December 10, 2005

Overheard inside a Ramadi bunker, Saturday, December 10

First militant: “I confess to being quite dispirited this day, Fahad.  For if the grapevine is to be believed, Iraqi locals—our own Arab brethren (peace be upon them)—turned over brother Amir Khalaf Fanoos to the infidel occupiers, siding with the West in this great war to restore the Caliphate and return the Arab world to its long dormant greatness and preeminence.”

Second militant: “Yes, but Isa—beleaguered people often become confused about their loyalties in times of war. Some will change sides and actively fight for the enemy; others will despair and hide themselves, rendered impotent by their own torn allegiances.  This has happened throughout the history of warfare—and so it is to be expected that during our glorious struggle, a handful of Iraqi dogs would surrender to the will of the Great Satan, with his promises of technological marvel and televised, high-definition porn.  Just as we have benefitted from those infidels who’ve become so enthralled by the romanticism of resistance and with the flowing silk finery of the noble, patriarchal Other that they have taken up our cause, however much they protest that obvious fact.”

First militant: “Ah!  You mean like Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean?”

Second militant: “Like Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean, precisely.”

Second militant: “Allah be praised.”

*

Posted by Jeff G. @ 8:45pm
69 comments | Trackback

Comments (69)

  1. Needs pictures…. But the thought of seeing Pelosi does give me pause.  I might go blind.  OK, not in that way.  Pervert.

  2. That explains why in very short order I will have fallen behind every single comic strip in the best humor blog category of these degrading weblog awards.

    Are comic strips / political cartoons and blogs really the same? 

    Next year I hope to be nominated in the category:  “Best conservative blog / White House Press Secretary / cream-based soup”

  3. PIMPER!!!!

  4. Jeff — You mean you’re going to work for Talon AND OSM/PMJ/Occupant?

  5. I think the Martha Series is what made some believe you were doing comics.  I just love when you combine your writing with Allah’s illustrations.  I love the irony.

    And I agree that your site is not as easily classified as the Weblog Awards may attempt to do.  That is what makes it stand out so much more.  That and the Cock.  Oh and diamond nipples.

  6. I feel so dirty now too.  I think I had better go to Hewitt’s place for awhile.

  7. “….our own Arab brethren (peace be upon them)—turned over brother Amir Khalaf Fanoos to the infidel occupiers…”

    Ha ha! wittily mordant as ever my dear Neocon comrade Goldsteinovski, and that clairvoyant linking to a an ubber-disinterested cum reliable media source such as the Kuwaiti government’s Soviet-style “national news agency” also known by its acronym KUNA by “freedom-loving” Islamic fundamentalist Gulf monarchies and other clerically enlightened Mohammedan autocracies!

    The Al-Sabah and Al-Saud Wahhâbi mafia families will be proud of you!

    See, Donald Rumsfeld isn’t the only one who can discreetly plant subsidized infomercials passing for news in faraway newspapers and other exotic blogs: retarded Ayyrabz can do it to, and without spending taxpayers’ money!

    -I know Jeff would even be willing to pay some syndicated royalties for the right to use that type of “news”…

    KUNA is on the record for having churned out a world class collection of Gargantuan lies in the past 15 years including amongst others the 1990 canard of the decade that came fully equipped with gore descriptions of “bloodthirsty Iraqi soldiers setting Kuwaiti maternities on fire, after having sadistically pierced through incubators with their Baathist bayonets” [sic]

    In Jan. 2003, the director of the Kuwait National News Agency, a buffoon named sheikh Ahmad Al-Jarallah, famously predicted that “the upcoming events will surely prove Vice-President Richard Cheney right: the people of Iraq will welcome their American liberators with sweets, almonds and rosewater” [sick]

    Many members of the Bush White House, as well as major corporate contributors to the Republican party such as Halliburton or Lockheed-Martin (who make more than 30% of their turnover with Arabian Gulf governments) are merry members of Washington’s “Imam corner”…

    Ironic how these self-proclaimed patriots pretend to “fight radical Islam” by razing entire villages in Iraq’s “Sunni triangle”, while shamelessly sleeping with the Wahhâbi enemy in Riyadh and Kuwait!

