Warrior-Diplomat Asks of Afghan War: "Why and to What End?"

posted by John Nichols on 10/28/2009 @ 10:28am

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx it!
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (112)

Subscribe Now

About the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan -- not merely the proposal to surge more troops into the quagmire but the occupation itself -- he says: "I want people in Iowa, people in Arkansas, people in Arizona, to call their congressman and say, 'Listen, I don't think this is right.'"

Who is this radical peacenik who fails to recognize the necessity of the mission in Afghanistan, let alone the role that it plays in the broader "war on terror"?

His name is Matthew Hoh.

What's his story? Oh, you know, the usual: Former Marine Corps captain with combat experience in Iraq, where he received citations for "uncommon bravery"; uniformed officer serving at the Pentagon; top recruit to the State Department; senior U.S. civilian official in Afghanistan's Zabul province, where he has confronted the challenges posed by the Taliban firsthand.

In a four-page letter to the State Department's head of personnel, Hoh wrote: "I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan. I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end."

The occupation, Hoh says, is fueling the insurgency.

In other words, the continued U.S. presence is making things worse rather than better in Afghanistan.

That's not a radical conclusion. It parallels statements made by veteran Central Intelligence Agency analysts, diplomats and soldiers in Robert Greenwald's powerful documentary, "Rethink Afghanistan."

As such, the decorated Marine says, the point of the continued occupation is called into question.

In his letter, Hoh noted that the families of soldiers who perish in combat "must be reassured their dead have sacrificed for a purpose worthy of futures lost, love vanished, and promised dreams unkept."

Unfortunately, he concluded, "I have lost confidence such assurances can be made any more."

Statements like that one made Hoh's September 10 letter one of the most potent statements about a mission that has long been misinterpreted by generals and misunderstood by official Washington.

Making his objections known as President Obama is weighing calls for a dramatic expansion of the U.S. military force in Afghanistan, Hoh's letter is a blockbuster.

The Washington Post identifies Hoh as"the first U.S. official known to resign in protest over the Afghan war, which he had come to believe simply fueled the insurgency."

According to the Post:

The reaction to Hoh's letter was immediate. Senior U.S. officials, concerned that they would lose an outstanding officer and perhaps gain a prominent critic, appealed to him to stay.

U.S. Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry brought him to Kabul and offered him a job on his senior embassy staff. Hoh declined. From there, he was flown home for a face-to-face meeting with Richard C. Holbrooke, the administration's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"We took his letter very seriously, because he was a good officer," Holbrooke said in an interview. "We all thought that given how serious his letter was, how much commitment there was, and his prior track record, we should pay close attention to him."

Holbrooke, who admits that, "I agreed with much of his analysis," tried to get Hoh to join his staff in Washington -- pushing the notion that "if he really wanted to affect policy and help reduce the cost of the war on lives and treasure (he should be) inside the building, rather than outside, where you can get a lot of attention but you won't have the same political impact."

But Hoh did not want his criticism of the occupation to be buried in the bureaucracy.

Frustrated by the low turnout and rampant fraud that characterized Afghanistan's August 20 presidential election -- "The Afghan government's failings, particularly when weighed against the sacrifice of American lives and dollars, appear legion and metastatic..." he writes -- and by the mounting evidence that the insurgency had significant popular support, Hoh suggests in his letter that the U.s. presence in the country "has violently and savagely pitted the urban, secular, educated and modern of Afghanistan against the rural, religious, illiterate and traditional. It is this latter group that composes and supports the Pashtun insurgency."

That insurgency, argued Hoh, "is fed by what is perceived by the Pashtun people as a continued and sustained assault, going back centuries, on Pashtun land, culture, traditions and religion by internal and external enemies. The U.S. and Nato presence in Pashtun valleys and villages, as well as Afghan army and police units that are led and composed of non-Pashtun soldiers and police, provide an occupation force against which the insurgency is justified."

This is an essential message for the administration to hear.

To the credit of Vice President Joe Biden, his staff has arranged a meeting with Hoh for this week. Hopefully, Biden will use the insights to strengthen his case against the proposed escalation.

If Biden fails, then the necessity of Hoh's decision to leave the building where Holbrooke and others had hoped to keep him will become all the more evident.

Hoh will be able to do what a patriot must in times like these: tell the people in Iowa, the people in Arkansas, the people in Arizona, to call their congressman and say of the Afghanistan imbroglio, "Listen, I don't think this is right."

Comments (112)

A Patriot Asks of the Afghan War: "Why and to What End?"

why,

to shield yourself from the preying hands of the fiatmeisters and stop borrowing our future from mars.

why,

to ensure that every resident of your our nations has access to clean air, water, and soil even if it means that monsanto has to pout a wee little bit.

why,

to give every child the opportunity to go to the highest quality schools in an environment where turning the corner doesn't offer the possibility of being glocked.

why,

to ensure that the voice of every resident is represented in the halls of legislature and that the no one profits off bad decisions made on behalf of moneyed interests.

why,

to ensure that the sick, be they rich or poor are offered the best possible medical care, if only in the name of humanity.

that's why WE (fuck, how embarrassing) are fighting in afghanistan.

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/27/2009 @ 9:38pm
afghanistan is becoming OUR palestine.

i wonder when the condos are gonna start going up.

HEY!

hey, zimbabwe ben, do i have a bubble for you!

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/27/2009 @ 9:41pm
afghanistan is becoming OUR palestine.

i wonder when the condos are gonna start going up.

HEY!

hey, zimbabwe ben, do i have a bubble for you!

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/27/2009 @ 9:41pm

Not at all-what a stupid statement. The Arabs in Israel were offered peace and chose war.

The Arabs in Israel said they would not stop until the Jews are pushed into the sea.

Why do you continue to hate the Jews so much that you love murderers instead?

Posted by antisocialist at 10/27/2009 @ 10:00pm
Instead of accepting Hoh's resignation, they should have fired him from his position and if he holds a reserve officers status, told him to resign his commission as an officer.

Just another example of Obama lacking the ability to make strong decisions.

Posted by antisocialist at 10/27/2009 @ 10:03pm
NICHOLS: ....Hoh suggests in his letter that the U.s. presence in the country "has violently and savagely pitted the urban, secular, educated and modern of Afghanistan against the rural, religious, illiterate and traditional. It is this latter group that composes and supports the Pashtun insurgency."

While in general, Hoh is of course, correct. It's unfortunate he didn't have the opportunity to observe Afghanistan when "the rural, religious, illiterate and traditional" came under the Talibans' brutal rule, which rule further extended to "the urban, secular, educated and modern of Afghanistan".

If Afghanistan reverts to Taliban rule, as is damned likely, what then? Hoh should read Kite Runner to gain a broader & longer perspective before he demoralizes our military, as has already happened with our magical CIC!

Posted by Happy at 10/27/2009 @ 10:12pm
Why do you continue to hate the Jews so much that you love murderers instead?

Posted by antisocialist at 10/27/2009 @ 10:00pm

hate jews?

that's funny.

love murderers?

not my favourite people, but hey:

Jesus loves the little children All the children of the world Black and yellow, red and white They're all precious in His sight Jesus loves the little children of the world

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/27/2009 @ 10:24pm
u.s. foreign policy in a nutshell:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuu0nmK_1S8

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/27/2009 @ 10:24pm
still love ya' though, lar....

hey,

check this out:

http://newsfrom1930.blogspot.com/

eery.

