Let it be understood by one and all that Mona and I ceased any conversation after I pointed out that a demonstration in the yard of a suicidal school administrator, instrumental in the subsequent death - was not right wingers, but actually members of a school union demonstrating for better treatment.

Mona didn't do her homework, got called on it, was embarrassed, and in the manner of women everywhere, will never let it go. So be it.

That is all.

GB, I think we're posting over each other, but I would like to hear your answer to the question about a representative room. How would you tell 70 Muslims in a room of 100 that they were wrong about Islam? -- Armagednoutahere

Hey nitwit, the 70 you refer to wouldn't do anything, it's the 30 who would, that you should worry about. But apparently, your self preservation instincts have atrophied to the point of non-existence. Where's Darwin when we need him?

As for the other nitwits happy over the small percentage of the poll that approve of Al Qaeda or violence, perhaps you should consider that represents many, many, thousands of people that think you deserve to die. It only took 19 for 9/11, which leaves quite a few to carry on that quest. Jeebus.

What do you think, should the guy that said this, be tossed as well?

Even if one disagrees with their desire for an ongoing military presence in Iraq, one can at least respect the intellectual honesty and principled stand of those pro-war advocates who acknowledge that we are far from ready to leave Iraq right now, and that achieving the original goals will require an ongoing, sustained commitment to a prolonged occupation. Having supported this war and subsequent invasion on the ground that U.S. national security will be improved if we create a stable, democratic government in Iraq, they commendably insist on staying and trying to "finish" what is so clearly an unfinished job, notwithstanding the fact that a prolonged occupation will subject Republicans to serious political difficulties, to put it mildly.

If not, the whole O'Hanlon etc. meme goes down the tubes.

Che Pasa: Belief in Muslim Hordes has supplanted the previous belief in Communist Hordes which in turn was a supplantation of the belief in Axis Hordes who themselves were the moral descendants of Criminal Hordes who in turn were a riff on Immigrant Hordes

Then I guess you don't believe in the original Caliphate or the role of barbarian hordes in the demose of Rome? How about just the hordes that invade, bomb, and shell Israel on a regular basis? No?

But what I do know is that I just got done listening to Cordesman on the radio along with Mike O'Hanlon explaining why we need "strategic patience" in Iraq, why we have to stay for at least a year longer before thinking about withdrawal, why the financial costs are really no big deal, etc. etc. No reasonable person could listen to what he says and hear anything that challenges the fundamental premises of America's imperial role in the world. The fact that he is one of your examples proves how weak the group is. -- GlennGreenwald

On the other hand we have this argument for staying in Iraq and why Cohen is correct....

Even if one disagrees with their desire for an ongoing military presence in Iraq, one can at least respect the intellectual honesty and principled stand of those pro-war advocates who acknowledge that we are far from ready to leave Iraq right now, and that achieving the original goals will require an ongoing, sustained commitment to a prolonged occupation. Having supported this war and subsequent invasion on the ground that U.S. national security will be improved if we create a stable, democratic government in Iraq, they commendably insist on staying and trying to "finish" what is so clearly an unfinished job, notwithstanding the fact that a prolonged occupation will subject Republicans to serious political difficulties, to put it mildly. -- GlennGreenwald

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2005/11/tough-guy-warriors-are-going-soft.html#links

I guess Glenn is just going to have to condemn and marginalize himself as a member of the discredited and immoral Foreign Policy Community. Heh.

Ok, I got to this thread late, but I'm SOOO tired of people saying that "in retrospect, we should have known that there was something wrong with the case for war." In retrospect?-- Houngan

Too bad. It would have required only one functioning bio or chem war lab, or centrifuges in Tuwaitha to legitimize the entire enterprise. But Saddam needed to act like they were present for his own political purposes, and assumed (properly) that no one would come in and call his bluff. In short we believed a liar and it cost us this occupation to see for ourselves.

You may have been fine with taking he risk after 9/11 that noone else was going to attack us, but that would have been negligent. Either way Bush was going to suffer, and decided that the welfare of the country was worth more than his legacy. Unlike some other Presidents I could name.

You realize of course that you are every Conservative's worst nightmare. They absolutely worship a concept called sovereignty. That is unless it belongs to someone else.-- Paul Dirks

You have been loonier than usual lately. Sovereignty is the liberal argument for us not invading Iraq. You know, borders are sacrosanct? Are you having a change of heart, or just got bored and threw a rhetorical filip out for fun?

Liberals in America derive much of their motivation by trying to control human behavior. Whether it is affirmative action or smoking doesn't matter.

Democrats want us all out of Church on Sunday. And on Monday we are supposed to toe the socialist line.--Anonymous (retold by Shooter)