I know this is an unpopular fact but Arabs and Muslims are, have been and will continue to slaughter one another in greater numbers than Salon's Great Satan aka the USA.

That's a good question, just as the question of why this president has used more signing statments to do workarounds on any legislation he doesn't like than all the previous presidents combined is a good question - as in: What is really going on here?

(A note on style: I practice news writing style. If I were to put the word president before George Bush's name, I would capitalize it, out of respect for the office. It is his title. Having said that, another bit of protocol holds that members of the uniformed services salute people of higher rank, only on the basis that they are acknowledging someone above them in the chain of command. As the saying goes: "Salute the office (or rank) not the man." So while I might, as a right, tear into George W. Bush in the context ol some sort of political give and take, as a former service member, I would still respect the office, if not the man. And I do - respect the office that is.)

Someone here is asking about be bop today (he may be operating under an assumed name, but I can't be sure). Anyway, bop and I, would, if we were again active rank- and- filers, and if RMP returned to active command status, would have to acknowledge his authority. But here were just pals, sort of; but I know there's a part of me that respects RMP that way, taking into account his former reponsbilities. I'm sure bop feels that way too. It's basically about comradeship.

When he checks into the motel with his blow-up doll in the suitcase and uses hydrogen to inflate her and things get too hot...

“The suitcase nuke is an exciting topic that really lends itself to movies,” said Vahid Majidi, the assistant director of the FBI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate. “No one has been able to truly identify the existence of these devices.”

http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1703/suitcase-nukes

I suggest you spend a few minutes here:

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/

before you suggest that there's some sort of equivalence between the folks battling islamofascism from their basements and those battling RWA ignorance from there's.

I'll wait.

I was going to put this up as OT, but I read so many insightful posts on the psychology of the armchair terror warriors, that I thought a little reminder of a real struggle might be warranted.

In the late evening, our time, the Pakistani voters will go to the polls. What is at stake in this election is the support and/or accomodation of militants, the rule of law, and democracy in an Islamic republic. Theirs is a real war on terror: One major, probably front-runner candidate for the prime minister was assassinated, two local or provincial candidates have been assassinated, zamindari militias have intimidated voters, there have been documented plots for massive vote rigging. Supreme Court justices have been sacked, in part for ruling that the government cannot hold prisoners without charge or render them to the Americans for torture just because they've been accused of terrorism. In the last 48 hours, 50 people have been killed, 200 injured by suicide bombers at political rallies, 5 polling stations blown up, and the threats in the air in the FATA areas not to participate, by the real al Qaeda and the real Taliban, are flying fast and furious. The Army chief has deployed 81,000 troops in an effort to make voting safe. He has also announced a withdrawal from government.

There is a lot at stake in this election. There's a dictator to oust, and militants to rob of their base of support. There is a Constitution to re-instate, judges and lawyers to free and return to their jobs, rule of law to institute. All the polls indicate that public overwhelmingly wants democracy, return to the rule of law, and end to Islamic and cross-border militancy, and an end to the influence of non-syncretic Islam.

If the election is fair, and the will of the people prevails these things may start to happen, and the root of the terror war on that side of the globe may be nearly severed. Its a big if. If we succeed in the battle that was finally joined in the House this week, in rolling back the neocons and the imperial presidency, and the torture, and the lawless unaccountability, and the culture of fear and manliness, the root of the terror war on this side of the globe may be nearly severed. Also a big if.

The whole world is watching 2 elections, and praying for the right outcome. Pray for a fair enough election and the re-birth of democracy in Pakistan. As I posted the other day, they might just be able to vote al Qaeda and the Taliban out of existence there. Isn't real democracy defeating the real 9/11 terrorists the sweetest outcome of all?

I served under LBJ and then Nixon.

I don't wish to pursue it here, but I think poor Lyndon just got in over his head in lots of ways when you recall what his reform goals were as against what he was forced to do in military terms, and Westmoreland was a terrible commander in those circumstances. LBJ picked the wrong general at the wrong time.

As for Nixon, he kept the war going for six more years, and combat deaths in Vietnam while he was president were nearly half the total 58,000-plus recorded during the whole war.

Nixon lied about having a plan to end the war when he ran in 1968.

With all of that chaos and carnage, I think there is something quite different going here now in terms of the constutional issues. Words fail me, but that is how I feel, and it is deeply disturbing. At my age, it is a very, very serious moral dilemma.

It's simply bread and circuses. That's what ALL of your insolvable issues are like the death penalty or abortion or the war or race gun control or culture or religion. They are not meant to be 'solved' because they can't be solved. They are meant to be squabbled over in order to distract you and help you keep score against your equally silly opponents. Glenn's smirking at the so called culture wars of others is no different than his own.