Shorter Daniel “Crack” Pipes


Above: “Attention Mosul residents:
Time to grow gills!”

‘Saddam’s Damn Dam’

  • Because it’s inevitable that the Mosul Dam will catastrophically fail, Bush ought to turn over full control of such infrastructure to the Iraqis while there’s still time to weasel out of at least some of the blame.

‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard.


 

Comments: 79

 
 
 

Well gee, seeing as though Gibby has announced that homelessness is over, maybe we can send some of the folks who are no longer homeless but still unemployed to go over there and plug the thing up with their chewing gum.

Wait, you mean nobody wants to go to Iraq? Nobody?

 
 

Ming the Merciless really cleans up… well, poorly, it seems.

 
 

This is just proof of Cheney/Bush having foresight. They sent pretty much the entire American National Guard over to Iraq so that when the damn breaks someone will be there to provide emergency relief, and they did it FIVE years ago.
Bush iz smert.

 
 

“More broadly, it should abandon the deeply flawed and upside-down approach of “war as social work,” whereby U.S. military efforts are judged primarily by the benefits they bring to the defeated enemy, rather than to Americans.”

Yup, those damn Iraqis and their stupid life problems! Here we are, looking our for own interests and they like, wants us to fix their shit for them too uh? I mean, look at all the benefits we’re losing out on! My god!

Of course, I’m sure that the dam will be sabotaged by an Al Queada suicide bomber.

No worry, we’ve got plenty of detainees around the globe to get to work building the new one.

 
 

Would the dam collapse just be the 2nd phase of “the surge”? Except this time, you know, literally.

 
 

Also, “Daniel Crack Pipes, And I Don’t Care…”

 
 

Would it be stupid for me to segue the MacGyver concept into this thread ?

No, to the contrary. It would be stupid NOT to !

 
 

Would it be stupid for me to segue the MacGyver concept into this thread ? No, to the contrary. It would be stupid NOT to !

Unless MacGyver ever challenged the Fishmen of Pasadena, then I fear it might be stupid.

 
 

“When I was nuts, I drummed up hate; on Arab and Islamic bait…
“I’d faster wars to seek to pry; And brush away the Green Zone Line!”
ALL TOGETHER NOW
“Daniel ‘Crack’ Pipes, and I don’t care,
“Daniel ‘Crack’ Pipes, and I don’t care,
“Daniel ‘Crack’ Pipes, and I don’t care…
“The bastard’s brain’s away.

 
 

“(Not coincidentally, Iraq was the site of Noah’s Ark.)”

Bwuh?

 
 

“It would likely be the largest human-induced single loss of life in history.”*

*Accomplished in the steroid era.

 
 

Well that’s big of Daniel. And America. In fact I think that should be America’s new brand as it slowly hands the world control of itself.

America the Big.

 
 

Unfortunately, this, like so many other unforseen or unanticipated disasters, is on our plate. We waded into this quicksand, and our grandchildren will have to pull our dead bodies out…

 
 

Haven’t these neocon rat fuckers already been discredited? Sheesh.

 
 

hmm. Wonder what’l happen to our Shiny New Embassy. Will it flood like NO? Will that be the end of our occupation?

 
 

From yesterday’s presser:

Shorter Q: How are you going to deal with this clusterfuck of a quagmire?

BUSH: I don’t — you know, “quagmire” is an interesting word. If you lived in Iraq and had lived under a tyranny, you’d be saying, “God, I love freedo…GAAAAhh glub…glub… glub……”

 
Herr Doktor Bimler
 

Since Pipes is the spitting image of Ming the Merciless, you can’t really complain that his opinions are ruthless and blood-thirsty. He’s just staying in character.

 
Herr Doktor Bimler
 

Damn, Norbiz’s comment wasn’t there at #2 a minute ago.

 
 

From Powell’s “you broke it, you bought it” to Pipes’ “We broke it, fuck you.”

 
 

Massive Iraqi deaths as a result of Bush administration incompetence would surely spawn conspiracy theories about American malevolence….and this blame and remorse would be entirely misplaced

Where have we seen this before?

Oh yeah, New Orleans after Katrina.
-catastrophic hurricane crushes neglected badly constructed levees, check.
-people die, many are homeless, starving, dehydrated, etc, check.
-Bush arrives with his guitar and anal probe, check,
-later, after all is revealed about the B Admin., pundits wag fingers, toes and tongues “it’s your choice to live on sand nyah nyah!” check.

