. They are pondering "the next war."
With that in mind, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates recently gave two sharp-edged speeches, one at Maxwell-Gunter Air Force Base, the other at West Point, each expressing his frustration with the slowness of the armed services to adapt to a counterinsurgency planet and to plan for the next war.
Now, there's obviously nothing illogical about a country's military preparing for future wars. That's what it's there for and every country has the right to defend itself. But it's a different matter when you're preparing for future "wars of choice" (which used to be called wars of aggression) -- for the next war(s) on what our secretary of defense now calls the "the 21st century's global commons." By that, he means not just planet Earth in its entirety, but "space and cyberspace" as well. For the American military, it turns out, planning for a future "defense" of the United States means planning for planet-wide, over-the-horizon counterinsurgency. It will, of course, be done better, with a military that, as Gates put it, will no longer be "a smaller version of the Fulda Gap force." (It was at the Fulda Gap, a German plain, that the US military once expected to meet Soviet forces invading Europe in full-scale battle.)
So the secretary of defense is calling for more foreign-language training, a better "expeditionary culture," and more nation building -- you know, all that "hearts and minds" stuff. In essence, he accepts that the future of American war will, indeed, be in the Sadr Cities and Afghan backlands of the planet; or, as he says, that "the asymmetric battlefields of the 21st century" will be "the dominant combat environment in the decades to come." And the American response will be high-tech indeed -- all those unmanned aerial vehicles that he can't stop talking about.
Gates describes our war-fighting future in this way: "What has been called the 'Long War' [i.e. Bush's War on Terror, including the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq] is likely to be many years of persistent, engaged combat all around the world in differing degrees of size and intensity. This generational campaign cannot be wished away or put on a timetable. There are no exit strategies."
"There are no exit strategies." That's a line to roll around on your tongue for a while. It's a fancy way of saying that the U.S. military is likely to be in one, two, many Sadr Cities for a long time to come. This is Gates's ultimate insight as secretary of defense, and his response is to urge the military to plan for more and better of the same. For this we give the Pentagon almost a trillion dollars a year.
The irony is that, in both speeches, Gates praises outside-the-box thinking in the military and calls upon the armed services to "think unconventionally." Yet his own thoughts couldn't be more conventional, imperial, or potentially disastrous. Put in a nutshell: If the mission is heading into madness, then double the mission. Bring in yet more of those drones whose missiles are already so popular in Sadr City. This is brilliantly prosaic thinking, based on the assumption that the "global commons" should be ours and that the "next war" will be ours, and the one after that, and so on.
But I wouldn't bet on it. John McCain got a lot of flak for saying that, as far as he was concerned, American troops could stay in Iraq for "100 years... as long as Americans are not being injured, harmed or killed." Our present secretary of defense, a "realist" in an administration of bizarre dreamers and inept gamblers, has just cast his vote for more and better Sadr Cities. In a Pentagon version of an old Maoist slogan: Let a hundred slum guerrilla struggles bloom!
It's a recipe for being bogged down in such wars for 100 years -- with the piles of dead rising ever higher. No wonder some of the top military brass, whom he criticizes for their bureaucratic inertia, have been unenthusiastic. They don't want to spend the rest of their careers fighting hopeless wars in Sadr City or its equivalent. Who would?
The rest of us should feel the same way. Every time you hear the phrase "the next war"--and journalists already love it--you should wince. It means endless war, eternal war, and it's the path to madness.
Vietnam Iraq Afghanistan Don't we already have enough examples of American counterinsurgency operations under our belt? The American people evidently think so. For some time now, significant majorities have wanted out of Baghdad, out of Iraq. All the way out. In a major survey just released by the influential journal Foreign Affairs, similar majorities have, in essence, "voted" for demilitarizing US foreign policy. In their responses, they offer quite a different approach to how the United States should operate in the world. According to journalist Jim Lobe, 69% of respondents believe "the US government should put more emphasis on diplomatic and economic foreign policy tools in fighting terrorism," not "military efforts." (Sixty-five percent believe the U.S. should withdraw all its troops from Iraq either "immediately" or "over the next twelve months.") But, of course, no one who matters listens to them.
And yet, the path to Sadr City and beyond is one that even an imperialist should want to turn back from. It's the road to Hell and it's paved with the worst of intentions.
[For a longer version of this piece, visit Tomdispatch.com.]
Share this article
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Ezra Klein
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
- ZNet
RSS
We don't need a Department of Defense to overcome and prevent terrorism. What we need is really good intelligence and international police cooperation to arrest perpetrators. "Wars" are fought between nations. For wars, we need a Department of Defense. Calling counter-terrorism "War on Terrorism" is pure marketing and has nothing to do with War.
Posted by jread_21205 at 05/07/2008 @ 10:54am
"Sixty-five percent believe the U.S. should withdraw all its troops from Iraq either "immediately" or "over the next twelve months"
And the guy who's calling for us to "maintain a presence" for upto 100 years....is going to get the nation to rally to him?!?!?!??
Posted by Mask at 05/07/2008 @ 11:01am
Posted by jread_21205 at 05/7/2008 | ignore this person
Exactly right!
Posted by Lillian at 05/07/2008 @ 11:16am
get out those funky hats and noise makers!
get ready for the october surprise party!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 11:20am
Tom Hayden -- The Nation -- 20 February 2008
'...Did Obama mean it? Was it only rhetoric? Perhaps, but as Obama has said over and over lately, words make a difference....they will question Obama's experience in pushing for diplomacy towards Iran, and draw him out on why he favors more troops in Afghanistan and a pre-emptive strike against Pakistan if there is "actionable intelligence."...'
