Letters to the Editor
mcnair
Published Letters: 20 Editor's Choice: 2
-
Paglia's ridiculousness
[Read the article: Art movies: R.I.P.]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]But things will be vastly different: no more happy facade of pacification and reconstruction; no more corrupt protectionism of commercial contractors; no more costly police or military training of volatile, faithless local recruits; no more intrusive neighborhood patrols with our soldiers blown to smithereens by cheap booby traps. It will be real war, heavily applied by air force, with maximum damage inflicted at minimal cost to our troops.
This paragraph shows Paglia has no concept of what's going on in Iraq, and has no credibility. The "costly" police training is what might save Iraq; many of the "faithless" local recruits are the Iraqi patriots willing to stand up for their country. Who would the "maximum damage" in Paglia's "real war" be inflicted on? The populace? The police? Who? Didn't we already have the "real war?"
It's hard to respect Paglia as anything but a moderate Republican who calls herself a "Democrat" so she can be paid by Salon for a column that wouldn't be published if she was honest about her real identity. But, her complete misunderstanding of reality in Iraq is something that can't be ignored.
I am a freelance writer and just returned from a monthlong embed with the 82nd Airborne...that's a drop in the bucket compared to what our soldiers spend there, but in that short time I can promise you I am well aware that Paglia has no idea what she's talking about, and in the words of an 82nd NCO, she and other living room patriots should "keep their crazy ideas to themselves."
-
A bit off-base on Michael Totten
[Read the article: What "winning" in Iraq looks like]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You are a bit off-base on your criticism of Michael Totten.
I'm not going into a line-by-line debate, but you use language like "revealingly points out" or "admits" to describe what Totten is actually reporting on - he doesn't hide that he's an embedded reporter, and his descriptions are his personal observations.
I was embedded myself as a freelancer in Bayji, Iraq over the summer. If I were to write that the center of the city was bustling and busy it would be accurate. It would be equally accurate to say the main street in front of the U.S. manned JSS was devasted and blasted from car bombs and battles.
As somebody with experience on the ground, I believe none of Totten's reports ring false, and while his personal viewpoint is "right wing" I think it's fair to say he is more objective than most.
It's very easy to get embedded, Glenn - much, much easier than you think. Despite your history with Col. Boylan, I bet you can do it. That's not a dare, and I mean no sort of an "I'm better than you" type of intepretation. I think you owe it to yourself to see some part of the war yourself - then you will be absolutely above reproach.
-
One other Pats-Dolphins comparison
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In 1972, the Dolphins obviously were excited to be undefeated, but that was before the 24-7, nonstop ESPN-driven sports culture that made the chase impossible to escape...so for the Pats to manage to play at such a high level, with the addition of the media distractions makes it even more impressive. The Dolphins had some distractions (cocaine, booze, women, etc.) but nothing compared to what any 2007 professional sports team has to deal with (ESPN, King Kaufman, Internet, steroids, booze, women).
I've been a Pats fan for a long, long time, so it amuses me to no end to finally understand what a Dallas/San Fran/Pittsburgh fan must have felt like in their respective decades (when I hated them all). And, I have no problem with the Dolphins hanging on to their legacy - which, as those players rightly point out, has not even been equalled yet, much less surpassed. Yet.
I would argue that the Patriots, if they go 19-0, will be the greatest sports team in the history of professional athletics, ever, in any country, in any sport. As the statistics show, they will be so much more dominant than the '72 Dolphins, that there is no valid comparison to make.
Or...
If they do not win the Super Bowl, they are the biggest chokers in the history of professional athletics - ever. No team will have been so dominant, so unbeatable, only to give it up when everything was on the line.
So, that's what they are playing for. There's no rationalization that will work for me as a Pats fan to defend this season as anything other than a mammoth choke and devastating disappointment if they don't win it all - and, there will be no other team, ever, that matches up to this one if they do. Not the 1927 Yankees, not the Bulls with Jordan or Celtics with Russell. Certainly not the 1972 Dolphins. Nobody, ever.
-
Clarification...
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There was a comment about "when in the history of football a team played in such a weak division!"
Of course, that would almost be the 1972 Miami Dolphins...combined 19-36, compared to 12-36 for the Pats. Obviously the 2007 Patriots benefited by playing the horrible 1-15 Dolphins twice, but the '72 Dolphins played eight games in their division (not six like the Pats, and no team was above .500.
I'm not saying that proves anything one way or the other, but it's not a valid complaint. Both teams played their share of tomato cans.
The undefeated, occasionally tied, Arsenal team is a valid comparison as another "best ever" team. But, it only matters if the Pats win the title - otherwise Hatriot Nation gets the last laugh.