Nothing new here.

 
 

…it should abandon the deeply flawed and upside-down approach of “war as social work,” whereby U.S. military efforts are judged primarily by the benefits they bring to the defeated enemy…

Yeah. What kind of fucking moron would evaluate Operation Iraqi Freedom based on whether it helps Iraqis?

 
 

I thought the whole fucking mess was about social work. It was about freeing the Iraqi people from abusive parent/spouse Saddam Hussein.
Or it’s about establishing a shining beacon of democracy in the Middle East. How the fuck is that supposed to work if the World’s Greatest Democracy™ treats the people it “liberated’ like shit? That’s a real selling point for democracy.
And I’ll repeat myself, this is no longer a war, it’s an occupation, which is a hell of a lot more like “social work” than the bloodthirsty bullshit Cracky seems interested in.
P. S.: Cracky seems to allow comments, although of course once they’ve been redacted, approved etc. Think I’ll just mosey over &…

 
 

Herr Doktor Bimler said,

November 9, 2007 at 4:52

Damn, Norbiz’s comment wasn’t there at #2 a minute ago.

Seeing as Norbiz is a dangerous member of The Left, it is only rational for the patriots of Sadly, No! to moderate his comments, at least until the security team has had a chance to search for dynomite. Or stale Cheetos™.

 
 

NIXON: I still think we ought to take the dikes out now. Will that drown people?

KISSINGER: About two hundred thousand people.

 
 

Oh noes, he says the dam is a time bomb waiting to go off!

More broadly, it should abandon the deeply flawed and upside-down approach of “war as social work,” whereby U.S. military efforts are judged primarily by the benefits they bring to the defeated enemy, rather than to Americans.

Pretty much the last remaining rationaleization for that whole debacle was the “benefit” of replacing the tyrannical leader with a series of vicious militiascorrupt and ineffective puppets .

 
 

For vintage Daniel Pipes, check out ‘On to Baghdad?: Yes – The Risks Are Overrated’ from December 2001. It’s a gem.

It’s got all those beloved classics from yesteryear… Saddam is about to arm himself with nukes! Saddam was behind 9/11! Overthrowing Saddam will stabilize the Middle East! Iraqis will celebrate our humanitarian invasion!

And Pipes still seems to take himself seriously.

 
 

Subtextual Daniel Pipes: Thinking about more dead Iraqis gives me a warm feeling ‘down there’. Ha ha, Iraqi loosers will be pwned!

 
 

this is my favorite wingnut nickname. pipes has written some truly vile stuff. if only he had a party hat…

 
 

You want fat pipes in party hats?

I guess that’s one take on a gay patriot.

 
 

Opening line:

The surge of U.S. troops in Baghdad is succeeding but deeper structural problems continue to plague the American presence in Iraq.

The surge is “succeeding” because the Iraqis have ethnic cleansed themselves, & the U. S. has put up walls between the newly segregated neighborhoods. And to hell w/ the Iraqis, the “American presence in Iraq” is “plagued.” Cheesis K. Rist, what words can describe this? I’m asking seriously. What is the psychological description of this kind of callous idiocy? Some sort of narcissism? Absolute sociopathy?

 
 

Holy shit, that’s one evil looking dude. Not to engage in looks-ism, but are we sure he’s not secretly a mad scientist or an international crime lord? Those eyebrows…that can’t be natural.

“What is the psychological description of this kind of callous idiocy? Some sort of narcissism? Absolute sociopathy?”
Uh, all of the above?

 
 

Haven’t these neocon rat fuckers already been discredited? Sheesh.

Yes, to people who think independently. But when the media doesn’t allow independent thinkers through the filter, and the political parties are afraid of independent thought, I guess that doesn’t work.

Seems to me that reports of the Neoconservatives’ death, as a movement, are greatly exaggerated.

 
 

Oh noes, he says the dam is a time bomb waiting to go off!

Quick! Torture the Euphrates!

And, yes, evil looking guy. I am swithering between “Ming the Merciless” and “Zod”.

 
 

Not to worry! The US Army Corpse of Engineers is on the way! Bwaaaaaa….

 
 

What Rufus said. “Not coincidentally, Iraq was the site of Noah’s Ark.” ????

 
 

Holy crap, even for Daniel “Kill The Ragheads” Pipes, that essay’s a festival of sociopathy.