Posted by HonestLiberal at 05/07/2008 @ 11:21am
but obverse democratic fascism needs neverending war, tom.
obverse - as opposed to classical fascism in which public, political entities co-opt business, in our red, white and blue form of fascism, private business interests and the satano-aynrando buzillionaires who drive such co-opt the polity. scaifes, murdochs, and their kind manipulate from behind the scenes, buying up as much media as they can, mis-informing schmuk nation and encouraging all the worst, most shallow, and self destructive behaviors and mindsets they can amongst the over-schooled, undereducated consuming units. the consuming units are kept just close enough to poverty to assure a steady stream of soldiery while constantly assaulted by private propaganda telling them what they want and need to be happy and "normal". private pseudo-schalorly propaganda factories are financed to counter any finding that trickles out of peer reviewed academia which might counter crypto-facist ideology. owned media outlets spew forth a constant stream of claptrap and chum to keep the morons alternately afraid, confused, and self satisfied. religion is coopted to its dtriment to mobilize masses of half concious voters while the corporate randian demigods live their lives as they please, above the laws that apply only to the masses they exploit.
democratic - this term, as oxymoronic as it sounds when juxtaposed with "fascism" is in fact a natural outgrowth of our unique national character. fascism, in many ways, is a natural outgrowth of nationalism (which we call "patriotism"). fascism is nationalism on crank - the denigration of non-nationals and the glorification of nationals, as if being born into a nation is a special accomplishment and pride in one's national identity is a virtue and not a sin. the classical form of fascism, as seen in mid 20th century europe, had the luxury of honestly denying democracy, since such a notion was in no way an integral aspect of the sum total of swelf percieved national characteristics. in the united states, however, "democracy" is one of the pillars of what we consider "american". inextricably lashed to our national self identity. myth and nostalgia must be maintained in order for fascism to thrive - thus on the surface one might be foolish enough to think that fascism would be impossible in this nationalistically democratic country. not so. when wealth (power) concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer, and those few use that wealth to not only control media and academia but to finance politicians of both sides of a dualistic polity...and when those corporations most heavily involved in fascist control are more than willing to allow their employees to go on a form of detached duty into government (as we have seen all too often in the last 7 years), "democracy" becomes an ever more hollow word. the facade of democratic government is ever maintained while the essence of the concept - the whole people meaningfully participating in the system - is illuiory at best. the fascists have their favorite party in our system to be sure - the republican party - but they understand that in order to maintain the illusion of democracy they must "allow" an opposition candidate to occupy the highest level of power from time to time, and so fish about for opposition candidates like ms. clinton and turn them to their own purposes, hoodwinking the pop culturally misinformed masses into thinking they are getting one of their own. democracy indeed.
fascism - pride pride pride! pride in one's fortune of birth, pride in the might of one's nation...fascism is all about the pride, and all about the ability and willingness of one's own nation to militarily dominate other, weaker nations, to snuff out potential competitors, to intimidate others and thereby bend those people's to the will of the dominant fascist power. in ancient times fascism was the natural form of governance and honest in its goals and methods. imperial roman troops made few excuses for aggression, conquest, pillage, and enslavement. with the rise of moral religion and educated masses the fascists must be ever more clever in their justifications for aggression and never-ending war, but ultimately there is no difference beyond the hypocrisy needed and all the satanic details. furthermore foreign wars serve to distract critically thinking challenged, over-schooled, undereducated masses on the verge of poverty and angry at they-don't-know-what, from their true enemies - their own powerful countrymen who spill their blood for profit. and if millions of foriegners suffer/die, so what? they are not as worthy as the citizenry of the fascist power anyway. if the fascist overlords care not about the welfare of their own people except enough to ensure a steady stream of recruits, theycertainly could care less about the suffering and death of other peoples.
because people are naught but expendable resources to be used by fascist self percieved demigods to achieve their satanic fantasies...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/07/2008 @ 11:26am
The first thing the next democratic president should do is have the 9/11 incident completely investigated.
See to it that any cover ups, lies etc. are retroactively prosecuted and punished for crimes against the state.
In short, if 9/11 was an inside job, the people behind it should be hung by their friggin testicles.
If 9/11 wasn't an inside job, but was allowed to happen, these guys should be cooling their heels in the federal pen until they rot.
The neocons are very close to destorying the U.S. government. One more administration and it will be "Mission Accomlished".
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 05/07/2008 @ 11:28am
Mask, you know darn well that John McCain NEVER SAID that he wanted 100 years. You know, what McCain really said is, only for 100 years as long as being sent to Iraq like being stationed on a base in South Korea.
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/7/2008 |
actually thats not what mask said either.
"And the guy who's calling for us to "maintain a presence" for upto 100 years....is going to get the nation to rally to him?!?!?!??"
but perception and reality, reality and perception...
i don't think most people want even one more year over there...
but lets just keep running that soundbite regardless. it plays well and regardless of the full context, i think accurately reflects the will, intention, and ideology of the republican party and its corporate masters.
let us not stay the dagger at the moment of victory out of silly notions such as pity...our enemies would not show us such mercy. no - shove that dagger in and give it a twist - the same as they would.
when fighting monsters eventually one must become a monster to at least some extent and if one is unwilling to go there...stand aside and give me or a kindred soul of mine the knife.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/07/2008 @ 12:01pm
In short, if 9/11 was an inside job, the people behind it should be hung by their friggin testicles.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 05/7/2008
That would hurt....a lot. What about Condi though?