    Go figure

  8. Hey Vic, Lord knows I’m no fan of Mr Goldsteinovsky’s politics myself (putting it mildly), but fuck me if I can even approach discerning a coherent point to whatever the hell it was you just said.  I swear you must just collect random paragraphs from your various paranoid ramblings and paste them into the comment box in no particular order.  Get a real job, ferchrissakes.

  9. That you, Doctor Verga. It’s all coming together at once, and in one place. Your eye.

  10. ..got cut-off there, sorry.

  11. Your eye for propaganda is truly remarkable.

  12. So Vega, don’t be so stingy.  Where is the “Random Unhinged Liberal Rant Engine”?  What’s its URL?  Come on, I want to play with it too!

  13. Don’t you guys understand it’s all about having the wrong army?  A guy can’t pick up chicks in a rented uniform like he used to….  So like, why even have an army? 

    PS:  God bless and thanks to our troops!!

  14. Ah shit, Dr. Vega, are you saying that KUNA reported this?  Nuts. 

    And here I thought we had that guy but it must be just someone else or no one at all.  Kinda makes me wonder though, who it is we’ve been subjecting to vicious torture since the errant capture. 

    Maybe you can tell me who al-Jazeera says the suspect is.  Then we’ll know the truth after all.

    BTW Jeff.  This is choice stuff.  Only a dead man in Chicago could vote for you more times than I have.

  15. Hey Vegs, did anyone ever tell you how sexy you are when you snivel like that?

    I thought not.

  16. - Citizen Q del Portovino,

    It’s Goldsteinovski, not Goldsteinovsky you Dostoyevskyian idiot!

    - Mr. Defeatist,

    Once again, no “liberalpinkoacademic” witchdoctor here: I’m just an old-school Taft Republican, saddened by the sight of the GOP’s inexorable falling under the spell of its longtime enemies, be they agrarian Dixie bigots, Wilsonian Pharisaic fools intent on spreading “democratic ideology” at gunpoint, nostalgic friends of the “League of Nations” and/or the Trotskyite Politburo…

    In my family, we’ve always voted (non-Neocon) Republican since the 1890’s

  17. Thank you Dr. Vegas,

    Now, would YOU explain to me how Bush, or any other US or foriegn leader, could get away with invading and subjugating Saudi Arabia when they own lefties world wide??

  18. Dr. Verga,

    Out of curiosity, I wonder if you could explain how “Taft Republican” realism would apply to the post-9/11 world in the way of policy.

  19. I’ve decided that Jeff is really Dr. Vicwatsis.  Seriously, now, no real person can be that perpetually ass-like, can they?  So.  It would take a very creative, not to mention busy-busy mind to create a creature like Dr. Victorstuff.  Now who do we know who can make armadillos dance and oatmeal talk??? 

    I rest my case.

  20. If we had only known that Jeff was also playing the role of Dr. Vic Vegas, we would have taken our names out of the contest days ago.

  21. « How “Taft Republican” realism would apply to the post-9/11 world in the way of policy ?»

    1) For a start, put our nation’s interest first

    2) No more fake intelligence fixed around a pre-ordained foreign policy devised by Israel and its Washington Amen corner and/or Saudi Wahhâbistan and its Houston Imam corner

    3) Send Israeli-trained traitors such as Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith and Dick Cheney to Guantanamo or Tel-Aviv

    4) Same as above for Israel’s Washington-based lobbyists and cronies such as Jacob Abramoff, Tom DeLay, Lynne Cheney & Co.

    5) Severe diplomatic ties with Islamic fundamentalist states such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Pakistan

    6) Free Saddam Hussein so he can take care of pro-Iranian Shiite fundamentalists and other Persian terrorists- we might even lend him a dozen F16’s so he can bomb Teheran’s weapons factories the way he did with president Reagan’s help 25 years ago

    7) Slash the Pentagon budget by 70%+ and reinvest the savings into efficient border patrol, law enforcement, federal grants for our nation’s farms, schools, and hospitals

  22. Dr. Verga,

    1) That’s not policy, but a cheesy cliché.

    2) That’s not a policy either. And it’s also a load of shit.

    3) Were “Taft Republicans” in favor of exiling American citizens? Not very realistic, Verga.

