« Pot: Have you noticed how black kettle is? | Main | Overseer Obama vexed by disobedient Haitian negro »

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Comments

And recent Nobel Peace Prize winner!

I think we should start making book on when he shows up in a flight suit.

If he plays to his truest believers, he'll wear a crown and robe.

Z

I doubt he will, Nomad. The difference between the Republicans and Democrats in high office is one of not substance, but style. What kind of dickweed wears a stuffed flightsuit?

We prefer our murderers genteel in these parts.

Ah, Chris, but in this case War=Peace. So I'm sure the Nobel committee members are sleeping soundly with their Obama plush toys in Norwegia tonight, untroubled by any recriminations.

to be fair, we should at least get half credit for palestine.

You forgot Columbia and, mas o menos, Mexico.

Somalia, right?

If he plays to his truest believers, he'll wear a crown and robe.

Ladies and gentleman, His Royal Heinous?

Well, it's impossible to defend Ghaddafi. He needs to go for a myriad of reasons and one of them is because he got the George W. Bush seal of approval.

Par4 -

Well Libya actually spends its oil money on Libyans, I think IIRC that they have the highest life expectancy in Africa. I'm no big Q/G/a(a)d(d)a(a)f(f)y fan but as dictatorial asses go he's likely better than most.

What is impossible to defend is subverting the constitution to spend billions on warfare when it's austerity all around for working families at home.

Interestingly there's a article on Yahoo News today that Mullen is claiming that the Q-man (G-man?) "can stay", meaning that Obama might try pulling a Kissinger/Kurds or more accurately GHW Bush/Kurds thing w/ Libya as we did in Iraq in the '90s. Among other things this ratchets down the stated goal so as not to claim that the slaughter 'failed' in the public eye in the 2012 elections.

So we can have our war and buy more missiles and kill more brown people AND keep the oil sales arrangements with Libya in place. "Hooray."

Normally the comments on Yahoo or some combination of right wing and dumb beyond description, but I liked this one just now: "You're right, a three front war. Brilliant strategy.
You suppose it's too late in the year for the U.S. to start a winter offensive against Russia?"

QuizmasterChris:

Um, actually, we are ALREADY in a land war in Asia in a country known, historically, for being unconquerable, so invading Russia would be redundant.

Besides, they are already run by kleptocrats, which was exactly how the Powers That Be wanted the Cold War to end, so. . . Mission Accomplished.

You know, when I think of how many prohibition military cliches we're indulging in, my head spins. In fact, my main argument (that I didn't believe in confidently, but found most valid when playing devil's advocate with myself) against the idea that the U.S. would invade Iraq was that it would be too freakn' obviously fucked up. Military history drips with anecdote after anecdote, and geography and culture hammers point after point that makes it clear that the U.S. has turned its military into a high-tech meatgrinder, designed to wear out and hold back opposition via attrition, indifference to friendly losses, and ridiculous overspending. It's like someone went line-by-line through the Art of War in order to precisely contradict each aphorism. I mean, when your foreign policy can be torn apart by fucking wargamers, you know you're on your way out of the empire biz.

The Final Gasp of the Empire of America: the U.S. needz moar dakka.

to be fair, we should at least get half credit for palestine.

True, but I had to restrict myself to U.S. military shooting wars or I'd have gotten carpal tunnel trying to type them all.

The comments to this entry are closed.