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/27/2009 @ 10:28pm
"Why do you continue to hate the Jews so much that you love murderers instead?"

antisocialist, always the most simple-minded of the lot. on second thought, bigpasture is the most simple-minded, but your passion for simple-mindedness surpasses bigpasture by miles.

greenwald on the amazing letter written by the subject:

"He then explains that most of the people we are fighting are not loyal to the Taliban or driven by any other nefarious aim, but instead are driven principally by resistance to the presence of foreign troops in their provinces and village"

i think that sums up any foreign occuption. and the arabs in israel obviously see the jews as invaders.

and probably vice/versa.

i

Posted by darladoon at 10/28/2009 @ 12:30am
Instead of accepting Hoh's resignation, they should have fired him from his position and if he holds a reserve officers status, told him to resign his commission as an officer.

Just another example of Obama lacking the ability to make strong decisions.

Posted by antisocialist at 10/27/2009 @ 10:03pm | ignore this person | warn this person

Insubordination is presumed by leftist to be "patriotic duty"? The ignorace of the principle is dumbfounding, but then that is why marxist are so successful in their subterfuge use of human doubt and unbelief to foment rebellion.

Posted by BigPasture at 10/28/2009 @ 12:53am
Trump casinos & Rockresorts spas in Afghanistan ... coming soon, THE hotspot destination holiday.

That's why. The countless trickle-benefits.

And don't forget the pipeline.

Posted by sloper at 10/28/2009 @ 01:13am
u.s. foreign policy in a nutshell: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuu0nmK_1S8 Posted by frosty zoom

Yes, this explains everything.

Posted by sloper at 10/28/2009 @ 01:33am
And check out the Pentagon's latest request for an Afghan surge ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iabQmjaWCM

Posted by sloper at 10/28/2009 @ 01:50am
"Why and to what End"?

War's of Opportunity and Occupations are never fought for any Noble Cause. So one would assume that they are ignoble and unprincipled.

In the ignoble and unprincipled categories there are many evils. And I'm pretty sure most of them are given equal time in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

And when men of conscience like Matthew Hoh do the right thing they are generally harshly criticized by lesser men, as some of the posts here testify.

Posted by chaoszen at 10/28/2009 @ 07:20am
to ensure that the sick, be they rich or poor are offered the best possible medical care, if only in the name of humanity.

that's why WE (fuck, how embarrassing) are fighting in afghanistan.

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/27/2009 @ 9:38pm

What's this "we" shit, kemosabe? I don't live in Lake Wobegone.

How can you give "everybody" the "best"? In Lake Wobegone speak, how can everybody be above average?

Don't you mean to say, "to ensure the sick all get average care"?

Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 10/28/2009 @ 07:22am
"The Arabs in Israel said they would not stop until the Jews are pushed into the sea."----Posted by antisocialist at 10/27/2009 @ 10:00pm

WHERE in "Israel" did the Arabs who said that live, Larry? Tel Aviv? Haifa? Tamra? Acre?

Posted by Mask at 10/28/2009 @ 07:28am
why are we in afghanistan? i am no military man or state dept operative, yet i have a pretty good idea.

1. to keep off balance the forces that would continue their jihad against western interests. let's "F" in their backyard so they can't "F" in ours; as they so desire.

2. iran must keep looking over its shoulders with USA forces on 2 sides of them. iraq never should have happened.(we must keep neocon\zionists away from USA levers of power) maybe, even though iraq empowered iran, our afghan presence keeps them in check.

3. afghanistan can never be conquered or pacified or modernized. we must stay there, and risk the lives of our professional military, to provide a shield for our citizens against the jihadists.

Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 07:51am
Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 07:51am

1. The London and Madrid attacks happened AFTER we had invaded Afghanistan.

2. Why is Iran, WESTERN border of Afghanistan, so fearful of our troops there...if they're bogged down fighting in the EASTERN border?

3. Given 1 and 2...what sense does your #3 make?!??!?

Posted by Mask at 10/28/2009 @ 08:14am
And don't forget the pipeline.

Posted by sloper at 10/28/2009 @ 01:13am

looks like the chinese are gonna get that done first.

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 08:21am
Posted by sloper at 10/28/2009 @ 01:50am

ummagumma!

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 08:40am
What's this "we" shit, kemosabe?

Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 10/28/2009 @ 07:22am

The first casualties occurred in the Tarnak Farm incident, in which four Canadians were killed and eight seriously wounded when a United States warplane dropped a bomb on a training exercise in the belief that the Canadians were enemy soldiers. The four servicemen were honoured at an event unprecedented in Canadian military history; on 28 April 2002, Skyreach Centre in Edmonton, Alberta, was filled to capacity for a tribute ceremony for the four fallen soldiers that included personal messages from the Governor General, Prime Minister, Chief of Defence Staff, Premiers of Alberta and Manitoba, and the Mayor of Edmonton, most of whom also attended the service. Subsequently, deceased soldiers have been honoured by much smaller services, though, at the rededication of the Vimy Memorial on 9 April 2007, Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, made reference to all the fallen Canadians in Afghanistan when she rededicated the monument "to their eternal remembrance, to Canada, to all who would serve the cause of freedom, and to those who have lost their lives in Afghanistan."[1] Further, in honour of all those who died during the Afghan mission, the section of Ontario's Highway 401 along which fallen soldiers are carried from Canadian Forces Base Trenton to Toronto after repatriation was named the Highway of Heroes.[2] The first deployed Canadian woman to die in combat was Captain Nichola Goddard, and the death of Anthony Boneca initiated debate around the combat readiness of Canadian reservists, wherein questions were asked not only about the suitability of employing reservists, but also the role of the media in reporting comments by grief-stricken relatives, such as those made by Boneca's part

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 08:46am
Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 07:51am

Please! Do we have to listen to this tired old B.S? We had to listen to these lies for eight fuckin' years. Give me a break for Christ sake...

Posted by chaoszen at 10/28/2009 @ 08:49am
Don't you mean to say, "to ensure the sick all get average care"?

Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 10/28/2009 @ 07:22am

i mean to say, "so that little kids and adults and grandmas don't die because of the greedy hearts of parasites."

don't fight a game a semantics with me, darin. do you understand "misallocation of resources"?

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 08:49am
afghanistan can never be conquered or pacified or modernized.

Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 07:51am

oh, lord.

another viceroy.

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 08:53am
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 08:49am

You DO realize the reason Darin keeps wanting to change ANY topic thread to health care reform is...

he's in a panic that it's going to pass with a public option?

Posted by Mask at 10/28/2009 @ 09:27am
"we must stay there, and risk the lives of our professional military, to provide a shield for our citizens against the jihadists"

you have no clue, dude, as you admitted at the beginning of your post.

our presence is precisely what's fueling jihadists.

Posted by darladoon at 10/28/2009 @ 10:46am
Here's a patriot being labelled as 'insubordinate' because he, with all of his experience, sees no reason to continue fighting a dubious war with only a tiny, if any, chance of success.

And if we won, we'd have to rebuild the country and give the Afghan people... health care, among many other things.

Misguided priorities and fake patriotism which is really corporatism. It's hard to tell this about oneself, though, when the mirrors in your house are like those in a circus funhouse. A million reflections, distorted images.

We need to admit that Afghanistan is a mistake. We should have expended a mighty effort over there FIRST instead of starting the endlessly debatable war in Iraq. We were supposed to be after terrorists, not dictators. And Arab terrorists at that.

But that's corporatism for you. And we still don't have access to those Iraqi oil fields... much to the chagrin of 'Dick the Cheney'.