    4) Same as above.

    5) And then what?

    6) Veeeerrrrrrry realistic! Are you sure you know what “Taft Republican” realism is?

    7) Actually Taft Republicans were in favor of a very strong armed forces.

  23. #6 of de la Vega’s screed alone…

    Wow.  Just…wow.

  24. “Free Saddam Hussein so he can take care of pro-Iranian Shiite fundamentalists and other Persian terrorists- we might even lend him a dozen F16’s so he can bomb Teheran’s weapons factories the way he did with president Reagan’s help 25 years ago”

    I take it back Vega.  You’re not unhinged.  You’re f’king insane.

  25. Aahh, now I understand Doctor Vic has gone all bug eyed about the jooos.  Careful doc your sheet is showing.

  26. AHA!

    Dr. Vega is really Pat Buchanan!

    I thought something smelled funny around here.

  27. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, it is.

  28. Corban, TomB — In the end, it ALWAYS comes back to the JOOOOOOOS!

  29. Dr. Victor Von Doom wrote:

    1) For a start, put our nation’s interest first

    2) No more fake intelligence fixed around a pre-ordained foreign policy devised by Israel and its Washington Amen corner and/or Saudi Wahhâbistan and its Houston Imam corner

    3) Send Israeli-trained traitors such as Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith and Dick Cheney to Guantanamo or Tel-Aviv

    4) Same as above for Israel’s Washington-based lobbyists and cronies such as Jacob Abramoff, Tom DeLay, Lynne Cheney & Co.

    5) Severe diplomatic ties with Islamic fundamentalist states such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Pakistan

    6) Free Saddam Hussein so he can take care of pro-Iranian Shiite fundamentalists and other Persian terrorists- we might even lend him a dozen F16’s so he can bomb Teheran’s weapons factories the way he did with president Reagan’s help 25 years ago

    7) Slash the Pentagon budget by 70%+ and reinvest the savings into efficient border patrol, law enforcement, federal grants for our nation’s farms, schools, and hospitals

    So where would a Victor Von Doom Administration put “Fighting Terrorism”? Somewhere around no. 347, right after no. 346 – “Give the French back all the Louisiana Purchase Territory?”

    Just asking oh Huge of Brain.

  30. For the record, I don’t read Vicky’s comments; I simply delete them from my email as they come in.  But I do read the rest of my commenters’ (well, I often skip those from Pinocchio in a time of Pedophilic Gepettos, particularly after the first in each thread), so I know from your responses that he’s going down the anti-Jooooos road.

    Here’s what I know about the guy:  he’s real, he’s Lebanese, a he’s a stark-raving middle east conspiracy nutjob.  So treat him accordingly.

  31. “Do not feed the trolls,” they say, but I’d like to respond to one specific point by Dr. de la Vega.

    The case may be made that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a Islamist state. However, one must also realize that much of the regime’s pro-Islamism is to placate the Wahhabis/Salafis in Saudi Arabia, who helped them come to power and who are supposed to help aal as-sa’uud remain in power. That was the original agreement between Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahaab and Muhammad bin Sa’uud. There are some members of the House who support Islamism, but the House in general has been seriously and severely challenged by domestic and foreign Islamists since the very beginning of the Kingdom’s establishment. The House may placate the Islamists (presumably to court the Islamists’ support and to be so generous that they won’t bite the hand that feeds them) but its members are not all Islamists themselves. (Indeed, some of them are quite decadent, which is one reason why Islamists oppose the House.)

    I don’t see how the State of Kuwait is Islamist. Sure, it may not be as grateful as we would like, but Kuwaitis are Arabs, after all, and so have great cultural pride. Kuwait’s foreign affairs seem to be to quite pro-West.

    The Islamic Republic of Pakistan is not Islamist. As a matter of fact, recent events, such as attempting to establish diplomatic relations with Israel and the people’s endorsement of this policy, shows that the people of Pakistan are less Islamist than many would imagine. Only certain regions, such as the Pakhtun area, are dominated by Islamists. Pakistani-sponsored terrorism against India are because of political issues rather than religious per se. Even so, it’s difficult to determine how much support the government gives to Kashmiri terrorists, and of this amount how much is from institutions (such as the ISI) the central government cannot control. At one point the argument could have been made that Islamists exerted much influence in Pakistani politics. This is less true today. This will remain true as long as there is a strong West-oriented government that is not truly democratic. In other words, as long as Musharraf (provided he doesn’t turn Islamist) and people like him remain in power.