"The neocons are very close to destorying the U.S. government. One more administration and it will be "Mission Accomlished"."
Would it actually happen this time or would it take 10 or 15 more years to actually happen?
I love that before we went into this we said it would be done in 6 months. Now we are 5 years in and they are predicting that it will never end. Shows you the neo-con way of doing things and the really strong thought that went into this war. We need to stop fighting aggressive wars. It's sickening that our country has come to this. Only surviving by instilling fear into it's voters. That's how the Repubs win. With fear tactics. That's how Bush won and that's how McCain will try to win. Problem is people are wising up. Realizing that maybe we don't need to kick the worlds ass to stay safe. That maybe we need to start talking instead.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/07/2008 @ 12:49pm
you know ibbs,
things can sure look icky,
but on the whole things are actually getting better.
a smaller and smaller proportion of the world's population lives under tyranny,
and the armies are increasingly less of conscripts but of volunteers. and as the current recruitment problems of the u.s. military show,
those dupable into fighting the stupid fight are becoming fewer.
and sure, moneyed interests are manipulating politics and world events for personal gain,
but that influence is far less than even 100 years ago when a presidential candidate (for example) was picked in a corporate boardroom
without the public even having the 30% say that they currently have in the process.
sure they meddle, and the process of achieving transparency and "doingtherightthingishness" is one of 17 steps forward and 16 back.....
and ‘oh! how they try to dumbify.....
but on the whole,
humans, despite all their folly and greed and anger,
are living longer, happier lives.
it's a long and sloooooooooooooow and very painful process,
but we're getting there.
sorry to be hopeful; it's spring.
excellent post, by the way.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008 1:18:44 PM
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 1:16pm
and my opinion is we will destroy the system we have of creating wealth, capital and independent individual ability to improve our selves
posted @sometime recently by MR. MAASCH
you mean the one that has the u.s dollar plummeting
(oops! i meant oil prices rising -- yeah, that's it)
and has the economy popping open every so often
like so many balloons on the floor of the 5 year old's birthday party?
BTW i hope you saw my clarification (you, too HAPPY) as to what i (usually) mean by "America". this means greater europe -- u.s., canada, and i suppose a few places to our south as well. that's what i meant about stealing native land. just like where i'm sitting now.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008 1:31:24 PM
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 1:28pm
And if a Pres. Obama should try to put a real stop to the fascism & its perpetual war, the DoD will put a stop to him. That is the sad reality of where we are.
Posted by sloper at 05/07/2008 @ 1:34pm
Wednesday, May 7, 2008 1:31:24 PM
Posted by frosty zoom
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
that was for the other thread and now i just posted it there.
grrrrrrrrrr.
blasted servers.
no tip for you!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 1:40pm
How insane is the now mainly fascist US DoD? Check the lead on Wm Pfaff's latest column ... "When the Associated Press reports that the Pentagon has prepared a $5 billion commercial development plan for the Green Zone in Baghdad (currently under insurgent mortar and rocket fire), and says it has signed a contract with Marriot International to build a hotel as the first in an extravagant series of projects that will include an amusement park among its other amenities, this brings home as nothing else has done how deeply mired in delusion are the people responsible for American foreign and military policy."
Posted by sloper at 05/07/2008 @ 1:53pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/7/2008
I think we will be destroyed by stupid wars fought for stupid reasons. This war is a huge drain on the economy. Being fought for what reason? You are never going to be able to take the oil wells from them as the war in Iraq has proven. We can drill here but where will that get us? I have heard from neo-cons that have enough oil to supply the world for an eternity. I have heard from more realistic sources that we have enough for 1 to maybe 15 years. Face it we need to start finding alternatives because oil is running dry. The neo-cons are so concerned about watching out for oil companies and big business that they kill projects that will take their money away like the electric car and replace it with other projects that will never work like the hydrogen car so that big business can keep it's profit rolling in. The government needs to start working toward the will of the people not the will of the top companies. Taxes will not kill this country their are plenty of socialist country with high taxes that work. Conserves like to shake the stick of socialism as if it's this evil thing but it works which is why many people tend to lean towards it. Where as capitalism works for the upper bracket and leaves the lower bracket to eat their cake.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/07/2008 @ 2:04pm
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/7/2008
1. Learn to read
2. Take your meds.
(Not necessarily in that order)
Posted by Mask at 05/07/2008 @ 2:08pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/7/2008
You trumpet the advantages of lowering taxes but Bush gave tax cuts out to everyone and it hasn't helped. It didn't stimulate the economy like they said. He gave tax breaks to the rich in the beginning and to big business it didn't work. The economy is still tanking. The dollar is still losing strength after all the tax cuts Bush has been giving out. You claim business pay the highest tax percentage in the world but you should go back and read the piece about how once you factor in all the tax breaks and loop holes they pay some of the lowest taxes in the world. You seem to choose to ignore that fact. I respect your opinion a lot but on the economy it does make sense because Bush has tried to do everything you have said should be done and the economy is still slowly failing.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/07/2008 @ 2:08pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/7/2008 | ignore this person
oh i'm not saying its hopeless...in fact look whats going down right now...
tttwnsth (the thing that was not supposed to happen), barry obama, has beaten tttwcbowbfo (the thing that was chosen by our would be fascist overlords), hillary clinton.
thats freakin amazing. and make no mistake, after our would be fascist overlords' colossal stupidity the last 7 years, mile high geriatric flippy mac SURE wasn't our fascist overlords' choice to succeed that lackwit mushmouthed manchurian candidate frat boy and his half competant handlers...