Mosul’s dam replicates a myriad of lesser problems in Iraqi life that have landed in the lap of Americans (and, to a much lesser extent, their coalition partners), such as provisioning fuel and electricity, working schools and hospitals, a fair political and legal system, and an environment secure from terrorism.

You mean we might be responsible for security in a country we occupy? Pshaw.

Since April 2003, I have argued that this shouldering of responsibility for Iraq’s domestic life has harmed both Americans and Iraqis. It yokes Americans with unwanted and unnecessary loss of life, financial obligations, and political burdens.

Yeah, we just invaded their country, destroyed their infrastructure and overthrew their government – let THEM clean up our mess, now! After all, you don’t require the police to fix your door and clean up your house after they’ve trashed it ’cause they mistook it for the crack den next door. Why should we expect the US military to be distracted like that?

So what’s Danny arguing, anyway? We should cut’n’run? We should leave troops there but not have them DO anything except get shot at? What?

More broadly, it should abandon the deeply flawed and upside-down approach of “war as social work,” whereby U.S. military efforts are judged primarily by the benefits they bring to the defeated enemy, rather than to Americans.

Shorter Crack Pipes: We need to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis so we can get on with the essential mission of attacking Iran.

 
 

Asshole right-wing buffoons
Fuck it all up and change their tune!

– New liberal chant

 
 

Winter is icumen in
Sing Goddam Dam!

– Ezra Pound

 
 

Would someone here mind telling me just how the U.S. is responsible for the poor planning and construction of this dam 27 years ago? (Built by Germans, I believe.) Nobody has alleged that we bombed it. Why should we be held accountable for the lousy engineering practices of Saddam’s government?

Actually, not a single topic in this blog or the comments thereto, make a lot of sense. It’s mindless BDS.

“What is the psychological description of this kind of callous idiocy? Some sort of narcissism? Absolute sociopathy?”

See your doctor and let us know, my friend.

 
 

“Not coincidentally, Iraq was the site of Noah’s Ark.”

That may be the stupidest sentence Pipes has ever written.

 
 

Would someone here mind telling me just how the U.S. is responsible for the poor planning and construction of this dam 27 years ago?

We’re not, but we did destroy the government that might have gotten around to fixing it.

 
 

“Not coincidentally, Iraq was the site of Noah’s Ark.”

I’m guessing he’s trying to make some sort of joke there. Like, “why don’t ya just build another Ark to save ya? Where’s yer Messiah now?! Loosers!”

Ah, when Neo-cons get playful, eh?

 
 

SamFromUtah,

Why would Iraq’s present government be incapable of doing this? Or was Saddam’s government a model of engineering proficiency? Is that it? Please, it’s the one that screwed up at building the thing in the first place. Yet you claim it “might have gotten around to fixing it” if not for the U.S.

Your hatred of Republicans in general and President Bush in particular is making you say incredibly dumb things.

 
 

Why would Iraq’s present government be incapable of doing this?

Golly gee. I’m stumped.

 
 

Yes, I’m quite sure that if a giant dam burst and flooded thousands of people who died in Iraq while under United States occupation, everyone would simply say “Hey, no problem, the USA didn’t build it, so f*ck ’em, who gives a sh*t?”

 
 

“Why would Iraq’s present government be incapable of doing this?”

Matt, I’m afraid your love of Republicans in general and President Bush in particular is making you say incredibly dumb things.

 
 

“Yes, I’m quite sure that if a giant dam burst and flooded thousands of people who died in Iraq while under United States occupation, everyone would simply say “Hey, no problem, the USA didn’t build it, so f*ck ‘em, who gives a sh*t?””

No one’s saying that, El Cid, but liberals are, or are wanting to, blame Bush for the dam’s failure, should it happen, as they do with everything from forest fires to weather to cancer. (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/338707_cancer08.html)

Righteous Bubba, care to explain how Saddam’s regime would have “fixed it” but Iraq’s democratically elected government can’t? The point is, dear, that the U.S. is not at fault if the dam fails, just as Mr. Pipes says. Why ridicule him for stating something so obvious?

 
 

Very original of you, Gundamhead.

 
 

*yawn* I have an idea.

LOLtrolls.

