Our Bizarre National Discourse
Kevin Drum writes:
[T]he more peculiar thing… is the underlying assumption that you can’t be considered reliable on national security issues unless you’ve supported every single war that’s ever been proposed. In fact, this view seems to pretty much underly the entire conservative project these days.
Pretty much.
It’s truly bizarre that in order to be considered “strong” in America, you have to have supported every war we’ve ever fought, no matter how disastrous, corrupt or bloody. The people who protested against the Vietnam war are still seen as dangerous parasites intent on weakening America’s moral fiber, despite the fact that history has proven them 100% right. I mean, if Ross Perot had been elected president in 1992 and had decided to wage war against the Mole People living in Hollow Earth, it would still be considered taboo for a politician to publicly denounce it. Weird, weird country we live in.
Above: Our next foe after we defeat Muslamonazism. As fiver writes, “We have to fight the Mole-o Fascists below ground so that we don’t have to fight them on the surface!” Indeed. I hear the Left is objectively pro-Subterranean.
How can that Wikipedia article not have a reference to the wonderful works of Richard Shaver? If I weren’t so darn tired right now, I’d fix it myself.
I’ve wondered if Paul Wolfowitz isn’t perhaps a Dero on occasion – he sort of looks like what I’d imagine them as.
I hate those Mole People.
Lil subterranean fuckers….
If you libruls hadn’t cut off funding to the Fantastic Four, they would have defeated the Mole Man back in 1962!
And NOW they’re doing the whole Domino Theory shit, so I feel right at home…
mikey
And some here call Kevin Drum a hopeless moderate?
We have to fight the Mole-o Fascists below ground so that we don’t have to fight them on the surface!
Drum’s good people. Retardo isn’t as much of a fan, but I tend to like wonkish, unemotional commentary every now and then.
You say “Weird”, I say “Fascist”, lets throw the whole thing out.
Didn’t the Republicons oppose our military actions in Kosovo, though? I wonder why criticism of that war wasn’t considered treasonous, didn’t undermine America, or didn’t mean that they would have been happier if Milosovic was still in power.
Didn’t the Republicons oppose our military actions in Kosovo, though? I wonder why criticism of that war wasn’t considered treasonous, didn’t undermine America, or didn’t mean that they would have been happier if Milosovic was still in power.
Because Milosevic was the good guy! Clinton was helping a bunch of Mulamics!!! WHO WERE TERRORIZERS!!!! DON’T YOU READ WORLDNETDAILY?!!!?!!
Lately I’ve had this really bad feeling that we haven’t yet seen
just how weird it’s going to get.
Anon- have you seen some of the monsters Mole Man has at his disposal? It’s gonna be a long and bloody war, m’friend…
The fact is that the mole people represent a dire threat to America. If the terrorists were to gain access to the secret underground tunnels that the mole people use to steal socks from our surface dwelling basements, they could attack without warning. In the wake of 9/11, we as Americans* could not take that chance. So when some say that we shouldn’t fight the mole people, that we should cut and run from the fields of hollow earth, leaving the terrorists and their mole-people backers free to take the fight back to our back yards, I say we need to spend more money on building giant drills and researching unobtainium so that we will have the tools necessary to finish the job and build a new society of underground dwellers free from terror and hatred.
John Dean’s Conservatives Without Conscience is a great book for peeking in to the mind of an authoritarian.
Shorter version; they have a Daddy complex. Whoever their Dear Leader is, becomes their Daddy. What Daddy says is infallible, indisputable, and sacred.
The fact is that the mole people represent a dire threat to America. If the terrorists were to gain access to the secret underground tunnels that the mole people use to steal socks from our surface dwelling basements, they could attack without warning. In the wake of 9/11, we as Americans* could not take that chance. So when some say that we shouldn’t fight the mole people, that we should cut and run from the fields of hollow earth, leaving the terrorists and their mole-people backers free to take the fight back to our back yards, I say we need to spend more money on building giant drills and researching unobtainium so that we will have the tools necessary to finish the job and build a new society of underground dwellers free from terror and hatred.