it was the goldwater girl herself, buddy buddy of murdoch and even the same scaife who slandered her and her hubby just a short decade ago. she hobnobs with these crypto-fascists at prayer meetings of the pseudo nazi rightwing "family" i guess and is obviously willing to say or do anything in order to take what was her rightful place as the supposed opposition president whose presidency is supposed to serve as proof to the idiot class that we still live in a democracy.
so if she had won and had been pliable our crypto-fascist overlords would have been fine to allow her 8 years of saying-one-thing-doing-their-bidding, throwing out a meaningless bone to schmuk nation here and there...or if she had gotten cantankerous and shown a willingness to stand up to them they would have swiftboated/whitewatered her into ineffectiveness the way they did with her philandering husband.
but indeed they fucked up soooo badly (pride always preceding a fall and fascists being oh so very proud) that even the somnambulant masses of pop culturally lobotomized masses have begun to awaken and dimly realize who is really screwing them.
whether their short attention span will kick in and when depends on many many variables, but perhaps obama actually has what it takes to keep them on task long enough to enact some real change.
tttwnsth is indeed an amazing individual. perhaps the good guys will actually win. been a while...been a long while...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/07/2008 @ 2:09pm
sloper
unbelievable!!!
here's some choice tidbits from the FOXnoose story on the BAGHDAD PLAN:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
One diplomat, who asked not to be named because of no authorization to speak to the media, said they did not think Iraqis would want Washington to "turn this area into downtown Kansas City."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The Iraqi government wants to limit U.S. power in the Green Zone," a top adviser to al-Maliki said on condition of anonymity as he was not authorized to speak to the press.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Iraqis also complain that the Americans -- because they control security in the Green Zone -- essentially hold a veto over the investors.
Karnowski acknowledged that American officials would vet potential investors because of a "vested interest."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Some Iraqi leaders even have drawn parallels to the U.S.-backed development plan and what Saddam Hussein did in the area -- known by its Iraqi name of Tashri during his regime.
Hussein stocked the neighborhood with family and tribal allies, political loyalists and members of his elite Republican Guard. Karnowski called the accusation "partially true."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ACCORDING TO KARNOWSKI, THE UNITED STATES WILL SPEND $120 MILLION TO DEMOLISH BUILDINGS DAMAGED BY AIR STRIKES DURING THE OPENING DAYS OF THE WAR.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
priceless.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008 2:16:24 PM
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 2:11pm
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,354120,00.html
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 2:13pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/7/2008
Shaking the stick of socialism doesn't work here. You are not amongst people who have an irrational fear of it. Our fear of socialism is just a symptom of our fear of communism but unlike communism, socialism works. Especially when you have a middle socialist capitalist system. The problem is for capitalism to work there has to be constant growth. There can never be stagnation but it is not possible to have constant growth. Socialism is a more realistic long term system. Capitalism works great in the short term but there is no way to keep growing forever. Here you will find rational people who are willing to experiment with other systems instead of believing every scare tactic conservatives throw at us about the boogeyman of socialism. We recognize the every system can be improved upon. Capitalism worked when there were plenty of places to expand to and America was still young. Now that America is reaching it's teenage years it is losing steam because growth is not easy to come by anymore. In order to grow companies are leaving the US to find slave labor so they don't have to pay their employees. The only way to grow is to take over more of the world which won't happen because if we try America will become Germany in World War II.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/07/2008 @ 2:17pm
good post, ccc.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 2:21pm
Off message, but BTW Nation editors: the new web stite is not only overloaded on the home page, but getting increasingly slower & slower overall. Is the DoD flexing its cyber muscle to teach you deviants a lesson?
Posted by sloper at 05/07/2008 @ 2:24pm
;aergoqeihngqoinbatbnoqihjgjonboeainbq0[jhbqejb-q4j-jbbjq4p5jh0-91ujbnb' 4lq5jh0
<i>testing</i>
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 2:46pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/7/2008 | ignore this person
ccc is a smart cookie.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/07/2008 @ 3:42pm
chocolate chip?
;+]
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 3:54pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/7/2008 | ignore this person
light caramel crunch from what she says...lol...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/07/2008 @ 5:04pm
we, in short, are in the process of turning our own lights off with no back up...all in order to save the world from carbon....as the rest of the developing world does not follow our lead into darkness...
Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/7/2008
JM,
You are just worried that the rules of the game might change and you might have to get back in there and get your butt kicked around like the rest of us.
So you tell me why families should be able to store wealth and pass it from generation from generation to generation so they can sit on their fat lazy rich asses and make everyone else work for them?! That's what fuedalism and pure capitalism produce. There should be estate taxes to keep idiots like the Bush from passing great wealth down that Prescot Bush the crook accumulated during WWWII. A lot of that wealth is blood money and quite frankly belongs to the American people, not the Bush empire.
Even Warren Buffet doesn't think that the children of wealthy tycoons deserve ivory castles generation after generation because that would indeed produce a nation of lazy loafers who think they are better than everyone else but don't have the intelligence or anything else to back it up but arrogance.
Kind of luck saying because Joe Montana was a great quarterback that it's a gaurantee that his offspring will be. Maybe they will, and maybe they won't but they shouldn't be gauranteed a spot at QB just because their dad was great.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 05/07/2008 @ 5:08pm
Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/7/2008
ccc is actually a light skinned mixed race female according to her. the force is indeed strong in that one...
moohahaha!