Because it seems we get a certain number of troll archetypes in here. Matt here is serious troll. He’s genuinely interested in engaging us, at least right now. His insults are mild, as to keep himself above the fray. When he discovers that he can’t win, all hell will break loose and he will turn into another troll type—crazy troll. As in foaming-at-the-mouth-at-the-moonbats, sometimes with extra-entertaining capitalization, typos, and punctuation.

Matt, I know you think you’re charting original territory here, but trust me, you’re boring. At least if you started hurling insults you’d be more entertaining, although I guarantee you if there’s one thing you can’t win at against this commentariat, it’s creative insults.

 
 

Meh, so it’s not original. Most internet gags aren’t. It’s still pretty appropriate. The democratically elected government (such as it is) can’t even get the oil exports up and running. They, and we haven’t been able to rebuild the country back up to the point it was at before the invasion after years and half a trillion dollars worth of trying.

We are at fault if the dam fails because we failed to rebuild the country like we claimed we would. We’re responsible because we caused the situation that made it extremely difficult if not impossible for them to rebuild it themselves. We broke it, we bought it as you folks liked to say.

 
 

Righteous Bubba, care to explain how Saddam’s regime would have “fixed it” but Iraq’s democratically elected government can’t?

I don’t know that they would have fixed it. They certainly would have had a better opportunity to fix it than the current government. A lot of Iraq’s higher education system was and is oriented towards producing infrastructure; with those guys quite rightly abandoning the mess of a country America’s made what can the current government of corrupt killers do?

http://www.brusselstribunal.org/academicsList.htm

You broke it you bought it: it’s America’s responsibility now.

 
 

Troll? I asked a fair question, which no one here appears able (or willing) to answer. It’s quite fascinating to me to see how so-called open-minded liberals treat people who have views different than their own. You’re right on one point, though, Simba, I can’t win. But that’s only because no one will play. Have a nice weekend everyone. 🙂

 
 

As an occupying power, the United States has an obligation under international law to ensure the safety of the Iraqi people.

 
 

Just as I was leaving Righteous Bubba makes an actual argument. Thank you. But we didn’t break the dam, remember? If we’re responsible for it, then where does it end? What aren’t we responsible for? And I think it preposterous to suggest that Iraq was anything but a totalitarian shambles before we liberated Iraq’s from the heel of Saddam’s boot. In fact, the entire region is suffering from a diseased politacal landscape for reasons that have nothing to do with US foriegn policy. The invasion of Iraq may fail to achieve it’s goals of bringing the Middle East into the 21st century (or even the 19th century), but that will be a failure of Iraqis themselves. Not us.

 
 

In fact, the entire region is suffering from a diseased politacal landscape for reasons that have nothing to do with US foriegn policy.

Oh, certainly not.

unquestioning support for Israel Cold War overthrow of Mossadegh support for Sau’di dictatorship support for Saddam weapons for hostages enemy of my enemy is my freind oil oil oil 13 years of sanctions support of Turkey against Kurds support for mujahideen military aid to Egypt Occupied Territories USS Vincnennes Carter Doctrine more oil

Not one bit.

 
 

But we didn’t break the dam, remember? If we’re responsible for it, then where does it end? What aren’t we responsible for?

These are questions that are better asked before an invasion that demolishes a country.

There are two arguments to have, one legal and one moral. I think the moral argument speaks for itself: the invasion was such a massive fuck-up that there’s an obligation to protect Iraqis in danger of death due to failing infrastructure.

Legal arguments are dependent on whether or not you can pretend that the Iraqi government can stand on its own and that the US is not an occupying force operating in the absence of government, but it’s pretty clear that the occupying power has a duty to prevent the deaths of citizens under occupation.

 
 

Matt: “What aren’t we responsible for?”

Nothing, Matt. One of the consequences of unprovoked invasion followed by years of bloody occupation. We created the current Iraqi government; we tore down the old systems; we “privatized” their economy; Young King George got a woody at the purple fingers; we own the whole mess. The government we created and continue to legitimize can’t get a quorum together, much less run the country. The violence we unleashed has resulted in a massive brain/talent drain, and our (completely foreseeable) inability to provide security or infrastructure means the few remaining engineering types can’t work anyway. If the dam goes on our watch, we will be responsible.

 
 

I should add that this is a crucial piece of international law:

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/hague04.htm#art55

Art. 55. The occupying State shall be regarded only as administrator and usufructuary of public buildings, real estate, forests, and agricultural estates belonging to the hostile State, and situated in the occupied country. It must safeguard the capital of these properties, and administer them in accordance with the rules of usufruct.