    Plus, evering ties with even Islamist states will work to our disadvantage. By doing so, we close the door to any and all dialogue, compromise, or discussion that could possibly mitigate circumstances.

    TW: although. Although I agree with statements that we need to be wary of Islamist states, we need to clear as to how and to what extent states are Islamist. Iran is Islamist, Pakistan is not. KSA is on the popular level to a certain extent.

  32. Where’s PIATOR?

    I need to express my sympathy for this horrible tragedy in Iraq.  It’s an obscenity that the evil, brainwashed, imperialist citizens of Ramadi turned the brave freedom fighter Amir Khalaf F’anus over to the enemy.

    Maybe a year from now Iraq won’t be an Iranian-style theocracy in the midst of a full-blown civil war.

    PIATOR, I mourn with you, my brother.

  33. I knew it would come to me and voila:

    2) No more fake intelligence fixed around a pre-ordained foreign policy devised by Israel and its Washington Amen corner and/or Saudi Wahhâbistan and its Houston Imam corner

    3) Send Israeli-trained traitors such as Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith and Dick Cheney to Guantanamo or Tel-Aviv

    4) Same as above for Israel’s Washington-based lobbyists and cronies such as Jacob Abramoff, Tom DeLay, Lynne Cheney & Co.

    It’s….wait for it…

    THE JOOOOOOSSSS.

    “Taft Republican”–We have a saying for you, Doc Vic and it involves an onion and your belt.

  34. But, as usual, Jeff beat me to it above.

    Dammit.

    Stupid Jewish clairvoyance.

  35. Lebanese, Jeff?

    That explains much.

  36. It’s….wait for it…

    THE JOOOOOOSSSS.

    The idiot claims he’s not a neo-con. Perhaps, but only because he’s too far right to be a neo-con. He’s more of a David Duke kinda guy.

  37. Here’s what I know about the guy:  he’s real, he’s Lebanese, a he’s a stark-raving middle east conspiracy nutjob.  So treat him accordingly.

    Fact:

    Lebanese? Cedrus libani, an evergreen of the family Pinaceae => Cedar of Lebanon.

    Fact:

    Henry Ford => Legendary Antisemite.

    Cedar and Ford.  Hmmm, there some connection here that I cannot quite put my finger on.

    Developing…….

  38. Both are douche bags?

  39. Hmmm… Michael Totten moves to Lebanon and suddenly Dr. Vic starts posting from there.

    Coincidence… or some dark machination of the JOOOOOOOS?!

    Inquiring minds want to know!

  40. I like to think of myself as an optimist, but I have to tell you that it is very troubling to read people write what amounts to ‘round up the jews’ at the end of the year 2005, even if it is just a select group of jews.

    Vega, hasn’t anyone ever told you what a losing proposition that ALWAYS ends up being?  I guess some people still need for there to be a villinous group in this world to blame everything on.

  41. ANTI-SEMITAPHOBE!!!!!!!!!!

  42. “The idiot claims he’s not a neo-con. Perhaps, but only because he’s too far right to be a neo-con. He’s more of a David Duke kinda guy.”

    I wouldn’t claim Duke, considering he’s a registered Democrat, product of their LA machine. Let them claim him and LaRouche.

    Probably best comparable to what LewRockwell.com has become, or a more extreme Pat Buchanan paleo-con.

  43. Actually, you’re probably right, considering how Right and Left have met around the bend. Far-left/far-right, who knows what to call these people anymore.

  44. I’ve never heard of any right-wingers that want to cut military spending by 70% (except maybe some Christian pacifists). I bet the “Taft Republican” stuff was BS. I’d also bet Dr. Verga is juat a plain old, run of the mill Edward Said disciple. He’s too steeped in the dogma to be a righty.

    Granted the JOOOOOS!!!!!! and NUKE MECCA!!!! things make it hard to tell for sure.