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/07/2008 @ 5:37pm
Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/7/200
China is not a pure capitalistic government. They are a mix of capitalism and communism. Basically a capitalist socialist government. Soooo you are arguing that socialism is working in china.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/7/200
I am a male not a female. Light skinned mixed race male.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/07/2008 @ 7:21pm
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/7/2008
See, now THAT works.
Yep, Mac said that he would stay 100 years if it was just like South Korea....but then we have to stay UNTIL it becomes like South Korea...and then we KEEP staying AFTER it becomes like South Korea....
so....where we EVER leave, even if 20 guys a month are killed and we are spending $250 BILLION a year...forever?
Posted by Mask at 05/07/2008 @ 7:24pm
"Socialism with Chinese characteristics" is an official term for the economy of the People's Republic of China which as of 2008 consists of the state having ownership of a large fraction of the Chinese economy, while at the same time having all entities participate within a market economy. This is a form of a socialist market economy and differs from market socialism and mixed economy in that while the state retained ownership of large enterprises, it does not use this ownership to intervene to change prices which are set by the market.
Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/7/200
Seeee socialist market economy. Which is what I am more in favor of advocating. I don't like pure socialism but I don't like pure capitalism either. You need a free market socialist style economy to continue a sustained economy without the need for constant growth to maintain itself.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/07/2008 @ 7:24pm
Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/7/200
Happy you realize you just basically praised a form of socialism? Are you feverish right now?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/07/2008 @ 7:25pm
Well then howzabout when McCain said he'd make sure the US never went to war over oil <b>AGAIN</b>
(yeah, I know - no bold)
Posted by leftofcenter at 05/07/2008 @ 7:45pm
leftofcenter
well, he'll just continue the same war, moving from country to country, keeping those hummers a-hummin'.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008 9:41:14 PM
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 9:36pm
China is building as many power plants in one year as there are in all of England, awesome display of capitalism!
Posted by HAPPY3
awesome display of stupidity.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008 9:43:46 PM
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 9:38pm
(since the role of the world's policeman is taken by us)!
Posted by HAPPY3
holy fuck!
i gonna launch an internal affairs investigation.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 9:56pm
Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/7/2008
The Chinese are not truly capitalist though thats why economists define them as market socialism. The government still owns a lot of their economy. It's a free market form of socialism.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/07/2008 @ 10:07pm
happy,
i'm saying they're dumb to imitate our ways.
if the chinese become us, this planet is doomed......
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 10:11pm
Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/7/2008
The Chinese are not truly capitalist though thats why economists define them as market socialism. The government still owns a lot of their economy. It's a free market form of socialism.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/7/200
Got time warped. By the way Happy I don't consider this arguing. I consider this a discussion with someone who knows more than me in order for me to learn more.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/07/2008 @ 10:11pm
HAPPY3
you like cashmere?:
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2008/01/getting_chinas_goat.jpg
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
is it dusty in texas? i've been to houston in march. it was like here in july.
anyway, is it THIS dusty?:
That became clear in April 2001, when a satellite photograph showed a vast, perfectly coiled cyclonic spiral of white clouds intertwined with brown dust plumes centered over Inner Mongolia.
Joseph Prospero, a leading atmospheric researcher at the University of Miami, called it "the most remarkable dust-storm image that I have ever seen."
Visibility soon dropped close to zero in Beijing and driving was nearly impossible.
Satellites tracked the dust as it moved across eastern China, the Yellow Sea, Korea, the Russian coast from Vladivostok to the Kamchatka Peninsula, the Sea of Japan, and Japan itself.
In less than a week, it crossed the Pacific Ocean, and produced thick haze as far east as Denver.
High concentrations of dust were found as far away as Maine and Georgia and eventually in the Canary Islands off northwest Africa.
DAN JAFFE, AN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENTIST AT THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON-BOTHELL, CALCULATED THAT ONLY A 20TH OF THE STORM'S DUST REACHED THE UNITED STATES, BUT THAT AMOUNT, 50,000 METRIC TONS, WAS TWO AND A HALF TIMES AS MUCH AS ALL U.S. SOURCES TYPICALLY PRODUCE IN A DAY.
and you're worried about a certain pastor..............
Wednesday, May 7, 2008 10:57:34 PM
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 10:53pm
denial is not bliss.......
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/07/2008 @ 11:41pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/7/2008 | ignore this person
wha????
oh - sorry dude. think i had just watched the new obamagirl video when i was typing that...
uh...sorry...lol...
oh well - guess i'll go back to thinking about obamagirl...mmmm...obamagirl...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/08/2008 @ 12:27am
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/8/200
Haha no biggy honest mistake. Frank calls me a girl to insult me.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/08/2008 @ 01:56am
Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/7/2008 | ignore this person
"China has grown for 30 years because of a change from what kind of econ. system to what current kind of system? Is it a transition from communism to capitalism, or from communism to capitalism."
.
.
Well gee Happy...is it a transition from communism to capitalism...or from communism to capitalism? Hmmm...
I bet you thought that was a real 'thought provoking' question, didn't you. .
.
Only fools would deny that capitalism will lead to the biggest pie, and yes, that pie will be less eqally divided under the much, much smaller pie that would be more equitably divided.
.
.
Hmmm..."...that pie will be less eqally divided under the much, much smaller pie that would be more equitably divided".
OK Happy, admit it...you were drinking when you posted that gibberish...right?
.
.
"All other so-called successful socialist countries achieved their greatest success..."
.
.
Wait, wait, wait...are these countries successful...or only "so-called" successful? Really...they can't be both at the same time.
Like I said...drinking...alot!!
So "happy" that you've given up actually trying to make sense?