 
 

Matt, here’s the reason we’re upset: Bush’s policies appear to be, once again, leading to the death of thousands of civilians.

Here’s the link. Bush directs the US military to invade Iraq; the most recent of the shifting justifications is that we’re bringing freedom and democracy to the poor Iraqi people, which was laboring beneath the Ba’ath boot on their neck. We proceed to destroy most of the crumbling, inefficient infrastructure that existed prior to 2003. Now there is no organization in Iraq except the U.S. military that is capable of shoring up this dam.

Now Pipes is proposing that despite the fact that the Bush-directed invasion destroyed the government that would have been responsible for fixing this dam, and the Bush-led reconstruction failed to reconstruct anything, and the mission Bush describes is one of peace and mercy… we’re not actually responsible for helping civilians who are about to get flooded out of their homes by the water piled up behind a dam that’s essentially made of frickin’ drywall.

So Pipes can go piss up a rope. Even if you set aside the fact that I feel–as many liberals do–that we have the power and therefore the responsibility to help people, it’s a matter of enlightened self-interest.

If thousands of innocents die in a preventable disaster on the American watch, it’s not going to help our cause in Iraq. Every child that is orphaned, every young person that loses a brother or sister, every parent that loses a child, will see American troops and think of them as the people that could have helped–but didn’t.

 
 

So, while I was writing my comment, Bubba said everything I was thinking. Read him instead.

 
 

ajay wrote: “I am swithering between “Ming the Merciless” and “Zod”.”

Actually, as wierd as it sounds I think he really looks like a Satanic Paul Krugman in that picture. It’s eerie.

 
 

If thousands of innocents die in a preventable disaster on the American watch, it’s not going to help our cause in Iraq.

What Matt should be jumping on is whether or not responsibility implies the continuing American occupation of Iraq. Fucked if I know how to unshit the bed.

 
 

What Matt should be jumping on is whether or not responsibility implies the continuing American occupation of Iraq.

The occupation implies responsibility, but not vice versa.

I’d like to transition to a multinational force under the UN, with a clear mandate and fair ROEs. Furthermore, we should engage Turkey, Iran, Saudia Arabia, and Syria in diplomacy–essentially, barter our departure (which pretty much everyone wants) for some guarantees of support for the Iraqi government (or governments). Finally, hold a national referendum (again under the observation and auspices of the UN) on whether Iraq should be a federal state or three separate nations.

Basically: get as many troops in there as possible, and lock down the insurgents and militias; allow the Iraqis to decide what they want; get Iraq’s neighbors constructively involved; and then get the hell out of the way.

 
 

Righteous,

When in the past 6 years have we cared about international law?

 
 

Sorry, by “we” I meant the current administration. I care a lot and I bet you do too!

 
 

I’d like to transition to a multinational force under the UN, with a clear mandate and fair ROEs. Furthermore, we should engage Turkey, Iran, Saudia Arabia, and Syria in diplomacy–essentially, barter our departure (which pretty much everyone wants) for some guarantees of support for the Iraqi government (or governments). Finally, hold a national referendum (again under the observation and auspices of the UN) on whether Iraq should be a federal state or three separate nations.

I think a form of #1 is and will be a necessity anyway, #2 would be great, and #3 not so great, with the latter two having an impressive disaster potential beyond what currently exists.

All imply a couple of years of continuing occupation I’d think, rather than the immediate pullout I hope for and dread at the same time.

If anyone wants to say I don’t know what the fuck I’m talking about regarding this stuff, they’d be well within their rights.

 
 

When in the past 6 years have we cared about international law?

When it benefited Americans of course.

 
 

But we didn’t break the dam, remember? If we’re responsible for it, then where does it end? What aren’t we responsible for?

Exactly. And that’s the same reason we aren’t maintaining our own infrastructure: the Interstates, Air Traffic Control, Water and Sewer. If the damned Eisenhower Administration didn’t build these to last forever, it’s not our goddamned fault.

Y’now here was a time when the Republicans didn’t look to the Visigoths for infrastructure policy. Now they’re the Baby Party.

Matt, perhaps you can explain why Blackwater is still in Iraq after the totally independent, totally democratically elected government ordered them to leave?

 
 

RB,

Good response! And totally true, of course.