    He could always just be a poor confused paranoiac, which is the side I’m starting to come down on.

    Either way he’s a shmeckle.

  45. I wonder if whichever Taft is running Ohio these days can sue for libel.

  46. Actually, you’re probably right, considering how Right and Left have met around the bend. Far-left/far-right, who knows what to call these people anymore.

    Good point. Take an idiot like George Galloway for example. The POS is an outspoken homophobe, anti-abortionist, and (by any reasonable standard) an anti-semite – all qualities that would have landed him an “extreme right” label only 5 years ago. Yet, he is a leftwing darling.

    Lew Rockwell is Pat Buchanan without the charm. I consider myself a conservative libertarian but I would never be able to vote for a libertarian candidate because almost without exception, libertarian candidates tend to be deranged lunatics, or total assholes. There are some exceptions. Take a guy like Michael Badnarik. I am in agreement with him on virtually everything, except (you guessed it) the Iraq war. That’s a deal-breaker for me. But at least he’s semi-sane as far as the other issues are concerned. Lew Rockwell on the other hand is a mentally unstable conspiracy nut.

    You know, the funny thing is that, if the Libertarian party had a candidate like Victor Davis Hanson, they would probably cream the Republicans at the polls.

  47. My favourtite Badnarik position :

    Badnarik also suggested that if he were elected president he would re-establish America as a sovereign nation, by removing and bulldozing the United Nations headquarters in New York.

    Yeah baby!

  48. I’m just an old-school Taft Republican

    There are no actual Republicans who call themselves “Taft Republicans.” This is a tic that reveals its author to be a left-wing nutcase.

    (Google “Taft Republican” to see what I mean; all you will find are some historical references, and news articles about the current governor of Ohio.)

  49. “…if the Libertarian party had a candidate like Victor Davis Hanson, they would probably cream the Republicans at the polls…”

    Yeah sure, and highly Cartesian for that matter!

    “if the Agrarian Communist party of Eastern Ukraine had a candidate like Dr. Arthur Laffer, they would probably milk the Eurocrat cow in Brussels, and screw that enticing capitalist “crémière” for good measure”

    VD Hanson is a paradoxical kind of “Libertarian Republican” if you want my opinion: he’s a staunch advocate of “free market entrepreneurship” and yet never worked for a private company; he’s eager to fight for Israel until the last American kid dies in the sands of Arabia or the steppes of Central Asia, but refused to serve in Vietnam and told his own children to stay away from the reserves corps for fear of being sent to the battle field!

    But one has to reckon it’s certainly more comfy to write lengthy treatises about the virile military cum civic virtues of Sparta and Carthage while sipping latte at Starbucks in a cozy California campus

    Damn Pinkodemagocrat cowards: when will they finally understand that a real macho man must show some “moral backbone”?

    … Remember Sparta/Athens/Masada/the Warsaw ghetto…That’s why today we have to fight against “Mohammedan evildoers” and “Ayyrab terrorist”….We simply can’t let Saddam, Chirac and Valerie Wilson steal our Christmas cake- yellow or otherwise… blah blah Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  50. Quote: VD Hanson is a paradoxical kind of “Libertarian Republican” if you want my opinion: he’s a staunch advocate of “free market entrepreneurship” and yet never worked for a private company; he’s eager to fight for Israel until the last American kid dies in the sands of Arabia or the steppes of Central Asia, but refused to serve in Vietnam and told his own children to stay away from the reserves corps for fear of being sent to the battle field!

    Have you met the man?  Where’s your proof of these claims?

  51. “Good point. Take an idiot like George Galloway for example. The POS is an outspoken homophobe, anti-abortionist, and (by any reasonable standard) an anti-semite – all qualities that would have landed him an “extreme right” label only 5 years ago. Yet, he is a leftwing darling.”

    You’re exactly right. Galloway is proof that the spectrum is circular. Like Mussolini, he went from Stalinist/Red to proto-fascist. It isn’t a coincidence that Galloway finds himself in Syria, or Baathists and Communists work so well together. Perhaps Hayek was right, the common thread is collectivism rather than individualism.