Fix Bayonets. Lock and Load. This far, motherfucker, and NO FARTHER. We’re gonna stand up as they stand down, ’cause we’re fightin’ the bastards over there so we don’t have to fight ’em over here. Ready? Steady? Have your tickets Ready…
mikey
Yes, the Mole Men, but what about the Orcs?
Shorter version; they have a Daddy complex. Whoever their Dear Leader is, becomes their Daddy. What Daddy says is infallible, indisputable, and sacred.
Ah! That explains what my problem is. From birth, my father was instructing me in the fine art of bullshit, tall tales and lying. I therefore assume that he’s telling me one of the three whenever he opens his mouth.
The same, therefore, applies to authority figures.
Didn’t you know? The Mole People are conspiring with the Mexislamohomolibrulfascists to flouridate our water and sap our precious bodily fluids!
but won’t any please fight and destory the underpants gnomes?
It’s truly bizarre that in order to be considered “strong� in America, you have to have supported every war we’ve ever fought, no matter how disastrous, corrupt or bloody.
Except the War on Christmas. That war is bad.
Or is it? I forget.
Ah, screw it. Nuke the elves!
We will fight them on the the ground
We will fight them underground
We will never surrender.
-Winston Churchmouse the 3’rd
Obviously supporting wars does NOT indicate strategic “expertise”, but in my experience people who are deeply non-violent usually are not interested in, and hence devote little attention to, military history and it’s boosom-buddy the history of strategic thought.
On the other hand, I’ve heard warmongers say things every bit as stupid as anything a “pacifist” said – but at least the pacifist has an excuse.
Christ, Jillian, I love you more every day. Can I come hang out in the shrubs outside your window or mail you bad poetry or something?
Oh please, bitch, I totally PWN mole people ass.
Well, at least the Mole Man doesn’t control Fin Fang Foom!
but won’t any please fight and destory the underpants gnomes?
Sometimes, I get the sense that the Bush Misadministration has based all of its policies on the underpants gnomes’ business model.
1. Invade Iraq
2. ????
3. Democracy flowering in the Middle East!
The sad reality is that modern America really only exports about three things: Entertainment, some IT stuff, and War.*
Gotta keep the “Defense” industry moving.
*I can’t back this up with paperwork.
Xipe Totec–
When you hve one-fourth the tactical expertise of the War Nerd (www.eXile.ru), come and fling shit at pacifists.
We have always been at war with the Mole Man.
Fortunately, we have just the team to defeat him:
Donald “Mr. Fantastic” Rumsfeld … watch him stretch our troops too thin!
Condi “The Invisible Girl” Rice … she disappears whenever there’s a crisis!
Dick “The Thing” Cheney … under that rocky exterior is a heart of stone!
George “The Human Torch” Bush … he’ll throw gasoline onto every fire!
Get in line, D. Sidhe.
D. Sidhe, I’m already hanging out in YOUR shrubbery composing odes to what can never be….
mikey
Dan Someone, i can imagine Cheney humming/muttering the gnome theme song from here.
It’s truly bizarre that in order to be considered “strong� in America, you have to have supported every war we’ve ever fought, no matter how disastrous, corrupt or bloody. The people who protested against the Vietnam war are still seen as dangerous parasites intent on weakening America’s moral fiber, despite the fact that history has proven them 100% right.
100% right? After 2 million people were slaughtered AFTER we left Southeast Asia?
Please, today’s “anti-war” liberal is loathe to go on the record supporting ANY war in our nation’s history, unless you really press them, and then they may cough up Afghanistan, but with strong reservations.
Even the left has come out against the War in Afghanistan.
“nothing shows “strength” in national security than backing two losing wars which have so decimated our armed forces that we can’t respond to real threats” – Markos from DailyKos
We know the left considers the liberation of Iraq to be a failure, but it’s news that they’re even against the liberation of Afghanistan.
Is the page fixed yet?
