What the f...? Can any of these imbeciles come up with a consistent story? Hot on the heels of Dick Cheney's "The insurgency is in its last throes" fantasy, we have Secretary of Pompous Arrogance Donald Rumsfeld telling a slightly different story:
Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said Sunday he is bracing for even more violence in Iraq and acknowledged the insurgency "could go on for any number of years."
Defeating the insurgency may take as long as 12 years, he said, with Iraqi security forces, not U.S. and foreign troops, taking the lead and finishing the job.
Memo to members of the American military: I hope you enjoy Iraq, it appears you're going to be there for a while. I'll think of you while I'm vacationing in the Canadian Rockies or something, maybe sucking back a cool Big Rock, while you're sweeping the sand out of your tent.
BONUS SNARK: And to all those fellow Canadians who thought this invasion was such a terrifically, peachy-keen idea, well ... as I understand it, the military recruiters in the U.S. are having a pretty tough time making their quotas.
I'll bet they'd be just tickled to get some able-bodied, gung-ho Canadians. Really.
7 comments:
Well, it would seem on the face of it that Cheney's and Rumsfeld's comment neutralize each other. But, look at it this way. It depends on what the meaning of "throe" is.
So ... sneering duplicity neutralizes pompous arrogance? OK, I can live with that.
If only John Fitzgerald Kerry had been elected. This "war on terror" would be all over.
John Kerry (who btw was in Vietnam) would have singlehandedly captured Osama. After all, Kerry did get 5 medals in the 4 months he served in Vietnam - a US military record.
And as every progressive liberal knows, as soon as the US captures or kills Osama, the "war on terror" will immediately end. All The Minute Men - as our beloved Marxist Michael Moore refers to them - will simply drop their arms upon hearing of Osama's capture or death - and immediately get jobs selling real estate or programming computers.
It's true and every progressive liberal knows this.
Progressive Paul
as I understand it, the military recruiters in the U.S. are having a pretty tough time making their quotas.
Our plan is working. The years of sneering and mocking the US troops; showering them in spittle when they come home, comparing them to Nazis, Fascists, baby-killers, torturers, and knuckle-dragging neanderthals is starting to slowly wear down the public's support for the military.
I urge all progressive liberals to step up the attacks even more on the US military. We need Iraq to fail because if it doesn't, it will make the Shrub look good - and we can't have that. To hell with those Iraqis. Let the country be overrun and the people slaughtered just like the Sourh Vietnamese and Cambodians were after us progressives forced the US military to flee Vietnam.
We must follow in the footsteps of brave dissenters like John Kerry and Jane Fonda.
Ideology must always come first.
Progressive Paul
John Kerry (who btw was in Vietnam) would have singlehandedly captured Osama... And as every progressive liberal knows, as soon as the US captures or kills Osama, the "war on terror" will immediately end.
Straw man argument. You attribute a clearly spurious position to your opponents and then proceed to ridicule it. Why not actually quote some of their actual, stated opinions and explain why you find questionable, rather than make them up and giggle at them? Too much work?
I urge all progressive liberals to step up the attacks even more on the US military... Let the country be overrun and the people slaughtered...
Factor by which an Iraqi is more likely to die today than in the last year of the Hussein regime: 2.5 [Les Roberts, Johns Hopkins University (Baltimore) ]
Factor by which the cause of death is more likely to be violence: 58 [Les Roberts, Johns Hopkins University (Baltimore) ]
Source: Harper's Magazine
just like the Sourh Vietnamese and Cambodians were after us progressives forced the US military to flee Vietnam.
Estimates I've seen range civilian deaths in the Vietnam war, depending on the duration, from such figures as 1.4 million to 2 million to upwards of 4 million. The absolute number can never be known, but obviously, it's ponderous. Are you seriously suggesting that millions of South Vietnamese were killed after 1975? Where's your proof?
Re, Cambodia: Cambodia was never a facet of the Vietnam War, though it was illegally used by both sides (the North Vietnmese used it to transfer troops and war supplies along the hinterland; the United States chemically defoliated and bombed it). Since the Khmer Rouge took over Cambodia in 1975, years after the US quit Indochina, it's a bit much to suggest the US had any bearing on the outcome either way... though their less than sparkling reputation may have had something to do with it:
The Khmer Rouge soldiers told residents that they would be moved only about "two or three kilometers" outside the city and would return in "two or three days." Some witnesses say they were told that the evacuation was because of the "threat of American bombing" and that they did not have to lock their houses since the Khmer Rouge would "take care of everything" until they returned. Source: Wikipedia
Ironically, it was not the freedom-loving United States or any of its stalwart allies that put an end to Pol Pot's reign of terror. It was an invasion by the army of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.
We must follow in the footsteps of brave dissenters like John Kerry and Jane Fonda.
Why? You're doing so much better emulating Josef Goebbels.
At this point, I'm not going to accept any more comments from Progressive Paul. I gave him a gentle warning once, and it didn't seem to help.
If someone has that much to say, they're certainly free to get their own blog, rather than use the comments section of mine as their general dumping ground.
This has nothing to do with ideology, it's strictly a function of courtesy.
Yeah... I was hoping Obsessive Paul had a blog so I could go pee in his pool. Oh well. :)
Keep up the good work, CC!
Post a Comment