Posted by ficheye at 10/28/2009 @ 10:49am
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 08:46am

In all seriousness, my question was related to Lake Wobegone, not Canada. I didn't mean to diminish the sacrifice of Canadians in the war against Islamic terrorists.

But it is a serious point: too many talk about providing the best care to everyone. That is impossible. By definition, everyone will collectively get average care. Some will get better care and some will get worse care, but on average, society will get average care. It is impossible for everyone to get the best care.

Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 10/28/2009 @ 11:02am
AFGHANISTAN

Why? To protect the source for opium for heroin traffic.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/27/karzais- brother-on-cia-pa_n_336279.html

To What End? http://www.narcoticnews.com/

Same reasons for the war in Vietnam. Read:

http://www.amazon.com/politics-heroin-Southeast- Asia/dp/0060129018

Posted by dont_know at 10/28/2009 @ 11:47am
Mr. Hoh (or Captain Hoh), has done his duty, as sworn when he became an officer, to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.

"The Marine Officer Oath of Office I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

Nothing in that oath says a thing about upholding failed foreign policies under George W. Bush, it doesn't even say anything about obeying a commanding officer's orders. He is defending the Constitution (and thus his country), in the best way he can; by quitting his job (at the State department). And in doing so has started a national conversation that should already have been had YEARS ago, but with the intervention of an illegal and immoral war in Iraq, might have.

The fact that Larry, Happy, BP, etc. find that to be treasonous (or whatever), I find kinda funny.

Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 10/28/2009 @ 11:54am
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 08:46am |

A higher portion of Canadians have suffered casualties in Afghanistan than Americans.

Darin should look up the definition of "Tonto".

And, from the "can't we all just get along" department, comes some more Keller Williams (with better vocals :p )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKCGw1j8yZ4

Posted by snowball777 at 10/28/2009 @ 11:57am
Instead of accepting Hoh's resignation, they should have fired him from his position and if he holds a reserve officers status, told him to resign his commission as an officer.

Just another example of Obama lacking the ability to make strong decisions.

Posted by antisocialist at 10/27/2009 @ 10:03pm

Just another example of how out of touch with reality and F-ing Nuts Larry is.

Posted by Extraneous at 10/28/2009 @ 12:18pm
mask, chaoszen, frostyzoom, darladoom

trash my opinion as you like.

keep your heads in the sand as long as you like.

ceasing of military action will cost us more in pain, blood, treasure and loss of liberties in USA than you can begin to imagine.

which way is mecca?

Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 12:43pm
Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 12:43pm |

What liberties would be curtailed?

The freedom to pour blood and treasure into the hills of that forsaken sh*thole?

The AQ operatives in Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, and Berlin are laughing at your assertions, Mike.

Posted by snowball777 at 10/28/2009 @ 12:56pm
>> "... my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end." <<

Matthew Hoh knows full well, "why and to what end."

In January, as President Obama was inaugurated, the US had 26,650 men in Afhganistan. Now there are 68,000 and the deployment of another 40,000 is under discussion.

Why and to what end is crystal clear.

Candidate Obama, a year ago, accused the Republicans of dithering in Afghanistan. It was his way of putting the shoe on the other foot. He was embarrassed, having called Iraq unwinnable and the Surge a bad idea. He now wanted to show himself a hawk, and to picture his opponents as irresolute, who did nothing to confront resurgent Taliban. They were wimps neglecting that theater. They had turned what he deemed, the central front in the war against terror, into a holding action. If elected, he would give Afghanistan the resources it needed. He fight that war to victory.

That is why we are now in a morass, with our wheels spinning. Because Obama, after having denounced Republican idling in that war, on gaining the driver's seat in January, stepped on the gas.

He did so, not to promote America's national interest, but his political interest, to win the White House. That is why he blew an ember into a blaze, a war which does not serve the nation. Fighting it was necessary for him, not America. He substitutes his personal welfare for the nation's. Has there ever been a graver case of corruption, a more explicit high crime and misdemeanor?

Many civil servants across the land consider their jobs, in the first place, as existing to serve them, rather than they serving their jobs. Now we have a president with that mentality.

Posted by Pirovano at 10/28/2009 @ 12:58pm
Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 12:43pm

I notice you didn't directly respond to my direct responses. Try again-

1. How did attacking Afghanistan help stop the jihadists who attacked Londan and Madrid?

2. Why will Iran fear a US military presence in Afghanistan, if it is bogged down on the EASTERN borders...and would NEVER be able to attack Iran without dragging America into ANOTHER quagmire that can't be won either? Or do you think the Iranians are totally stupid?

3. If #1 and #2....what "shield" does us staying there provide us against either jihadists or Iran???

Posted by Mask at 10/28/2009 @ 12:59pm
Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 07:51am

"why are we in afghanistan? i am no military man or state dept operative, yet..."

Yet you feel compelled to share your opinion about something you don't know anything about?

1. The Afghanistan Taliban has zero interest in "F"ing in our backyard.

2. Iran is enjoying a surge in influence because we have left a huge power vacuum in Iraq and Afghanistan, paving the way for a future Persian empire. It also has little to no fear of a U.S. attack because it can shut down the Straits of Hormuz - and our economy - in a New York minute.

3. Afghanistan has never been conquered because it has never been a country, and it doesn't have anything worthwhile to make it worth conquering.

From Robert Baer's "The Devil We Know":

"There's a set of people in America who have focused on the radical wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, on al Qaeda, and even on Iran, lumping them together, claiming they represent a wider hate that drives the Middle East. Sine 9/11, without any evidence, these people have tried to make the case that Muslims intend to infiltrate the United States, bring it down from the inside, and convert us to Islam. They search the Dumpsters of the world looking for evidence of this dark conspiracy."

Sound like anyone you know, Mike?

Posted by srjenkins at 10/28/2009 @ 1:07pm
Sound like anyone you know, Mike?

Posted by srjenkins at 10/28/2009 @ 1:07pm | ignore this person | warn this person

Says our myopic echo chamber friend obliviously distracted from Brittion and Central Europe where it is already under way.

Posted by BigPasture at 10/28/2009 @ 1:16pm
ok mask. you mention london and madrid. you fail to mention WTC 1993, uss cole, the attack on USA personnel in saudi, the 2 attacks on USA embassies. all prior to 9-11. all done on clinton's watch. you also fail to mention recent arrests in USA which are reported to have af-pak connections or attempts. so you mention 2 incidents since 9-11, i have 5 not counting 9-11. do you really want to have a rock fight on this issue? also, the recent apprehensions would probably have gone farther if the af-pak were less restricted by USA presence.

how many miles closer is eastern afghan to iran than norfolk, va or san diego, ca? proximity can have an effect.

with USA standing on the neck of alqaeda's friends in afghanistan, the jihadists cannot operate with enough liberty to direct their plans. i know its simple, but, clearly you can't do this calculus yourself.

head in the sand. butt in the air.

Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 1:37pm
From Robert Baer's "The Devil We Know":

"There's a set of people in America who have focused on the radical wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, on al Qaeda, and even on Iran, lumping them together, claiming they represent a wider hate that drives the Middle East. Sine 9/11, without any evidence, these people have tried to make the case that Muslims intend to infiltrate the United States, bring it down from the inside, and convert us to Islam. They search the Dumpsters of the world looking for evidence of this dark conspiracy."

Sound like anyone you know, Mike?

