Letters to the Editor
-
@ bystander
I'd like to post as Derbig Mooser's wife,
Be my guest, bystander, and if I don't mind my saying so, that's big of me. Or would it be on-line bigamy?
You will have no difficulty registering an account as "Derbig Mooser's wife" . But I warn you, Shooter242 says you will find it unsatisfying.
I'm having a hell of a day! I don't exist and I can't satisfy my wife.
Buckyl has destroyed me, with one snap of his synapse. I hope it wasn't his last, but it looks close. Or maybe they do things different in Florida. I've heard people down South are more easygoing. and their heritage makes it easy to understand why I am LWM's literary slave.
Where's my Emancipation Proclamation?
-
glenn
the last sentence in your post sez it all...if they were to just report facts as journalists should, they wouldn't get any more of the good ole costco bar-b-que...
-
Bucky, who are you?
lwm, you must be tiring of the joke by now. Who am I? One who has watched you destroy more threads on UT than Glenn can start.
-
@buckyl
I do not dispute anything you say; but if we do not make America see what she has done, then she will do it again.
And you are just the guy to do it Buckyl. Why should we doubt anything you say?
-
@bystander
Derbig likely would have responded differently,
Not on your tintype, baby. I know just how permeable I am.
-
DCLAw, Matthews
DC, you were right that Matthews mentioned the McCain 'mispeaking' on his show, but having just watched it, I can tell you he did veracity no favors.
Matthews never questioned whether McCain was lying, instead he ran the story as point, counterpoint with a McCain-bot given many precious, uninterupted mouth-flappings to muddy the water. Add to that the very confusing counterpoint by John Soltz--that Iran is arming Shia militias, not q'eida ones--and the show at the least bolstered McCain's reputation. Contrast that with Matthews segue immediately after, a segment on Hillary's claim of landing in Bosnia under sniperfire. In that segment--with the title, "Caught", which leaves nothing up to the imagination--Matthews called Hillary Clinton a liar in plain English.
This is why I don't watch that creep.
-
Christopher Hitchens said McCain is a serious man and should be president of anywhere
Christopher Hitchens was interviewed on Australian TV last night and he said McCain is a serious man and should be president of any where. Here’s the quote from http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2007/s2197841.htm:
"TONY JONES: Have you reach add point yet where you're even considering a vote for John McCain?
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS: Um, I would consider it, yes. I mean, he's a serious man, and a man with a lot of character and actually a lot of charm. The sort of person that I would prefer to say this there should be more of in the senate. I'm not sure that a guy like that is volatile shall we say and should be president of any where."
-
bucky1
if we do not make America see what she has done, then she will do it again.
Trying to get Americans to take note of what they are doing to their fellow citizens is well nigh impossible..
Trying to get them to take note of what they have done to nameless, faceless brown people on the other side of the world is asking the totally impossible.
What you are asking for is self reflection on a national scale. Short of being on the losing end of something like WWII, which is what it took to make the Germans reflect on their sins, it isn't going to happen.
Note that the Japanese by and large escaped the self reflection that the Germans underwent.
-
@ casual observer, war in iran
Here is what I think it going on. A big fight. And I don't mean in Iraq.
Hersh was absolutely correct on the evidence. At one point America had half, half, its navy in the Persian Gulf! Then there was the steady drumbeat of rather clumsy propaganda about EFP's, some of it denied by General Pace even at the time.
Then we heard from Adm. Fallon who said, "not on my watch". I have observed that senior serving officers rarely take the time to deny things that aren't on the table. (Fallon now denies saying this now) I think Fallon took the wind from their sails. For a time.
Since then it's been a pretty steady rain, of Iran this, Iran that. Then came the NIE that said there was no program. It was a huge message to Bush from saner elements in the intelligence community and the Pentagon. Unfortunately, Bush and Chtheny simply routed around the damage, saying that they did not believe it and started bloviating about "capacity". The Israelis of course chimed in with what they said was their own assessment -- that in fact there was a program.
And so it goes. It's clear to me that there are elements who wish to attack (for whatever reason - pick your theory) and those who don't. For a while, the "holy shit and attack on Iran is freaking nuts" crowd had the upper hand and perhaps still do. However the intent of the PNAC crowd has not changed one iota. America must control the middle east. They must. Iran is in the way. Iran must be destroyed.
As for the US lacking the military capability, the Air Force and the Navy are essentially unaffected by Iraq, and their capacity to destroy is undiminished.
See CONPLAN 8022, http://tinyurl.com/d3k8s
America now has detailed operational plans to destroy upwards of 10,000 targets - from the air, anywhere in the world, in just a few hours. It is also worth noting that the Bush administration has reclassified nuclear weapons so that theatre commanders may use them at their discretion. That fact alone is utterly terrifying.
I think that they want to take one last roll of the dice. Dubya or nothing! A war in Iran has many advantages, the most notable being Obama swept away in the tide of fear and loathing that will ensue. And if nukes are used, the hope is that the ultimate "shock and awe" will finally break the will of the Muslim "enemy". It won't, but that is how these stupid vicious monkeys think.