Uhhh, we seemed pretty much to support Kosovo. Snatch.
Or did that not count, cause it wasn’t a Repub president?
I was very much against the war in Afghanistan (of course I’m not American either, but I follow US politics quite closely). Why? Because I’ve said from the get-go that wars are not the way to fight terrorism. What would I have done instead? Covert infiltration operations Intelligence agencies could have done a much better job of dismantling alQ, and they would have done it from the inside. Instead, the few intelligence agents that even speak middle-eastern languages are getting fired by the bucketload simply for being gay.
In fact, it makes you realise the priorities of these nuts; they fear teh ghey more than they fear terrorists.
It really is astonishing that a war supported by the likes of Gary Ruppert and Jose Chung could ever have gone wrong.
I know there is no point to this but…
Gary, Kos did not say “Im against the war in Afghanistan.” He said we are losing it.
Which in your head apparently means “..they’re even against the liberation of Afghanistan.”
Can you NOT see the difference?
I’m confused by Peachy. Your point seem to be.
1: Counter-intel could never possible work, since it didn’t work that one time in the past.
The trick with covert intel programs; when they work right, no one has any clue that they were there. Besides, I think the CIA might get pissed if Bush tried to land on top of Langley.
http://today.reuters.com/news/articleinvesting.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=2006-06-23T011533Z_01_N22149544_RTRIDST_0_SECURITY-USA-ARRESTS-UPDATE-2.XML&pageNumber=0&imageid=&cap=&sz=13&WTModLoc=InvArt-C1-ArticlePage2
Or does “modern times” mean “in the past five hours”? True, this was.. not so much with the major threat, but still.
I THINK your last paragraph was a blatently ill-informed, reactionary jab regarding clandestine domestic information dredging with no oversight? Also, there’s something in there about Scooby Snacks? I’m not sure.
This ought to do it. It’s always the night shift that gets stuck cleaning up everybody else’s messes.
Can’t you guys go for 3 posts without screwing up the formatting?
One more try
“100% right? After 2 million people were slaughtered AFTER we left Southeast Asia?”
Who kicked out the Khmer Rouge and ended the slaughter? Oh yeah, the Vietnamese. And who supported the Khmer Rouge in exile? The US and our puppets in Thailand. Really fucking nice example, Jose.
What random guy said. And the fact that we got bored and took our army elsewhere makes me think we really should have sent in the prosecutors. I can think of one at least who’d probably have jumped at the chance. But being against how the war was prosecuted is not the same as being against the war. Where have I heard that before?
In fact, damned few of us were against Afghanistan. And the only other one I know was against it on the grounds that causing civilian casualties are not how one defeats terrorism. He was right, too.
And, dangit you guys, fine. I’ll just worship Jillian from afar. But remember, Doghouse Riley’s mine. That’s official. No blogstalking without permission, or you turn into one of those creepy guys who starts making veiled threats in the comments.
Mikey, I swear I didn’t know that was you in the shrubbery. I thought it was the ex-housemate trying to get her free room and board back. I’ll stop emptying the litterbox out the window, and I’m terribly sorry.
And to echo Thers’ comment:
“It really is astonishing that a war supported by the likes of Gary Ruppert and Jose Chung could ever have gone wrong.”
Indeed. Especially since Jose fucked up a thread by not bothering to preview and Gary immediately blamed it on the liberals who were minding their own business.
That all sounds kind of nastily familiar, too.
Actually, Brad, I’ve HEARD the Savage Weiner say something like that on several occasions.
OT, but look what our pal Guy Adams is up to.
I think we should be really careful in our battle against the Mole People. There’s a danger of Civil War breaking out between the Marvel and the DC villains.
100% right? After 2 million people were slaughtered AFTER we left Southeast Asia?
Jose: what were we supposed to do, exactly? Stay in Vietnam forever? We’d still be there today, you silly silly person.
“I think we should be really careful in our battle against the Mole People. There’s a danger of Civil War breaking out between the Marvel and the DC villains.”