Posted by srjenkins at 10/28/2009 @ 1:07pm

never heard of him. draw my conclusions from consumption of MSM, like NYT, WAPO, NPR. honestly. i do sometimes do a gut check to make sure my position is true and not some zionist manipulation. each time i do, i conclude they are out to get us, and afghan presence is essential. when is the last (first) time you re-assessed your opinion?

Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 1:44pm
What liberties would be curtailed?

The freedom to pour blood and treasure into the hills of that forsaken sh*thole?

The AQ operatives in Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, and Berlin are laughing at your assertions, Mike.

Posted by snowball777 at 10/28/2009 @ 12:56pm

the patriot act is only a preview of what a gov't legislating on fear can do. you want more of that?

those operatives you mention have many things in common. one of them is afghanistan. i know you know this. but keep on quitting.

Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 1:48pm
"we must stay there, and risk the lives of our professional military, to provide a shield for our citizens against the jihadists" you have no clue, dude, as you admitted at the beginning of your post. our presence is precisely what's fueling jihadists. Posted by darladoon at 10/28/2009 @ 10:46am

and your bonafides? can't be great. the jihad started years before we entered afghan. (WTC 1993, uss cole, 2 us embassies, attack on us people in saudi) you must have been born yesterday, literally. dude.

Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 1:55pm
From Robert Baer's "The Devil We Know":

"There's a set of people in America who have focused on the radical wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, on al Qaeda, and even on Iran, lumping them together, claiming they represent a wider hate that drives the Middle East. Sine 9/11, without any evidence, these people have tried to make the case that Muslims intend to infiltrate the United States, bring it down from the inside, and convert us to Islam. They search the Dumpsters of the world looking for evidence of this dark conspiracy."

Sound like anyone you know, Mike?

Posted by srjenkins at 10/28/2009 @ 1:07pm

And Baer is 100% wrong on the agenda of the jihadists. He's a man who did his job well, but like many who came into the agency at a similar time, he is a liberal. It's interesting that most of these liberal field ops types all retired around the same time.

They all thought they had changed the agency into some milk toast, ineffective social network.

We need a new generation of field ops people who understand the dangerous world we are fighting against and are willing to get the job done.

Posted by antisocialist at 10/28/2009 @ 1:59pm
Please! Do we have to listen to this tired old B.S? We had to listen to these lies for eight fuckin' years. Give me a break for Christ sake... Posted by chaoszen at 10/28/2009 @ 08:49am

maybe you are right. withdraw. let's turn the clock back to the 1990's when clinton let 5 incidents at least occur without rersponse, thus emboldening them to do 9-11. inspite of the fact that he engineered a muslim state in the balkans where nobody else could. that's the thanks he got.that's progressive.

Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 2:01pm
Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 1:48pm |

"the patriot act is only a preview of what a gov't legislating on fear can do. you want more of that?"

Hell no, but that self-same fear is why we're flying drones and pissing off everyone except AQ in Afghanistan in the first place.

AQ is a criminal organization and should be dismantled using the existing techniques for that class of problem.

"those operatives you mention have many things in common. one of them is afghanistan. i know you know this. but keep on quitting."

More of them have connections to House Saud than Afghanistan.

Keep on wasting decent American soldiers.

Posted by snowball777 at 10/28/2009 @ 2:03pm
Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 1:37pm

You are clueless about the effect our presence in Afghanistan and Iraq is having on terror recruitment.

Do you think people go and blow themselves up because as Bush and Cheney would have you believe "they hate freedom"?

What effect do you think unmanned drones bombing wedding parties has on terror recruitment? If you had family killed by terrorists would you want revenge? Sure you would. Just like if an afghanistani had family killed by Americans, he would want revenge.

You mention USS Cole, and other prior attacks. Well those attackers had little to do with Afghanistan, most of them came from Yemen, SA, Pakistan, etc. There is little if any tie between Iran and support for terrosism.

You like having our servicemen and women abroad so that the terrorists have something to shoot at. I say, F-that! If they think they can attack us here I say bring it. Lets not just give them easy targets. Lets make them actually do the leg work to get here and hit us at home, if they can. It is not worth our servicemen's lifes or the trillions of dollars maintain a force in their backyard. And as Cpt Hoh, implies, maybe there will be less reason for them to attack us if we are not in their home killing their friends and family.

Posted by Extraneous at 10/28/2009 @ 2:07pm
ceasing of military action will cost us more in pain, blood, treasure and loss of liberties in USA than you can begin to imagine.

which way is mecca?

Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 12:43pm

Just curious...on whose (or what's) authority do you make your dire predictions? What do you know that no one else does (except for those who agree with you)?

Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 10/28/2009 @ 2:08pm
We need a new generation of field ops people who understand the dangerous world we are fighting against and are willing to get the job done.

Posted by antisocialist at 10/28/2009 @ 1:59pm

...as long as they stay within the letter of the law, right Constitution-lover Larry?

Or would you be happier with them being "extra-Constitutional?"

Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 10/28/2009 @ 2:14pm
Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 1:44pm

"...i conclude they are out to get us, and afghan presence is essential. when is the last (first) time you re-assessed your opinion?"

Let's just say I spend a little more time on the topic than reading the NYT and doing an occasional gut check.

The logic of takfiri is the logic of "propaganda of the deed". It will fall apart when they've killed enough of their fellow Muslims to lose their support - which more or less means that Taliban (both Pakistani and Afghani) are irrelevant over time. At least the Afghan Taliban has a realizable objective - since they are essentially a nationalist movement. The Pakistani Taliban is only as effective as the ISI makes them.

So, we could cut a deal with the Afghan Taliban, get them to keep their terrorists at home. At the same time, we cut a deal with Iran and get them to help us keep the extremists (theirs and the looser cannons) in check and offer them more modern techniques in getting their oil out, help refining it, eliminate sanctions and so forth - and we'll have a reliable ally. Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and even Israel aren't reliable - and we need to make a move to cultivate Iran as a friend.

Then, we back up our crap and learn the lesson that we should stick to fighting with proxies, develop our guerrilla warfare tactics, and understand that conventional WWII style fighting with tanks and aircraft carriers is as outdated as the phalanx.

Since these are ideas that aren't even permitted in the main stream media, it's unlikely you've given them much thought. Perhaps it is time for another reevaluation and "gut" check.

Posted by srjenkins at 10/28/2009 @ 2:14pm
Taking military pressure off gihadists in their home regions is not a good idea. Neither is a Vietnam-style escalation to prop up a corrupt regime. The only answer left is for NATO to be the harasser of the Taliban element, not the occupier of Afghanistan -- saw a cool site; Balkingpoints ; awesome satellite view of earth

Posted by reg373 at 10/28/2009 @ 2:32pm
...as long as they stay within the letter of the law, right Constitution-lover Larry?

Or would you be happier with them being "extra-Constitutional?"

Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 10/28/2009 @ 2:14pm

Do you think that the constitution bans assassinations by CIA operatives of our enemies?

Posted by antisocialist at 10/28/2009 @ 2:56pm
We need a new generation of field ops people who understand the dangerous world we are fighting against and are willing to get the job done. Posted by antisocialist at 10/28/2009 @ 1:59pm

What a surprise. If they lose heart because of a change in their philosophy they are now liberals. How many generations will go by before we have the right guys, willing to kill anything that moves on the plains of this dubious ideology?

