Letters to the Editor
Baldie McEagle
Published Letters: 984 Editor's Choice: 3
-
War criticism
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I have been very disappointed with the outcome of the Iraq invasion, and I count myself as one of George Bush's harshest critics. So many mistakes were made, from a military AND a political point of view, that I can no longer support this war.
(1) NOT ENOUGH BOMBS. If your plan is to bomb a nation into the iron age, you need a certain ratio of explosives (equivalent tons TNT) per square meter. Rumsfeld failed to follow this simple metric.
(2) TOO MANY IRAQIS. By the Army's own counterinsurgency manual, you need a certain ratio of troops to civilians to peacefully occupy a country. But even with the surge, there are too many Iraqis. The plan should have included contingencies for the extermination of at least 10 million Iraqis, far more than the maximum 1 million killed and a few million displaced.
(3) TAKING NUKES "OFF THE TABLE". Perhaps the stupidest thing Bush did was to fail to obliterate Iraq with nuclear weapons to send a strong message to Iran and Syria and liberal Israeli voters. By 2006, it was clear that no one had benefited from the invasion but Iran and China, and this crisis has been allowed to persist, making the US look weak and uncertain in a global order that, thanks to increasing violence around the world despite the abundant supply of American weapons, calls for more assertiveness, not less.
Why haven't these important criticisms been raised in the liberal media?
-
@Paul
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Which shall I regard as important?
Remember shooter, that's YOUR money they're stealing.
Yeah, but they're paying it back to him, at 5 cents a word.
-
@quickstrategy
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You were asking about concern trolls the other day.
Read Samlor's comment---it's textbook.
-
Sure
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Tomorrow is the five year anniversary of Mission aCONplished. Anyone have special plans to celebrate it?
I'm going to sacrifice a goat and appeal to the Ancient Ones.
Hear thy slave, Cthulhu!
-
@PDA
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Good eye. I'll add that locution to my compilation of Trollus trollus behavior.
-
@kuhnigget
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Awesome! Where can I get the lyrics?
I poked around and found this:
http://www.cthulhulives.org/shoggoth/
-
Go Nozzlebuffer!
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Classic. Just a classic post!
Now go away, you blog commenter/drooler/troll/wingnut/lunatic/pervert/child molester/cannibal/zombie/fiend/demon/beelzebub/devil/monster/angel/ghost/sprite/pixie/Peter Pan/Captain Hook/pirate/corsair/U-boat captain/Kraut/Nazi/Hitler!
-
Um, kinda
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What did you expect Williams to say: "these guys are in the tank for the Iraq war, the military establishment and their opinions have been purchased by this network"?
Yeah, that would do it.
-
Good plan, scoot
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It would be easy and self-policing via the blogosphere research gnomes. Hand out a questionnaire to incoming analysts and if they fudge it, one side or the other will cry j'accuse, and tarnish that person's reputation forevermore.
And just who would be presiding over this Dreyfussian disaster?
Oh, right---Brian Williams, of course! He's got gnomes like nobody's bidness.
-
That's assuming, of course
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]that the Net research gnomes respect net neutrality. Didn't think of that, did you scoot?
-
Boy, that's a stumper
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Because his posts on the subject of transparency in news analysts has only come up when conservatives are involved.
You got me there, scoot. I cain't figger that one out fer nuttin. It's a reel knundrum.
-
On the other hand
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glenn hasn't come out against leprechaun-jumping, either.
Where do you stand on this issue, scoot?
-
Very nice, Jim
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Keepers of the Echochamber---of course!
I'd propose "Archpriests of the Tentacled Dark," but I'll vote for yours if it wins the nomination.
-
DO NOT!!!
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Funny that someone mentioned leprechauns because when I got an e-mail screed recently that affectionately referred to Lieberman as "The little leprechaun," it registered the exact same level of "ick" as the idea of Kristol grinning impishly.
try leprechaun-jumping with Joe Lieberman!!!
There is a potential for something going seriously wrong. Stick to playing Twister with the Connecticut senator, if you must indulge.
-
scooter is so sad
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]How about the story where MSM news people surveyed gave money to the Democrats by a margin of 9:1?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113485
I mean, what can you do with this, really?
Ooh, tell us again about Dan Rather, scoot. A fairy tale before bedtime!
-
Meanwhile: when Hayden speaks ...
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Wingnuts listen.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/30/AR2008043003258.html?hpid=topnews
-
there are trolls, and then there are trolls
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Shall we all agree Glenn could use an editor, and move on?
I mean, I'm one of his biggest fans, but the Democrats are going to lose in November whether he spews invective or not.
Now let's talk some more about race. And Dan Rather!
-
"fun fest"?
[Read the article: Brian Williams' "response" to the military analyst story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yes, I've often seen them wax nostalgic about the "Nam. Now THAT was a fun fest. Just ask them.
-
An interesting locution
[Read the article: What backroom conniving are Steny Hoyer and the Chris Carney Blue Dogs up to on FISA?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Carney: Carney said that a compromise should protect national security
Why does "national security" need to be "protected," rather than enhanced or promoted? Is it now a tangible thing, like "terror," that can absorb endless sums of cash without any direct effect on it?
Is it, maybe, an institution that needs protection from those who would investigate it?
Or an industry?
-
These are the best of times; these are the worst of times
[Read the article: What backroom conniving are Steny Hoyer and the Chris Carney Blue Dogs up to on FISA?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You have to remember, the Founders didn't trust government or governors because both were notoriously bad in those days. So they set up the Constitution so that incompetent or dishonest politicians wouldn't be able to do too much damage.
Those were the bad old days. Now we have a government that has been refined by decades of liberal reform and conservative think tanks. It's nice and safe. We can trust it. It's the outsiders that we can't trust.
At the same time, those were the good old days, too. The Founders didn't have to deal with terrorists---they WERE terrorists. They had no notion of security. Now we are frightened suburbanites. (Check any census.)
That's why, now that we are now facing a threat that---as only a counterterrorism expert like Carney can tell you---is worse than any we have faced, because it's posed by terrorists, we can't be restrained by antique laws that assume we are dishonest, when it is clear others are dishonest.
And it's vital we protect our national security industry/apparatus so that it can protect our grandchildren, the way our Constitution no longer can.