Also, they have The Tick and Cindy Crawford on their side. We’d be crushed.
[…] Demogenes Aristophanes is a bloody genius who should blog more often. Witness: We have always been at war with the Mole Man. […]
“I think we should be really careful in our battle against the Mole People”
I trust that you’re not talking about Lemmy Kilminster, the Human Carbuncle.
/Mötörhead fan
Drum’s good people. Retardo isn’t as much of a fan, but I tend to like wonkish, unemotional commentary every now and then.
Oh, just admit that you love his Sensible Boat Shoes of Moderation (apologies to Norbizness if that isn’t precisely how he referred to that old Calpundit picture).
Brad, it’s obvious.
After the success of Vietnam and our illegal bombing of Cambodia, which helped to destablize the Cambodian government and usher in the Khmer Rouge, we should have then gone to war with the fragile constitutional monarchy in Phnom Penh because they allowed the Khmer Rouge to exist. That the fragile government had little choice, especially since we illegally bombed the hell out of their people, hardly matters.
It’s no more insane than killing Lebanese civilians because Hezbollah exists in their country.
The war in Afghanistan at least made sense: The Taliban controlled the state and they openly supported and harbored the group that attacked us. (They were also sadistic bastards who brutalized the people they had illegally taken over, but that had been going on for years and we never cared before.) It was logical to argue that going to war against the Taliban-controlled Afghanistan would help us take out Al Qaeda.
The war in Iraq made Cheney get wood. There was no other reason for us to be there other than it was “the one that got away” in Gulf War 1. Sure, Saddam was a sadistic bastard who brutalized the people he had taken over, but that had been going on for years and we never cared before.
How is the war against the Taliban any different than the war against Hezbollah?
“100% right? After 2 million people were slaughtered AFTER we left Southeast Asia?�
Who kicked out the Khmer Rouge and ended the slaughter? Oh yeah, the Vietnamese. And who supported the Khmer Rouge in exile? The US and our puppets in Thailand. Really fucking nice example, Jose.
______________
On second thought, perhaps the killing fields (1.7 million people) of the Communist Khmer Rouge was actually a “progressive revolution.”
Hell, why not call it a “democratic revolution” as they eventually named themselves “the Party of Democratic Kampuchea.” Idiot.
How is the war against the Taliban any different than the war against Hezbollah?
Dude.
Jose, I admire you taking your name from the best X-Files episode ever made, but come on.
War in Afghanistan = Apples
War against Hezbollah = IBM Selectric
These two things are very different from one another.
North Korea’s official name is the “Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea.”
In other words, it’s claims to be democratic but is, in fact, republican.
Just like Joe Lieberman!
On second thought, perhaps the killing fields (1.7 million people) of the Communist Khmer Rouge was actually a “progressive revolution.�
Must have been, Jose. Considering that America sent me and thirty thousand of my closest friends over the line to kill as many cambodians as possible. So if America did it first, it must have been good, right Jose? Can you see?
mikey
If you consider that expertise you are incompetent.
If you consider that expertise you are incompetent.
Hokay, you really know your war, eh, Xipe Totec? Tell me where you got your expertise. Come on, don’t be shy. You show me yours, I’ll show you mine….
mikey
Dude, I’m no expert – I’m just smart enough to spot a phony
Great. This is the SECOND comment thread I’ve read today where Jose gets the bold tag stuck on. Of course, in the other one, he also jams up the italics tag, and that was already screwed up here.
[…] I think this is exactly right.* I find it very difficult to believe that smart people like Kerry and Edwards could be “fooled” or “misled” by the stupidest president in American history. The sad truth is they were scared of being called weak on terror like their commiecrat allies Ted Kennedy and Russ Feingold. And since America is a country where it is considered weak to oppose any war, no matter how unjustified or ill-conceived, they threw their consciences under the bus for the sake of political ambition. […]
[…] Brilliant! When do we start leaking our plans to attack the Mole People? A final gift to the world. […]