This head on method of dealing with al Qaeda and the Taliban is just not going to work in the long run. Blowing things up and shooting people is not going to have a lasting effect on changing the philosophy of a religious extremist group or anyone for that matter. It just hardens their resolve. You, of all people, should recognize this. If it was 'regular' warfare, then maybe. The crusades never solved anything... it just created motion in the shifting sands of control. This is another type of crusade using the same methods... force. You'll say no, that this is just a 'regular' war, not one of those christian campaigns. I say no, the goals are just as hazy, the methods just as reprehensible and ineffective.

It didn't work then and it's not going to work now. We need to get inside their heads and crumble their resolve from within if we are to change hearts and minds. And on the way to doing that we may just discover some important things about ourselves.

Posted by ficheye at 10/28/2009 @ 2:59pm
Do you think that the constitution bans assassinations by CIA operatives of our enemies? Posted by antisocialist at 10/28/2009 @ 2:56pm

Under the U.S. Constitution, the president is not allowed to create private assassination squads (Bad Cheney!!). This power is exclusively delegated to Congress under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which grants Congress the power to both "define and punish piracies and felonies" as well as to "grant letters of marque and reprisal"

And since that is the case, the CIA figured out a workaround since they didn't want to put their assassination requests before Congress: they hired Blackwater. They 'outsourced'. It's the American way.

Posted by ficheye at 10/28/2009 @ 3:06pm
Do you think that the constitution bans assassinations by CIA operatives of our enemies?

Posted by antisocialist at 10/28/2009 @ 2:56pm | ignore this person | warn this person

If we have a legally declared war then we can assassinate our "enemies" although that may or may not be the best policy in any given situation. But if they are only adversaries and not official enemies, then assassination becomes murder and there are laws against that. You know that.

Posted by dont_know at 10/28/2009 @ 3:10pm
maybe there will be less reason for them to attack us if we are not in their home killing their friends and family.

Posted by Extraneous at 10/28/2009 @ 2:07pm | ignore this person | warn this person

That is just stupid like the Obamanation and other leftist cry, it is like saying that after all the Islamic terrorism that took place decades BEFORE there was an Iraq or Afghanistan war that those attacks and 9-11 never would happen! Grab both ears and pull until you hear that popping sound!

Posted by BigPasture at 10/28/2009 @ 3:14pm
Posted by antisocialist at 10/28/2009 @ 1:59pm

Actually, the first person I thought about when I read that quote was you. You're a Christian takfiri.

He delineates between the Sunni takfiri and the Revolutionary Guard in a way that you seem incapable of understanding. He also makes the point that the CIA's mission is intelligence, not interventions.

"We need a new generation of field ops people who understand the dangerous world we are fighting against and are willing to get the job done."

Yes, hopefully, field ops that have a much better and greater understanding than you do and understand their primary mission is intelligence. All they have to do is know what the letters of the agency stand for.

Posted by srjenkins at 10/28/2009 @ 3:20pm
Do you think that the constitution bans assassinations by CIA operatives of our enemies? Posted by antisocialist at 10/28/2009 @ 2:56pm

Under the U.S. Constitution, the president is not allowed to create private assassination squads (Bad Cheney!!). This power is exclusively delegated to Congress under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which grants Congress the power to both "define and punish piracies and felonies" as well as to "grant letters of marque and reprisal"

And since that is the case, the CIA figured out a workaround since they didn't want to put their assassination requests before Congress: they hired Blackwater. They 'outsourced'. It's the American way.

Posted by ficheye at 10/28/2009 @ 3:06pm

We have used assassins like all other nations throughout our history until the idiots in the Church commission. And it was and can still be easily accomplished with Congressional oversight approval as they did in the past.

Posted by antisocialist at 10/28/2009 @ 3:28pm
He delineates between the Sunni takfiri and the Revolutionary Guard in a way that you seem incapable of understanding. He also makes the point that the CIA's mission is intelligence, not interventions.

"We need a new generation of field ops people who understand the dangerous world we are fighting against and are willing to get the job done."

Yes, hopefully, field ops that have a much better and greater understanding than you do and understand their primary mission is intelligence. All they have to do is know what the letters of the agency stand for.

Posted by srjenkins at 10/28/2009 @ 3:20pm

Who is the "he" you refer to?

I don't find any significant difference between Al Qaeda (the modern takfiri) and the Iranian Rev Guard. Their primary difference is simply that the IRG hires, trains, and funds groups like Hezbollah rather than doing it themselves.

"He also makes the point that the CIA's mission is intelligence, not interventions."

That is also just a revisionist redefinition of the agency that doesn't reflect it's roots.

Posted by antisocialist at 10/28/2009 @ 3:33pm
SRJ and others who seem ignorant of US history

<Among the documents found in the training files of Operation PBSUCCESS and declassified by the Agency is a "Study of Assassination." A how-to guide book in the art of political killing, the 19-page manual offers detailed descriptions of the procedures, instruments, and implementation of assassination. "The simplest local tools are often much the most efficient means of assassination," counsels the study. "A hammer, axe, wrench, screw driver, fire poker, kitchen knife, lamp stand, or anything hard, heavy and handy will suffice." For an assassin using "edge weapons," the manual notes in cold clinical terms, "puncture wounds of the body cavity may not be reliable unless the heart is reached....Absolute reliability is obtained by severing the spinal cord in the cervical region." T he manual also notes that to provide plausible denial, "no assassination instructions should ever be written or recorded." Murder, the drafters state, "is not morally justifiable," and "persons who are morally squeamish should not attempt it.">

http://tinyurl.com/cmc56

Posted by antisocialist at 10/28/2009 @ 3:44pm
Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 1:37pm

mike, we're discussing YOUR theory of "terrorism prevention"....and I pointed out an OBVIOUS flaw in your "If we just invade Afghanistan, we'll put the terrorists on the ropes!"...i.e. London and Madrid in 2004, 2005.

Now you want to change the debate to Clinton.

Kind of proves my point when you can't defend yours, doesn't it?

Posted by Mask at 10/28/2009 @ 3:48pm
he's in a panic that it's going to pass with a public option?

Posted by Mask at 10/28/2009 @ 09:27am

well, he can rest easy then.

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:28pm
which way is mecca?

Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 12:43pm

under the frikkin' oil

wake up.

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:30pm
which way is mecca?

Posted by mikeflynn at 10/28/2009 @ 12:43pm

on top of the frikkin' oil

wake up.

[oops]

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:30pm
It is impossible for everyone to get the best care.

Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 10/28/2009 @ 11:02am

especially with insurance companies raping the public.

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:31pm
Murder, the drafters state, "is not morally justifiable," and "persons who are morally squeamish should not attempt it."> http://tinyurl.com/cmc56 Posted by antisocialist at 10/28/2009 @ 3:44pm

Well once they found out what he really thought about the Fed, it was easy enough to find some lame brained radical who would be happy to have lunch in a book repository while some of those folks who weren't 'morally squeamish....'

gunshot... gunshot...

Hey, just funnin' around... thanks for the 'death with any instrument handy' primer, Larry.

Posted by ficheye at 10/29/2009 @ 02:48am
Sadly I believe the reasons for us being over there have become convoluted and lost. The more we reamin over there the more the Afgan people resent us. I would like to hear from the Afgan women that are still over there. I worked with several women from the middle east years ago back when this war started. They were glad that America had finally gotten involved. They left their homelands because of the oppression and abuse they suffered from the men in their country. One of the Dr's at the Hospital where I worked told me stories of how the Taliban refused to let women work. Even women such as herself that had dedicated her life to medicine and healing people. I bet the women have a far different perspective than the men in Afganistan and Iraq. For many of us its our own perspective that drives us to acheive an end. My personal view is that covert operations would have been more effective and less costly than sending our countrymen into a winless war. However I know many think this would also be wrong. Do we really have the right to force our views onto other cultures. Another plan of action would be to ignore the rest of the world and live in our own little shell. Afterall isn't that what Roosevelt wanted to do during WWII. It wasn't until we were attacked that He realized the severity of the situation. Hind site is always 20-20.

