Letters to the Editor
-
Iran "is threatening" the US
daleyrocks: Bengt - Very dishonest of you to say Iran is not threatening America.
One more comment on this. As far as I can see there is no present threat by Iran on America, so there is no current "Iran is threatening America". There is, however, quite a lot of "America threatening Iran" currently.
As for what was in the past, should past conflicts be revived? Should America go to war with Britain? How about a war with Japan? And what about Vietnam, where President Bush was on a diplomatic visit not that long ago?
In other words, regardless of what was in the past in re Iran -- get over it!
-
Three (No, Make That Four) Wise Men and a Game
One more “Hear, hear!” for Gen. Odom.
Glenn wisely notes the preposterousness of having to wear the flag lapels of patriotism, support of the troops and strength on national defense before even deigning to question Bush/Cheney’s disastrous Middle East policies. The Democrats and the few but growing interested Republicans should take note of the Gen. Odom’s refusal to let anyone else define the playing field.
IMO, the two defining moments reflecting if not expediting the change of opinion on the war were when Rep. Murtha came out against the war in late 2005 and when the generals started calling for Rumsfeld’s resignation a few months later. When Murtha came out against the war, the radical right immediately started comparing him to Michael Moore - and, darned if I didn’t see Fox News’s Brit Hume still doing so today @ http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/18/hume-murtha-smear/. Can’t wait to hear from the doddering old man Murtha (as Hume and the right-wing echo chamber are also depicting him) on this one.
It is a good measure of how far opinion has moved against the war that Gen. Odom is now being compared Murtha - I guess the stretch from top military brass to Moore is too far even for the malleable right wing authoritarian followers. The commentators from the right here as well as at Fox today only underscore the damage Murtha and the generals have done to the perverse neo-con, radical right agenda.
Speaking of Fox News and perverse, I don’t hold out much hope for the “hard-core 30%”, that some were discussing earlier today, either. Five years-plus on from 9/11, one cannot imagine the paralyzing anxiety and panic Fox still engender in their viewers with their constant, high-pitch fear-mongering. I would bet you could not find one hour of broadcasting on that network since 9/11 that would not have some reference to terrorism, either on the main broadcast or the scroll at the bottom. If you want proof, try this:
When you have a minute or two - and, believe me, that is all you usually need, turn on Fox News and see how long it takes for some reference to terrorism to appear. For those whose stomachs are not as strong as Glenn’s, mute the sound. When I did it today, it took approximately one minute for a scroll to appear that described bombs being made with ingredients found around the kitchen sink, or something like that. With its various betting possibilities, this would make an excellent gambling or drinking game, but, as always, moderation in such activities is strongly encouraged.
(And one more big thumbs-up for clownsense – wise comes in many forms. In addition, he gives the joint a little class.)
-
Robert Franklin
It's nice to see that Baldie's back from the bus station bathrooms to help you out with your analysis.
In order to answer your question about 2012, you would have to provide a whole lot of other information. I would be interested in how many troops we had in Iraq then and whether the country was peaceful. If the country wasn't peaceful, who are the primary antagonists and their backers in 2012? What is the regional situation in 2012 that we need to take into account - specifically, Iran, Saudi Arabia and any other players that may emerge? What is going on with the global war on terror at that point in time? Do we need regional bases for other reasons at that point?
I think you were looking for an easy answer, but unlike William Odom, I don't think there is one.
-
OK, one more
Bengt - Very dishonest of you to say Iran is not threatening America.
I wasn't dishonest, certain other people signing daleyrocks, were.
-
This is a great post - Odom for President!
This is a great post - Odom for President!
-
Who Are You? Who Who, Who Who?
I'm sorry, Daley, I know who William Odom is. Who the fuck are you? I have heard him interviewed numerous times on my radio station over the past 18 months, and pretty much everything he has said over that time frame has proved true. Pretty much everything the administration has said hasn't panned out. So once again, who the fuck are you, and why should anyone believe a word you type?
-
Odom's song
Cast Your Faith to the Wind
-
DR
Sorry for not stating all my assumptions. An oversight. I'm also assuming that conditions in Iraq in my 2012 hypothetical are roughly the same as they are now. Not much improvement, not much deterioration. About the ame number of active-duty US troops, etc. In other words, just like it is today only five years, several thousand lives and hundreds of billions of dollars later.
So, can I get an answer? I'm not trying to rope you into anything. Just answer yes or no and then explain all you like. Are you arguing for an open-ended commitment or not?
-
To be clear
Very early in this thread i said:
I can't think of a better platform for a smart, unapologetic general with the ultimate military street cred to take direct action against the simpering neo-con water-carriers.
I just want to clarify that I don't mean to imply that military service makes the citizenship of any person greater or more important than that of anybody who hasn't served. I just mean that I think a military person with that kind of credibility is the perfect foil for neo-con war-loving militarists.
I say that not from partisanship--most ex-military with any experience in Iraq are lining up with the Democrats (my party), and I'm a veteran myself. I just believe that it's anti-democratic (anti-American) to put the military or individual members of it on a pedestal over the rest of the citizenry.