I think you know what you are talking about re: Iraq. I would add that one of the reasons the reconstruction of Germany and Japan after WWII worked so well is that we worked with the existing power structure – fascists as they were. We kept most of the mid-level and lower level civil servants, businesspeople and such and their way of doing things. We imprisoned the leaders – or at least the ones who didn’t know about nuclear weapons and/or rockets – and kept the rest.

We also took a lot of time. When I was in Berlin in 1976, the occupying powers were still helping to govern and had many programs in place for various issues: infrastructure, housing, energy, even commerce.

I’m not saying we should be the ones to do reconstruction, hated as we are over there. I would be inclined to favor a multi-national reconstruction program – probably through the UN – which we largely pay for. We did break it and it would be best for us to take responsibility for our foolishness.

Of course, none of this would be considered acceptable in DC and it might be too late for anything to work, but it’s my idea of where to start to unshit the bed.

 
 

If anyone wants to say I don’t know what the fuck I’m talking about regarding this stuff, they’d be well within their rights.

The problem is that no one really does know. I agree with you that a three-state Iraq stands a good chance of exploding like Gary’s head at the Folsom Street Fair, but then again, is there any strategy (including the current one) that doesn’t offer that possibility?

One of the things that infuriates me most about the Republicans is that they continue to collectively refuse to admit that any mistakes were made in the Iraq war or allow any timetable for withdrawal to be set. It’s clear that they intend to place the blame for whatever happens in Iraq when we start to pull out on the next (probably Democratic) President.

 
 

Quick! Torture the Euphrates!

Um, sir? The, uh, waterboard thingy isn’t working so well.

“(Not coincidentally, Iraq was the site of Noah’s Ark.)”

I’m thinking he’s thinking of Gilgamesh, but can’t remember how to spell it.

 
 

Maybe Daniel “Crack” Pipes is trying to hint to us that he’s actually the wild man Enkidu, seeking the even manlier Gilgamesh who will wrestle him to the ground.

 
 

“It’s clear that they intend to place the blame for whatever happens in Iraq when we start to pull out on the next (probably Democratic) President.”

The perverse beauty of the administration’s “plan” is that they’re going to keep the numbers up until the end of the summer next year, when the military basically collapses from the strain of keeping up the pace. That way, after the military has been forced to come home regardless of the conditions on the ground in Iraq, they can point at the new administration and call them (odds-on democrats) “cut-n’runners.”

It’s clever, in its own sick way.

 
 

Yet you claim it “might have gotten around to fixing it” if not for the U.S.

Yes, I claimed exaclty that. If they didn’t get around to fixing it, it’s still true to say they might have.

But I’m late to the party – the others have pointed out our obligations under international law, so nyeah.

 
 

This lends new meaning to “We were neck deep in the Big Muddy / The big fool said to push on”.

 
 

Matt and Pipes may be correct that this isn’t the US’s problem since the US wasn’t involved in designing the Mosul Dam, or in its construction, nor are we responsible for the incompetence of the Saddam regime in allowing it to be built in an unsuitable location. Not our fault that Saddam chose to build palaces instead of fixing the thing. All true enough.

None of that is going for count for spit if that fucker collapses. Certainly the Iraqis aren’t going to say: “Oh well, that Saddam screwed us again”. When the Bush-whacker invaded, well, as they say: “You break it, you bought it”. There is no one over there who has the resources to prevent this disaster other than the US. If it’s not a legal obligation, it certainly is a moral one, as well as a public relations one.

“Not to worry! The US Army Corpse of Engineers is on the way! Bwaaaa” This doesn’t inspire a helluvalot of confidence. These are the same yutzes who built the Wolf Creek Dam, after all.

If the Mosul Dam is a “time bomb”, then defuse it: drain the resevoir now while there’s still time! Ya think?

 
 

what is it with all of these wingers and beards that look like overly manicured and conspicuously over-dyed head-merkins?

now i feel like i’m gonna have to ditch my beard so that i have nothing in common with any of the hairier (and infinitely more pathological) denizens of the wonderful world of wingnuttia

 
 

Matt and Pipes may be correct that this isn’t the US’s problem since the US wasn’t involved in designing the Mosul Dam, or in its construction, nor are we responsible for the incompetence of the Saddam regime in allowing it to be built in an unsuitable location. Not our fault that Saddam chose to build palaces instead of fixing the thing. All true enough.

No. The safety and security of the people and the maintenance of their public buildings is up to the occupying power.

 
 

(comments are closed)