Posted by DrPiggy at 10/29/2009 @ 3:34pm
"The more we reamin over there the more the Afgan people resent us."

I should think so.

Unsavory!

Posted by snowball777 at 10/30/2009 @ 09:28am
Hind site is always 20-20. Posted by DrPiggy at 10/29/2009 @ 3:34pm | ignore this person | warn this person

hindsight not Hind site.

Posted by emile duBois at 10/31/2009 @ 11:17am
Is that your only comment is to correct my spelling, how sad for you! Obviously we are raising a country full of spelling bee champions with no original thoughts of their own! Was my spelling correct on this?

Posted by DrPiggy at 10/31/2009 @ 10:42pm
Posted by DrPiggy at 10/31/2009 @ 10:42pm | ignore this person | warn this person

when someone spells words the way they sound, it is an indication that they do not read much.

a person who does not read is not equipped to carry on an intelligent discussion.

so feel free to be defensive and feel free to share your drivel with us. but "ohne mich".

Posted by emile duBois at 11/01/2009 @ 09:28am
Posted by DrPiggy at 10/31/2009 @ 10:42pm |

You're the one claiming to be a 'doctor', swine.

Perhaps you merely spend too much time pointing guns at asses (interpret as you see fit, oh barnyard avenger).

Posted by snowball777 at 11/01/2009 @ 10:12am
100's of brave men have died while this administartion dances around with false claims that they need to see who is the legitimate government of Afganistan. There never has or will be. There are Taliban, Al Qaida and terrorists there and our national interests however.

This is pure political grandstanding while brave men die. The deaths, and blood of 100'2 since Mccrystall requested the reinforcements can be laid at the foot of this administartion. It is a disgrace that after boasting he would increase trrop comittments in afganistan, find bin ladin and win the war that Obama with his mouth pieces Biden and Kerry can't seem to define why we are there and what the definition of victory is.

What happened to all the increased Nato troops Obama and Kerry said they could negotiate because those countries would love us once the annointed one got in. This administration has gotten nothing from Nato. Why should they after backing away from allies on the ground like Poland. This performance is a disgrace and the press refuses to call them on the carpet for this deadly policy of inaction.

Posted by Obamunut at 11/01/2009 @ 10:35am
a person who does not read is not equipped to carry on an intelligent discussion.

so feel free to be defensive and feel free to share your drivel with us. but "ohne mich".

Posted by emile duBois at 11/01/2009 @ 09:28am | ignore this person

I'm a Pharmacist in fact a PharmD which takes 5 years of Higher Education, what do you do? Just for the record I read every DAMN day. In fact I read articles that you couldn't even pronounce the words. What your feeble inteligence neglected to realize is that I do not type well. I didn't want to be a secretary probably like you I wanted to be an artist. Once again rather than attack me why don't you actually address what I said. Or can't you find the words.

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/01/2009 @ 2:32pm
My father and brother have both been Career military. My father fought in Vietnam and my brother has been to Afganistan once and Iraq twice. They both think we need to get out of there. Have you been over there yet? By the way don't call me swine you frog. No wonder half the world hates America if people like you represent us.

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/01/2009 @ 2:35pm
Posted by DrPiggy at 11/01/2009 @ 2:35pm |

I called you a swine, not emile (who is not from France)...and what do you expect when self-apply a porcine moniker, Doc?

Posted by snowball777 at 11/01/2009 @ 5:16pm
I called you a swine, not emile (who is not from France)...and what do you expect when self-apply a porcine moniker, Doc?

Posted by snowball777 at 11/01/2009 @ 5:16pm | ignore this person |

What? Sorry you will need to explain that comment to me? Are you being goofy? Frog leggs!

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/01/2009 @ 5:57pm
In fact I read articles that you couldn't even pronounce the words.

methinks thou protesteth too much.

with all your voluminous reading, just read over your pearls of wisdom before you post.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/01/2009 @ 6:06pm
with all your voluminous reading, just read over your pearls of wisdom before you post.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/01/2009

So you crucify me just because of 1 typo and 1 alternate spelling of a word? If you can't see how petty that is,then nothing I say could convince you that we need to get out of Afganistan or that maybe your point of view isn't the only one in this world. By the way I don't prtest, I DEFEND!

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/01/2009 @ 6:11pm
So you crucify me

you have got to be kidding.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/01/2009 @ 6:21pm
So you crucify me

you have got to be kidding.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/01/2009 @ 6:21pm

Have you even commented on one of my "little pearls of wisdom",other than my typo and misspell? How do you expect me to react. Are you really that pompous and arrogant Emile! By the way I hate typing so this will be my last comment. To bad we couldn't have had a rational discussion on the Afgan war. I'll know next time not to intrude on the 'Boys Club' conversations. Glad my Dad and brothers are open minded, to bad your not. Good-bye

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/01/2009 @ 7:01pm
Are you really that pompous and arrogant Emile!

even more so.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/01/2009 @ 8:58pm
, to bad your not.

to bad what?

Posted by emile duBois at 11/01/2009 @ 9:32pm
What your feeble inteligence neglected to realize is that I do not type well. I didn't want to be a secretary probably like you I wanted to be an artist.

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/01/2009 @ 2:32pm

So, you suck at typing AND art so you became a pharmacist?

"...probably like you I wanted to be an artist"

Did Emile want to be an artist? This is getting good!

Posted by ficheye at 11/02/2009 @ 10:19am
Posted by ficheye at 11/02/2009 @ 10:19am | ignore this person | warn this person

I AM an artist. I have exhibited in numerous juried group shows and self produced exhibitions.

according to Otto Rank, the first thing an artist must do is self identify as an artist, a sort of affirmation, to put it more modern terms.

if you make art, then you're an artist. whether anyone sees or buys your work is immaterial.

the misspellings are not a matter of typing, but rather a matter of WRITING.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/02/2009 @ 11:13am
We need to get inside their heads and crumble their resolve from within if we are to change hearts and minds. And on the way to doing that we may just discover some important things about ourselves.

Posted by ficheye at 10/28/2009 @ 2:59pm

Are you on crack!!! If they were over here bombing our country and killing off our countrymen could your resolve be crumbled you idiot, do you think they could change your mind,moron!!

So, you suck at typing AND art so you became a pharmacist?

Posted by ficheye at 11/02/2009 @ 10:19am

I never said I sucked at Art, in fact I didn't say I wasn't also an artists, I guess someone who's hyped up on ignorance tends to read that which isn't written. I actually won a contest recently for United Health group Children's foundation for best design. I chose Pharmacy because Science interests me more and is more lucrative. What do you do ficheye(other than drugs). Are you a member of the armed services, if not perhaps you should join and go over to Afghanistan and preach your theories. You know they have Poppies Fields for commercial use over there. It's a win win for us and them.

By the way Emile ,you say you are a artist, where you named after the famous French artist Émile Munier?

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/02/2009 @ 2:31pm
DrPiggy

you still here? you are welcome.

Emile duBois is a nom de plume. it is a French expression similar to John Doe, a sort of everyman.

I am an American, naturalized, who was born in Austria and raised in Germany. I am a videographer by profession and an artist and scholar by avocation.