Posted by Lillian at 05/08/2008 @ 02:48am
"Sixty-five percent believe the U.S. should withdraw all its troops from Iraq either "immediately" or "over the next twelve months"
That doesn't mean it is the right thing to do. After all a majority of Americans wanted to go into Iraq.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/08/2008 @ 08:34am
TV News Blackout on Pentagon Pundits
5/5/08
Two weeks after a New York Times story (4/20/08) revealed a Pentagon propaganda campaign that had been feeding talking points to TV military analysts, many of whom also had ties to military contractors, the cable and broadcast networks that employed these analysts have almost entirely failed to report this crucial news story. Fox has even continued to feature commentary by two Pentagon-affiliated ex-generals without disclosing their conflicts of interest.
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3361
Thursday, May 8, 2008 9:34:03 AM
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/08/2008 @ 09:28am
Blackwater shooting highlights a U.S., Iraq culture clash
By Borzou Daragahi and Raheem Salman, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
May 4, 2008
BAGHDAD -- He refused to take the Americans' blood money.
Mohammed Hafidh Abdul-Razzaq had been summoned by U.S. Embassy officials who wanted to make amends for the killing of his 10-year-old son. The boy died during a shooting involving employees of Blackwater Worldwide, the U.S. security firm.
Deputy Chief of Mission Patricia A. Butenis told him that she was sorry for what had happened, Abdul-Razzaq recalled. She gave him a sealed envelope. It had his name written on it. Abdul-Razzaq pushed it away.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Physician Haitham Rubaie doesn't want money either. What he wants above all is justice for his wife, a doctor, and his son, a medical student, who died.
He rebuffed attempts to have a donation to an orphanage made in his family's name. No amount of cash, no matter how well-intentioned, would sweep this under the rug.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I don't want any help from you," he said he told them. "If you want to help the orphans, you give them money yourselves."
If North Carolina-based Blackwater wanted to negotiate, it would have to apologize, publicly and loudly, he said.
"Let them apologize by saying those were innocent people," Rubaie said. "Then we will be ready for understanding."
Rubaie couldn't believe that with the investigation still going on, the State Department would renew the Blackwater contract.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Abdul-Razzaq remembered rushing his son to a hospital, and being told an hour later that he was dead. At a police station two days later, U.S. investigators apologized while emphasizing that Blackwater personnel worked for a private company, not the U.S. military, he said.
"I told them that if they didn't fall under [the military's] protection, I would have killed them with my teeth right here on the street," he said.
They pulled out an aerial map of Nisoor Square.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Two days later, he said, he met with a Blackwater representative. The man offered him $20,000, Abdul-Razzaq said, "not as compensation, but as a gift." Abdul-Razzaq said he refused again.
"If you write out an apology for me and confess your crime," he recalled saying, "I will give you a similar paper with my signature promising not to press charges."
He said the official told him such an arrangement was impossible. His company's lawyers in America would never sign off on such a proposal.
"Such decisions abuse us," he said. "I appeal to the American ambassador: Just as he considers the safety of the American diplomats, he must also consider the safety of the Iraqi citizen in an equal way."
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/08/2008 @ 09:50am
Posted by abell12ct at 05/8/2008 |
Guarenteed, when ABELL was "in the majority"...he was happy to cite the polls and how the "peacenik liberals were a minority"!
Posted by Mask at 05/08/2008 @ 10:23am
Posted by Mask at 05/8/2008 I'm just saying that because something is popular doesn't make it right.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/08/2008 @ 10:51am
Haha no biggy honest mistake. Frank calls me a girl to insult me.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/8/2008 |
maybe that, combined with the obamagirl video (with mike gravel - lmao) was what did it. and a brainfart...
ironic - yankeegrits is such a petulant bitch himself.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/08/2008 @ 11:10am
Ummm...the only htin we need to battle terrorism is to stop sticking our noses in other people's business. Bush would like us to believe that islamic terrorists attacked and want to attack America because of our way of life, because of our liberties. Truth is they could car less about what we do within our borders, What they care about and the reason they hate us is for putting tens of thousands of troops in their back yard in order to impose our will onto them. If we had no troops n the middle east no the term islamic terrorist would not even exist. So what does this administartion do? THey send hundreds of thousands more troops to the middle east.With the trillion dollars spent on the war in Iraq thw US could well be on tis way to energy independence and out of the middle east with no more terrorist problems. But then how would big oil and the defense industry keep making their record profits.
Posted by danconstan at 05/08/2008 @ 11:11am
Posted by abell12ct at 05/8/2008 | ignore this person
a majority of Americans was lied to and believed the lies. you too evidently.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/08/2008 @ 11:27am
Posted by abell12ct at 05/8/2008 | ignore this person
a majority of Americans was lied to and believed the lies. you too evidently.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/08/2008 @ 11:29am
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/8/2008
He really is.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/08/2008 @ 11:29am
That doesn't mean it is the right thing to do. After all a majority of Americans wanted to go into Iraq.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/8/2008 | ignore this person
.
.
I'm so happy to see those on the right wing finally coming around to the fact that going into Iraq was the wrong thing to do!
Posted by Lillian at 05/08/2008 @ 11:41am
Posted by Mask at 05/8/2008 I'm just saying that because something is popular doesn't make it right.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/8/2008
And I'm just saying that 4-6 years ago....you were likely singing a different tune when Bush was in the 60s and everybody was onboard for invading Iraq....and likely NOT saying "I'm just saying that because something is popular doesn't make it right."
