Letters to the Editor
prunes
Published Letters: 784
-
@Ramadi
[Read the article: Improvement in Iraq: Trust Joe Klein and his secret sources]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Many of you want to lose this war. That is your right.
Give me a break. You really can't imagine any other reason any American might want to end the invasion other than "they want to lose"?
C'mon now. You know that doesn't really make any sense.
Americans want what is best for their friends and families. They may disagree with you on what is best. Is that so hard to believe?
-
@shooter242
[Read the article: Attacks on civilians, torture and lawless detentions]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]These polls are meaningless. Why? Because it doesn't really matter what any attitudes are, or by how many they are held. It's irrelevant. What matters is what actually happens in real life.
When was the last time YOU paid attention to real life? You cover your ears when the topic is the economy, you ignore flagrant violations of the law by your political heroes, you squirmed and writhed to try and paint estimates of Iraqi deaths as "unscientific" and "politically motivated" when you know nothing of the subject, you pretend Iraq has anything at all to do with terrorism, you pretend that just because Clinton did something wrong, it excuses Bush, you don't give a damn about the sweeping abrogation of civil rights and the BLOODY OBVIOUS power-grab underway by the Executive.
Don't ever speak of "real life" again, you freak. Relax and enjoy your golf game, there's no jews or blacks at the country club to bother you.
-
Civilian deaths
[Read the article: Attacks on civilians, torture and lawless detentions]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For anyone who is interested in the matter of estimating Iraqi civilian casualties, I HIGHLY recommend the first act of this episode of This American Life:
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?sched=1104
Act one contains an interview with the author of the famous Lancet study of civilian casualties in Iraq.
At the end of Act one, there is an interview with a man whose job was to estimate the number of civilians that would be killed by a particular strike. He claims the rule was more than 30 civilians estimated killed per 1 Ba'athist target, the strike was called off. Otherwise, it went through. For some reason, this interview is not listed in the show notes.
-
the outer reaches of logic!
[Read the article: Attacks on civilians, torture and lawless detentions]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Well, I'd say there is quite a difference between Muslims and Americans after all. Besides the awkward comparison of a Religion and a country, that is.
Well, I'd say there is quite a difference between chalk and cheese after all. Besides the awkward comparison of a mineral and a dairy product, that is.
-
@Lynx
[Read the article: Attacks on civilians, torture and lawless detentions]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The US has not stated they'd use nuclear weapons first in a conflict since they were used in WWII
That's not quite true:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctrine_for_Joint_Nuclear_Operations
The current reasons which could justify a pre-emptive nuclear strike include "to rapidly end a war on favorable US terms" and "to make sure US and international operations are successful".
-
@Lynx
[Read the article: Attacks on civilians, torture and lawless detentions]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Are these official policy of the US or just the rambling wishes of madmen?
Both. From the very top of the Wikipedia page:
"The 2005 Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations is the current US doctrine on when and under which circumstances to use nuclear weapons."
In other words, the official wishes of madmen or the ones they harbor until they can find some way to make them official.
The madmen are the most highly-placed officials in the country, and their feverish nightmares have been made official policy. It's no joke.
-
@Lynx
[Read the article: Attacks on civilians, torture and lawless detentions]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If you are looking for a statement on a .gov site saying "We will strike first", you won't find it. After the public reaction to the Doctrine, references to it were quietly dropped in all official publications and statements. No subsequent document has been released indicating a change of policy.
You can see a FOIA'd history of US nuclear position statements here:
http://www.nukestrat.com/us/guidance.htm
-
@GB
[Read the article: Attacks on civilians, torture and lawless detentions]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]please don't claim that I'm lying when I simply report the findings of the poll.
Ok. You just plain don't understand how to read polls. And yet you continue to talk.
-
@Rufus X
[Read the article: Attacks on civilians, torture and lawless detentions]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I see that Glenn's army of supporters are afraid to address the frightening implication of huge numbers of Muslim Americans who love George Bush and are independently wealthy. They have no problem denouncing the millions of independently wealthy Christian Bush-lovers, but as soon as its Muslims, they're all, "You don't understand polls."
Since that is a clear reference to my comment, I'll reply:
I wasted a lot of time trying to explain the flaw in GB's logic to him. He doesn't deserve any more effort on my part if he's not willing to make a little effort to understand.
I am quite sure GB doesn't understand polls, because he keeps making the same damn error over and over. If you would like to discuss the poll results, I'd be happy to, but don't just bitch if you haven't followed the conversation from the beginning.
-
dagnabbit
[Read the article: Attacks on civilians, torture and lawless detentions]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I spend too long typing that :P
-
@shooter242
[Read the article: Major troop reductions imminent -- again]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]One would think that the factions at war would figure out, less violence equals fewer Americans. But I guess Muslims just aren't that smart.
One would think that if one completely missed the point of the post, and one believed himself smarter than everyone else despite making public failures of logic daily, and one ignored the huge permanent bases we've built in Iraq, and the constant escalation of rhetoric from America, and the many American economic interests we've moved in, and if one was so dishonest to pretend ANY of this had ANYthing to do with "democracy building".
We'll leave Iraq when it becomes unprofitable for the people making money on it, just like everything else in life. The Iraqis are smart enough to figure that out, I wouldn't presume (*ahem*) to guess if they would actually adopt that view as part of an overall strategy.
-
@ChillyDogg
[Read the article: Right-wing noise machine: Plame not covert]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The CIA classified her as covert, dumbass. You don't think the secretaries, janitors, and mailroom staff also drive up to the building every day?