I have never heard of that artist, but will check him out. thank you.

you would do well to treat others here the way you would wish to be treated here. perhaps temper your remarks.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/02/2009 @ 2:41pm
you would do well to treat others here the way you would wish to be treated here. perhaps temper your remarks.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/02/2009

Emile I don't feel I have been treated well here at all. I have had several others read the comments that have been written and they agree that I have been treated very poorly. You guys have been very condescending toward me just because of a typo and a misspell. I don't normally insult people however I feel that I have been put on the defensive. Furthermore no one has yet to even comment on WHAT I said. All that has been done is to criticize a few mistakes. By the way Emile, the above comments were directed at ficheye not at you. I hope you do look up the Émile Munier. He was a truly wonderful French artist. I also believe I do owe snowball777 a apology, looking back I don't think he was criticizing my spelling.

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/02/2009 @ 3:44pm
Piglet, I corrected your spelling. big deal. it's your defensiveness that elicited criticism.

the good thing here is that there's always a new thread and we can all start over.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/02/2009 @ 3:53pm
Munier? kitsch, a truly awful artist, but....

tastes vary.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/02/2009 @ 3:55pm
First of all Emile if you are going to compare me to a Disney character please, I am more of a Pooh than a piglet. Only when comparing me to a muppet character am I MsPiggy (aka DrPiggy). Do you really believe that "Essai de l'Eau" is awful? I think it was a beautiful piece of work by Emile Munier. So who do you think is a good artist,other than yourself obviously.

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/02/2009 @ 4:22pm
Hind site is always 20-20. Posted by DrPiggy at 10/29/2009 @ 3:34pm

Dear Doctor,

You're right. Your point of view is not the issue here. We were making fun of you. In fact your view of those wars is just like mine. But emile will ALWAYS bust you (or me) on spelling and syntax errors because he likes to.

Remember there are separate personalities at work here. And that sometimes, unless it's finely honed, writing on a blog isn't a very good way to present a point. I can't tell you how many times I've gotten busted for something when I'm writing without my glasses on.

And I also suck at typing. I'm forcing myself to learn to type using various software. I'll tell you this... when addressing a point of importance, sometimes hunt and peck is elevated to a new and frustrating level. It can be funny.

A sense of humor is necessary. When I picture emile I see him as Gomez Addams with a dry sense of humor. He'll get me for that one, but... I'll deserve it for saying something like that! Voila!

Posted by ficheye at 11/02/2009 @ 6:00pm
Besides, let's ask emile what artist he likes. That could be interesting.

Personally, I was fascinated with the Pre-Raphaelites technique for painting on wet white lead, although some of their subject matter is trite. William Holman Hunts painting of the 'Lady of Shallot' was fantastic and involved many items that he made just so he could paint them. William Waterhouse's version is superior from an emotional standpoint, and his brush work is reminiscent of Singer Sargeant. Sir Lawrence Alma Tadema did some fine Grecian paintings, collected mostly by Alan Funt of Candid Camera fame. He was a master at painting marble. Then there was 'Ophelia' by Millaise. The Victorian painters were pretty cool.

But of course, those are just painters. I just saw an Alexander Calder exhibit. He was a master of wire sculpture and mobiles. Fascinating fellow. I'm a musician, myself... a jazz vocalist, but I used to dabble and know some people who became famous after my college days. Matt Groening, for instance.

So I meant no ill will as far as your art is concerned.

Posted by ficheye at 11/02/2009 @ 6:17pm
Okay ficheye perhaps your not an idiot (not really sure about the whole crack thing just yet, just kidding). The things that you have stated have given me something to ponder on. It sounds like you definitely know your art. I do agree that art is more than painters, to me anyone that creates is an artist. I do suck at typing and I usually proofread my comments before releasing them however sometimes I get so caught up in the statement that I just hit submit to quick. As far as not posting a serious comment on a blog? I thought that was the whole point, combined with the fact that this is a subject that I have strong feelings on. Of course who doesn't have strong feelings when it comes to war and politics? In the future I will try to bring more humor or else I just won't comment on it. Thank you for proving me wrong about you ficheye, I would still stay away from those crack houses though, they're detrimental to your brain cells:)

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/02/2009 @ 6:49pm
Posted by DrPiggy at 11/02/2009 @ 6:49pm

And just to clarify... I'm not saying NOT to post a serious comment... just that it's easy to make a mistake when trying to get a point across, especially if you are 'responding while passionate'.

As far as the crack thing... you were just getting warmed up! No offense taken. Read some of BigPastures comments about Obamanation, demoncrats, etc, etc. He has his own lexicon of demeaning references. Makes for fun reading, though.

Now, I'm fresh outta crack, so... gotta go!!!

Posted by ficheye at 11/02/2009 @ 7:12pm
Okay ficheye, you will need to enlighten me. I was under the belief that the terrorists only goal with 9-11 was to create havoc with our financial structure. It is my understanding that they hate our way of life. Perhaps there is some foreign policy issues in which you could educate me on. I do believe that whether we invaded Afghanistan or not they hated us from the beginning. I now believe that oil plays a part in to some of the reasons they hate us. There is a select few that became terrorists because of our dealings with the drilling for oil on there land. However it's much bigger than that. The comments by BigPastuer have some merit but they also lack vision. If we continue to react to violence then the cycle of damage will continue to rain down. However if we open up lines of communication with our enemies maybe the violence will end. Its a given that it will continue as long as we remain on their soil. I say find a way to make our enemies our allies and we will find the right path to destroying terrorism, or at the very least minimizing it.

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/02/2009 @ 8:14pm
I say find a way to make our enemies our allies and we will find the right path to destroying terrorism, or at the very least minimizing it. Posted by DrPiggy at 11/02/2009 @ 8:14pm

You know, Doc, I have some of the same thoughts. I've been called naive for holding an opinion like that, but changing hearts and minds from within the muslim community seems to be the most constructive way of approaching what you (and I) are talking about.

HOWEVER.... I did see a short film on the internet about muslim extremism in England. These muslim folks seem to hate us just because we are not muslims, not because of our interest in oil. We are infidels and because we don't believe as they do they feel that we must be destroyed. It's that simple. Are these folks a minority? Possibly. I don't know enough to say. Are all muslims complicit because they don't take a hand in exposing these crazy people? That's another point of deep importance that I don't have the answers to.

All these thoughts caused me to start studying the crusades. I needed to know just how far back this tit for tat warfare has gone. Check out the crusades at wikipedia. It's a good place to start. Seems like the French started it with the goal being mainly to take back Jerusalem from muslim rule. It started a series of wars that lasted over 200 years. Did that start some bad blood? Yes. Is this crossover into theology a confusing issue since it's all based on belief, which is all based on religious schools of thought which can't be proven historically or otherwise? Yes. Is your head hurting yet? Mine sure is.

So your first assumption about 911 could be correct. But the reason for the disaster may actually go all the way back to when we first pissed them off. I tell you it's a labor of love to parse the history on it

Posted by ficheye at 11/02/2009 @ 11:09pm
When I picture emile I see him as Gomez Addams with a dry sense of humor. Posted by ficheye at 11/02/2009 @ 6:00pm | ignore this person | warn this person

well thank you. about the humor part. physically I am more the leading man type. in my gorgeous youth I worked as a model, as an actor, I studied modern dance and a bit of ballet, and sold expensive clothes, along with driving a cab at night in NYC. think Christopher Walken, sans the acting talent.

as far as artists that I like, I like modern art of the last century. I am partial to Dada and surrealism. Paul Delvaux comes to mind, and Marcel Duchamp. and Kurt Schwitters. American artists? Joseph Cornell and Mark Rothko. I am a big fan of the German expressionists, and the Bauhaus painters.

my own art is mostly abstract expressionism but small scale, drawings and collages mostly. I feel a special kinship with Robert Rauschenberg.

there are of course many, many more, I am an old guy, well maybe oldish.