  52. VD Hanson is a paradoxical kind of “Libertarian Republican” if you want my opinion: he’s a staunch advocate of “free market entrepreneurship” and yet never worked for a private company; he’s eager to fight for Israel until the last American kid dies in the sands of Arabia or the steppes of Central Asia, but refused to serve in Vietnam and told his own children to stay away from the reserves corps for fear of being sent to the battle field!

    Victor Davis Hanson was born in 1953 – do a bit of math, here Doc Vega, and see how that matches up with your contention about him refusing to serve in Vietnam.  Regarding your other assertions – Hanson is a self-identified Democrat, although of late he has found much in his party to dislike, and has spent a sizable part of his life operating a family raisin farm in California.  Don’t take my word for it, though – these are easy enough facts to establish.  Try reading his Ripples of Battle, for example, to see whether your contentions match up with what Hanson has to say.

  53. He doesn’t need proof Vlad, he’s a “Taft Republican.” He can see things that are invisible to the normal eye. He has the special gift of knowledge that allows him to form connections between people and ideas that would otherwise go unnoticed.

    It’s kinda like the Force except this is real life.

  54. Misterpundit,

    The Libertarian Party is never going to do well in the polls because their leadership suffers from the same problem as the elite left: they think their shit don’t stink and they have an irresistible urge to talk down to the people they are asking for votes. They also seem incapable of understanding politics in a way that could translate into victory.

    I ran in to a group of Bandarick supporters at the last debate in Tempe and they were as fanatical as the moonbats that showed up late, smelling like ass, and dressed in rags.

    I voted for Harry Browne twice but never again. I’ll support the liberty caucus instead.

  55. Yeah, I guess it’s evidence of the weakness of one’s ideas when your major criticism of Prof. Hanson is to complain that at age 15, the young Hanson didn’t serve…and that now he’s content with being served Starbucks. 

    I’ve seen him debate publicly twice and have found him to be fair and gracious, even when his debate opponents have either pandered to the emotions of the audience, or had broken the rules of the debate altogether.

    Carnage and Culture is a great read….still not finished with it.

    Indeed Runninrebel, may this “farce” be lifted from our false consciousness by the magic touch of the anointed Doctor Vega and his conspiracy of dreams.

  56. blah blah Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    The most coherent thing he’s ever written.

  57. Well, the man was actually 17 four years before the war ended: clearly he could have served…but courageously chose not to by enrolling in a liberal California campus instead!

    Also, great article by Gary Brecher in the July 2005 issue of “The Exile”:

    http://www.exile.ru/2005-July-28/victor_hanson.html

    Sharp stuff about Victor Davis Hanson, a self-proclaimed neocon “thinker”, and a man Rumsfeld and Cheney have called “America’s greatest living historian”

    “ This fool passes himself off as a military historian, writing columns about Iraq and Afghanistan and everything else he feels like babbling about, but he doesn’t have a clue about contemporary warfare…[…] He proves his sleaze when he moves on to Gulf War II:

    War IV. (April 2003 to present)”The Fourth Iraqi War (“The Insurrection,” “The Occupation”) began immediately after the end of the conventional fighting and continues today. It was framed by the fact that the United States would not simply leave after toppling Saddam yet had never really gone into the Sunni Triangle in force during the three-week victory. War IV was waged by a loose alliance of Wahhabi fundamentalists, foreign jihadists, and former Baathists against the American efforts to fashion an indigenous Iraqi democratic government.”

    Here again, there’s so many lies it’s hard to know where to start. Like, what the hell does Hanson mean by saying we never attacked the Sunni Triangle? As military history, that’s pure nonsense. The only reason he says it is because he has to explain to himself how come the insurgency was able to come on so strong after we kicked ass in the conventional war. And see, Hanson can’t admit to himself that there was a difference in the kind of war being waged, a transition from conventional to urban-guerrilla warfare. If he once admitted that we’re dealing with an urban guerrilla war now, he’d have to face the historical fact that modern armies still don’t have an effective counter for that mode of warfare […]

    Victor Hanson: American Traitor disguised as a fit, likeable “doctor” of Classics

    And all that ancient Greek stuff won’t help Hanson deal with urban guerrilla war, because there was nothing like it in the ancient world. In those days conquerors wiped out cities the second they showed any sign of uppity behavior. Urban guerrilla wars were pretty quick and pretty unsuccessful: rise up against the occupier, and literally every man, woman and child gets slaughtered, and the offending city covered in salt. End of story.