Posted by Mask at 05/08/2008 @ 12:14pm
forget al-qaeda......
here's a REAL enemy:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=LSxQ0t1KQas&feature=related
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/08/2008 @ 12:35pm
Posted by Mask Actually his popularity was around 90%.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/08/2008 @ 12:47pm
And to be clear I thought that the war was and is right regardless of popularity. War is not a popularity contest.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/08/2008 @ 12:51pm
emile duBois I guess Americans don't like being wrong and when they are they need someone to blame. We were not lied to and we were wrong about WMD's. We were not wrong about the dangers Sadaam posed or his support of terrorists.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/08/2008 @ 12:54pm
War is not a popularity contest.
Posted by abell12ct
get with the plan.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/08/2008 @ 1:05pm
abell12ct
still clinging to that bitterness?
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/08/2008 @ 1:06pm
Posted by frosty zoom I'm not bitter. Still clinging to the fantasy that everything will be hunky dory in Iraq once we leave?
Posted by abell12ct at 05/08/2008 @ 1:14pm
i know things will be very bad when the u.s. leaves.
and i know why.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/08/2008 @ 1:25pm
"Such decisions abuse us," he said. "I appeal to the American ambassador: Just as he considers the safety of the American diplomats, he must also consider the safety of the Iraqi citizen in an equal way."
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/8/2008
Ah, Frosty, don't you understand that we U.S. citizens are always in the right with the best intentions for the rest of the world in mind. No greed crosses our sacred leader's minds nor the businessmen making the deals behind the doors.
Therefore, we are the ones to "police" the world. When we kill people in other countries, it's for their own good because they have been lead astray by uncapitalistic societies. Keep in mind that the democracy in the U.S. is pretty much a gone thing, but capitalism will thrive on to strangle everyone out but the wealthy and that includes the idiots defending capitalism to the nth degree.
Glenn Frye did a song called I've got mine that defines these people to a tee.
The world is what it is, but as long as I've got mine, I don't give a shit. Starve to death if you must, but don't ask for crap from me. That's the mentality.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 05/08/2008 @ 1:34pm
War is not a popularity contest.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/8/2008
hmmm...
how bout a dance contest?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/08/2008 @ 1:54pm
War is not a popularity contest. ----Posted by abell12ct at 05/8/2008
No but elections are.
Question, abell...given the "rightness of the cause" and the "wrongness of the American people" (now)...
if it appeared as if Sen. McCain would surely lose, would you object to the elections being "postponed" for a while....until "victory was achieved in Iraq"....from a moral standpoint?
Posted by Mask at 05/08/2008 @ 2:05pm
Posted by danconstan at 05/8/2008
Dan you need to read your history again. The word "terrorist" and those who terrorize have been around for quite some time. It's nothing new. Their dislike for the US and her allies is due in part to our support of Israeli policies towards the Palestinians and the ruling royal families in the ME. It's is also true they hate our way of life. Now, unless you haven't had your ears examine in awhile, many extremists have vowed to force the conversion of the west, to Islam, by any means possible.
Posted by ACook at 05/08/2008 @ 2:23pm
Posted by ACook at 05/8/2008
Yes, and if we don't stay in Iraq "until victory"...won't take six months, a year at most, for millions of Jihadists to storm our beaches and start forcing us to worship their false god and make ACOOK wear a burkha!!!!
Posted by Mask at 05/08/2008 @ 2:51pm
Posted by abell12ct at 05/8/2008 | ignore this person
you're STILL lying about Saddam.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/08/2008 @ 3:00pm
oooh,
here come the "others"
i heard they've got long ears..........
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/08/2008 @ 3:13pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/8/2008
Actually I heard they're led by Benjamin Linus and can control the Smoke Monster!
Posted by Mask at 05/08/2008 @ 3:33pm
And to be clear I thought that the war was and is right regardless of popularity. War is not a popularity contest.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/8/2008
Uh.. could you elaborate on this lunacy? How was it right (based on a bed of shifting lies)
NATION: UPGRADE YOUR BLOG ENGINE - JIMMINY CHRISTMAS, I COULD DOWNLOAD A BETTER ONE FOR FREE, WHY COULDN'T YOU???????????????
Posted by leftofcenter at 05/08/2008 @ 4:15pm
The only exit strategy in war is either all out victory, or defeat and surrender (surrender being the favorite of the left).----Posted by lvliberty1 at 05/8/2008
Wade into them. Spill their blood. Shoot them in the belly. When you put your hand into a bunch of goo that a moment before was your best friend's face, you'll know what to do.
Now there's another thing I want you to remember: I don't want to get any messages saying that we are holding our position. We're not holding anything. Let the Hun do that. We are advancing constantly and we're not interested in holding onto anything except the enemy. We're going to hold onto him by the nose and we're going to kick him in the ass. We're going to kick the hell out of him all the time and we're going to go through him like crap through a goose.
Posted by Mask at 05/08/2008 @ 4:24pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 05/8/2008
Actually I in no way call for a socialist nation. I want an experimentation in economy to find a sustainable system. I don't care if it's socialism, capitalism or some new form or economy. Just something that can sustain itself without a need for constant unceasing growth.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/08/2008 @ 4:33pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 05/8/2008
Well if we closed our borders and fixed the immigration system we could control that. The birthrate is harder because everyone feels like they need to have 13 kids. I think you should have to have a license to be a parent though but that's just personal. I see too many shitty parents who are messing their kids up for life and it makes me sad and angry they were allowed to have children in the first place.