I thank you for the attention.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/02/2009 @ 11:25pm
Dr, Osama was quite clear in why he attacked NYC. it was because we stationed lots of troops in his country after the first Iraq war. that's why. that goddamn Bush confirmed this by withdrawing the troops after 9/11.

they don't hate us for our freedoms. they hate us because we are a meddling collossus astride the world.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/02/2009 @ 11:45pm
And both emile and snowball are excellent resources for the aforementioned topic.

Antisocialist, for all of his extreme points of view is a well studied person. At times one can gain some historical insights from him... but he is also a classic religious zealot and a warmonger. There's a nice guy somewhere down inside of his diatribe. I find him fascinating in a dark way.

One can get information from the weirdest places if one is willing to be somewhat... devious.

Now..... emile probably thinks Munier is awful because of his limited subject matter. He seems to be a commercial artist who painted scenes of innocent looking girls for the most part. Technically he was a good painter, though. If you like that style I would encourage you to check out the Victorian painters. Also the portrait work of Jean-August Dominique Ingres (pronounced ANG). Somewhat cold, but one of the finest draftsmen ever. A commercial portrait artist, but a cut above. His paining 'Odalisk with Slave' is pretty cool, sort of a 'symbolist' painting. John Singer Sargeant and William Waterhouse both had a more painterly, less realistic style, but I have come to like that better than the realist painters, though I still admire their draftsmanship.

Oddly enough, some of the painters I mentioned above did paintings of characters supposedly living in the time of the crusades, and Ingres 'Odalisk' painting is a scene of a concubine in an islamic country. William Holman Hunt, one of those 'Pre-Raphaelite' painters, went to the dead sea during the height of the ottoman wars and painted a painting called 'the Scapegoat' in the outdoors on the dead sea. He was devoutly religious. Pre Raphaelites were obsessed with painting from life on wet white lead so it looked like stained glass. A difficult technique.

Posted by ficheye at 11/02/2009 @ 11:50pm
as far as artists that I like, I like modern art of the last century. I am partial to Dada and surrealism. Paul Delvaux comes to mind, and Marcel Duchamp. and Kurt Schwitters. American artists? Joseph Cornell and Mark Rothko. I am a big fan of the German expressionists, and the Bauhaus painters. my own art is mostly abstract expressionism but small scale, drawings and collages mostly. I feel a special kinship with Robert Rauschenberg. there are of course many, many more, I am an old guy, well maybe oldish. I thank you for the attention. Posted by emile duBois at 11/02/2009 @ 11:25pm

My god, a kindred spirit! Larry Rivers, Duchamp - The Bride Stripped Bare By Her Bachelors Even - Max Ernst. I used to Love Dali, but his commercial excesses... I don't know who said it..."Dali was a genius from the elbow down and an asshole from the elbow up". His very early painting were so cool, but who can deny 'Tuna Fishing'? And 'Galacidalicideoyxyribonucleic acid'? And there's the Raushenburg Kashmir goat with the tire around its body. You can talk art anytime with me my friend... bust my syntax all you want.

Posted by ficheye at 11/03/2009 @ 12:01am
have you seen Duchamp's final work in Philadelphia?

Posted by emile duBois at 11/03/2009 @ 12:04am
I'm a musician, myself... a jazz vocalist,

I like Chet Baker, singer and trumpeter extraordinaire, and Hoagy Carmichael, great songwriter and sly vocalist. Big Joe Turner.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/03/2009 @ 12:11am
Check out the Chet Baker movie, Let's Get Lost. They seemed to capture every wrinkle and crack in his face. He was a serious addict. As far as Hoagy, I've got an album called 'Hoagy Sings Carmichael' where he sings his classics. I like Kurt Elling. Fairly full of himself, but he covers all the bases and then some. He recently did an album called 'Nightmoves' which I would highly recommend.

I didn't see the last Duchamp piece. Online anywhere? I read that he just gave up art and played chess. a friend went to his house and in the living room was a table with a chessboard. And a string hanging from a nail on the wall.

Posted by ficheye at 11/03/2009 @ 01:53am
seen the movie, of course. that Hoagy discs have that too and love it. the Duchamp piece must be seen in person. it's an installation, which the audience can only glimpse through a peep hole. most amusing.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/03/2009 @ 07:57am
Dr, Osama was quite clear in why he attacked NYC. it was because we stationed lots of troops in his country after the first Iraq war. Posted by emile duBois at 11/02/2009

Osama wasn't in Iraq-he helped fight against the Russians in the first Afghan war. He's from Saudi Arabia, are you thinking Sadam Hussain?

These Muslim folks seem to hate us just because we are not Muslims, not because of our interest in oil. We are infidels and because we don't believe as they do they feel that we must be destroyed. Posted by ficheye at 11/02/2009 @ 11:09pm

Sadly I believe this is more true for the terrorists, I know many Muslims here in the states and they understand the need for tolerance and respect.

One thing neither of you mentioned(Ficheye and Emile) are the fact we are friends with Israel. I believe this angers many in the Muslim world. I don't have the time to elaborate on all the history between the Jews and the Muslims. However I find it difficult to find a common ground between these 2 religions. They HATE each other for many reasons. To say one has more valid reasons than the other would be wrong. Hate yields' hate. Sadly I do not see a resolution between these 2 religions. Only after each has learned to respect and tolerate each others beliefs will they be able to live with each other. Do you think I'm an idealist? As far as the art talk goes WOW you guys blow me away, it will take me some time to look up all the names you guys have mentioned. In short I will say this, I like the Renaissance artists, particularly Titian.

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/03/2009 @ 10:32am
Osama wasn't in Iraq-he helped fight against the Russians in the first Afghan war. He's from Saudi Arabia, are you thinking Sadam Hussain?

what are you, retarded?

Posted by emile duBois at 11/03/2009 @ 10:50am
Posted by DrPiggy at 11/03/2009 @ 10:32am | ignore this person | warn this person

your post insults my intelligence. I have nothing more to say to you.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/03/2009 @ 11:11am
what are you, retarded?

Watch it Emile, perhaps you need to read up on your history. this is straight from Wikipedia-"After leaving college in 1979 bin Laden joined Abdullah Azzam to fight the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan[45] and lived for a time in Peshawar.[46]" Look it up before you start insulting people.

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/03/2009 @ 11:26am
your post insults my intelligence. I have nothing more to say to you.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/03/2009 @ 11:11am | I caught you, you can't admit your wrong! Hah!

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/03/2009 @ 11:36am
Posted by ficheye at 11/03/2009 @ 01:53am | ignore this person | warn this person

where do you reside?

Posted by emile duBois at 11/03/2009 @ 11:39am
where do you reside?

Posted by emile duBois at 11/03/2009 @ 11:39am

Who are you asking????

Posted by DrPiggy at 11/03/2009 @ 2:12pm
where do you reside? Posted by emile duBois at 11/03/2009 @ 11:39am

I live in Washington state, in Seattle.

Posted by ficheye at 11/03/2009 @ 5:40pm