Such fictions play well among the fringe left, who have already picked Greenwald up as a favorite, but if he wants to be taken "seriously" (and although he mocks the term, it is painfully obvious that he does) a turn away from sensationalism would mark an excellent start.

-- mcintire78

Unlike threatening countries all over the world with our discredited military power, which is rapidly being reduced to nukes or nothin. No sensationalism there.

I am more and more convinced that the only standard for political discourse in America is the same one used to write "action movies" or "political thrillers"

I mean, what the hell kind of movie would it be if the possibility of violence was precluded from the script, and this was announced at the start of the movie. Total dullsville, baby, it won't play in Peoria.

What the right seems to be endorsing is the dramatic, or more accurately, the melodramatic possibilities of war or violence. And in that, I totally agree, no sword fights, no punches thrown, no battle scenes, no movie.

Unfortunately, they seem to be unaware that an actual world, where consequences are real, exists.

And could there be a state of more extreme privilege? Demanding the world conform to nopt just your needs, but entertain you, too.

And I just love that "fringe left" maccy, baby. The only "fringe left" we've got going are the former Trotskyietes who bacame the neo-cons.

Yeah, that's right mcintire. And for a change, try actually reading the post, not just seeing if you can get a plot to pitch out of it.

Besides, war movies and spy thrillers may go out of style for a while. They often do after military defeats. I guess all the amputees and PTSD cases bring people down. (The ultimate sin)

of course, is not closing my bold tags at the write time.

But I could have been wrong. Saddam could have been building nuclear weapons and long-range missiles.

Excellent, excellent! Now we throw in a hunky hero who finds out the secrets of Saddam, and a country that just won't listen cause of (villian to be named here, but only sprung on the audience in last half of picture that his are not the most principles of motives) and we'll need a love interest.

Don't you see that you are proposing the hooks for movie plots as a basis for foreign policy? So let's just write a script, and we can make some real dough.

I'm tellin' ya, I've got Matt Damon and Angelina Jolie beggin' beggin, for roles in this, it'll be a blockbuster! Why the scene where the hero sees, for the first time, Saddams hideous arsenal...

Jesus.

we get to the one word which is so telling about our foreign policy discussion.

scenario!

There is indubitably no doubt that your knowledge of action movies is superior to mine, being as how I have never seen one. Okay, there's a few seconds before I figure it out and turn the channel, but considering the fact that the only time I see TV is when I go to my inlaws home, I just use my life-long policy of immediately switching channels or turning the TV off as soon as I see a gun.

So I gotta go with you, if you say Hanks, it's Hanks! I'm not gonna muck up a five-star deal like we're gonna get by insisting on something I have no expertise in.

Hanks, it is! And the love interest? Anyone of 'em would give her falsies to get a part in this extravaganza!

Yeah I did focus on that one word; a scenario is something used to pitch a movie plot, it's not something used to determine foreign policy.

Yes I know what you're thinking, I think: "If he doesn't know a damn thinf about action movies, who the hell does he think he is, commenting on foreign policy.

I can stand being accused of any perversion or heresy except intellectual pretension. If you want to get on my good side, appeal to my moral pretensions. First of all, my 6th grade education pretty much precludes that, don't ya think? (And I have an indisputable absence of diplomas to prove it)

The fact that, and it is a fact, Jack, that I don't watch movies or TV is not, I am sure out of intellectual pretensions. I am simply not capable, given the material, of the suspension of disbelief required, nor am I capable of feeling that displays of gratuitous violence, even when essential to the plot and containing shitloads of artistic merit entertain more than they degrade.

This requires no intellect, just a whole lotta fear. Movies and TV scare the shit outta me.

I don't think I've ever tasted cognac. Is it good? I am totally in favor of finding a legal intoxicant which tastes good and has nice effects. Is cognac it? Everything I like is illegal or flattening.

As far as what an insufferable, elitest prick you might be when you dazzle your co-workers with you lexicon, that's their problem. I would fire you, but different employers have different standards. As for me I've got a weak knee, and a fractured syntax. So lay off.

And as far as possible scenarios go, let me try one out on you: All of Saddam's weapons have been moved to Syria, where they await the command of Islamic science to destroy everthin we hold, dear. And when you're holdin five aces, well, figure it out for yourself.

And try being just a wee bit less defensive. I was criticising your words and thoughts as expressed, not you.