Like that crazy ass dude who just recently was found to have locked his daughter in a basement for like 20 years and was having sex with her and fathered 7 children with her. That person shouldn't have gotten their license to have a baby.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/08/2008 @ 4:57pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 05/8/2008
I am not against bringing some order to our immigration system. I am not for just letting anyone and everyone into this country. However as long as we have a failure of an immigration system that doesn't work whatsoever people are going to continue to come in illegally. I am for fixing the current system then shutting down our borders.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/08/2008 @ 5:07pm
when a country loses the support of its people in going to war, you can be sure that it will lose that war. example? Iraq and Vietnam.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/08/2008 @ 5:25pm
victory will be obtained,
even if it means losing!!!!!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/08/2008 @ 7:20pm
could you elaborate on this lunacy? How was it right (based on a bed of shifting lies) Posted by leftofcenter
I don't believe your premise of the war being based on "lies" so Saadam was a danger and was supporting terrorists. Now before someone says that there was no proof that Saadam supported Al Qaeda, I want to say I'm not talking about AQ. It was well documented that Saadam was giving money to palestinian suicide bomber's families.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/09/2008 @ 10:21am
Posted by abell12ct at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
here is the truth about Saddam's payments to the families of suicide bombers. Israel bulldozed the houses of the families of suicide bombers. doing so it engaged in collective punishment. similar to the Nazis killing and entire town as "punishment" for the Heydrich assassination. it is these victims of collective punishment that Saddam supported with a check. this support was of course post facto to the terrorist attacks. an' dat's de trutt.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/09/2008 @ 11:06am
you hate america, ed junior.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/09/2008 @ 11:22am
Posted by emile duBois He also offered 50,000 to the families of any suicide bomber.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/09/2008 @ 11:31am
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=frosty%20zoom
I like to bite the hand that feeds me, lies.
when I came to this country as a teenager, I was told over and over again how lucky I was to be brought to God's country. don't get me wrong, I'm glad I came, eventhough one of the first things my adopted country did was to try to draft me and send me to a country far far away, no fight an unnecessary war. nein Danke.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/09/2008 @ 11:35am
Posted by emile duBois He also offered 50,000 to the families of any suicide bomber.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
this is the same story. the money offered has been reported as $20,000.
it is important to remember that Saddam was not the only entity supporting extremist terrorists. the house of Saud too has been implicated, as have many other gulf arabs. get ready to invade them too.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/09/2008 @ 12:04pm
a bigger box. it's a start. don't stop there Nation.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/09/2008 @ 12:14pm
let's rewind the time machine to 2003, shall we? Bush addresses the nation and congress. states that Saddam has sent a few checks to Palestinian families of suicide bombers. that is why we have to embark on a five to ten years war, costing a trillion dollars, thousands of dead American soldiers, tens to hundreds of thousand casualties, to say nothing about Iraqis. right?
Posted by emile duBois at 05/09/2008 @ 12:30pm
Posted by lvliberty1
birds of a feather
Zawahiri Terms Iran Common Enemy of Al-Qaeda, US TEHRAN (FNA)-
Al-Qaeda's number two leader snubbed US Republican Senator John McCain for claiming that Iran is working with the terrorist organization.
During a new online Q&A session, Ayman al-Zawahiri said al-Qaeda wants to see the destruction of Iran - a Shiite nation battling the terrorists.
"We hope that war 'saps' both Washington and Tehran," he said according to a press tv report.
"The dispute between America and Iran is a genuine struggle, and the possibility of the US striking Iran is real," al-Zawahiri said.
"Whichever country that emerges victorious will find itself in an intensified and fierce battle [with al-Qaeda]," he continued.
Al-Zawahiri was referring to a recent blunder by the presumptive Republican nominee, Senator John McCain, who has claimed that Iranian operatives are "taking al-Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back" to Iraq.
Although McCain's campaign has attempted to whitewash the senator's remarks as a mishap, pundits have questioned McCain's awareness of current world affairs.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/09/2008 @ 4:18pm
i think anybody who tries to "take down" anything is scum.
as to the government's legitimacy,
we are talking about lebanon, remember.
i refer to the u.s. because it's meddling hand falls just as heavy as iran's and the saudi's on the unfortunate pueblo of lebanon.
imagine the apricots.....
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/09/2008 @ 4:49pm
Lebanon, another festering wound of the Treaty of Versailles. when that big pizza pie the Ottoman empire was carved up by the French and the Brits, the French got greedy. Lebanon, a Christian country, was to fall under French influence. the French wanted more and so greater Lebanon was born, no longer Christian, but multi religious/cultural. and so conflict is born and perpetuated.
don't believe for a moment the US is not involved up to their elbows, remember we're backing Israel.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/09/2008 @ 5:10pm
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=frosty%20zoom
ok my friend, here's one fer ya. Augustin Barrios, you know where to look.
off topic alert, so sue me
Posted by emile duBois at 05/09/2008 @ 9:31pm
julia florida is one of the most beautiful pieces ever.
barrios rules.
ask john williams
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjBy0buLIW0&feature=related&fmt=18
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/10/2008 @ 12:38am
David Russel's the best for this. Narciso Yepes for everything else.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/10/2008 @ 1:52pm
odd,
neither yepes nor fisk nor segovia
touches(ed) barrios.
envy, perhaps?
3:02
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/10/2008 @ 3:02pm
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=frosty%20zoom
this may be just on youtube.
how about that Hillary.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/10/2008 @ 3:11pm
heard she plays a mean villa-lobos.
(won't touch brouwer -- heheh)
well, she'll have plenty of time to practice.
3:15
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/10/2008 @ 3:16pm