    We could do it, way more easily than the Romans. We’d burn only as many calories as it takes to press a button. If we had the will, we could wipe out the whole population of the Sunni Triangle in a few days. If we used neutron bombs, we could do it without even messing up the area too badly. It would sure stop the insurgency.

    Trouble is, that kind of genocide just isn’t popular these days, and nobody, not even Professor Hanson, is ready to argue for it. It’s hard to argue you want to bring democracy to the Sunnis by making them extinct. And what Hanson and morons like him won’t admit is that short of genocide, there is no military solution to urban guerrilla warfare ”

  58. Well, the man was actually 17 four years before the war ended: clearly he could have served…but courageously chose not to by enrolling in a liberal California campus instead!

    Huh?  Again, Vic, have you even looked at the stated facts of Hanson’s life? I certainly wouldn’t recommend relying on the fellow whose writings you cite as a “source” on VDH – at least, not if his stated wish to carry out an act of arson on Hanson’s family farm is anything to go by.

    Besides, aren’t we a little past that whole argumentam ad chickenhawk?  How about, oh, I don’t know, considering Hanson’s arguments on their merits?

  59. If anyone thinks my concern regarding Brecher (the anarchist quoted by Vega above)and arson is misplaced, consider this, from Hanson’s own site:

    How strange that about the time that Mr. Brecher’s article appeared, someone in fact did try to torch our vineyard, but managed only to scorch about 20 vines near the road before the nearby Mid-Valley Fire Department arrived to put out the fire.

    http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson082605.html

    And regarding the degree of seriousness to associate with Brecher, consider his heartfelt statement on 9/11 (again, from Hanson’s website at the link provided):

    The best war is when you can hate both sides, and that’s how it was with the WTC. I cheered those jets…Until those planes hit the WTC nobody dreamed you could knock down an American corporation building. Nobody ever thought one would come down. And when they did, damn! It was like the noche triste, when Aztecs made the Conquistadors bleed for the first time and said, “Hey these aren’t magic six-legged metal monsters, they’re just a bunch of victims like us.”

    Really sweet folks you keep ideological company with, Vic.

  60. Also, great article by Gary Brecher in the July 2005 issue of “The Exile”

    Whoo boy! That has got to be the most unhinged, comical bullshit I have ever read. This Brecher guy makes Raelians look downright respectable by comparison. How can you link to that article and expect to be taken seriously? Far from impugning Hanson’s credibility, you impugned your own.

  61. Well, Mr. Vega, at least when you aren’t speaking in tongues you can be debated:

    Obviously I can’t entirely defend VDH, but he was clearly referring to the fact that the 4th ID was unable to go into Iraq from Turkey, and as a result we didn’t hit the Sunni areas like Tikrit until the end of the campaign, when it was clear that the regime had been defeated. This allowed many of the Baathists to retreat from the field.

    Clearly, you source doesn’t understand much of what he’s even referring to, so it isn’t exactly the most objective judge.

    Then, when he says…

    “And what Hanson and morons like him won’t admit is that short of genocide, there is no military solution to urban guerrilla warfare”

    He’s just being f-ing ignorant. Mao expressly called urban areas death traps from insurgencies. The instance in which the Algerian FLN [probably the closest historical example to what we’re fighting in Iraq] was most clearly defeated was in Algiers, when Massau cleaned out the district so thoroughly that the FLN avoided the cities for the rest of the war. Similarly, the various autocracies in Southern American and Latin America faced mostly urban rebellions, most of which failed.

    Of course, I’m not suggesting we’re going to resort to autocratic rule, but it is quite clear from even a superficial look at history to see that the author is clueless.

  62. Quote: Hanson can’t admit to himself that there was a difference in the kind of war being waged, a transition from conventional to urban-guerrilla warfare. If he once admitted that we’re dealing with an urban guerrilla war now, he’d have to face the historical fact that modern armies still don’t have an effective counter for that mode of warfare […]

    Hanson has commented on the nature of the insurgency and does so here for one…

    Q:  In your book Carnage and Culture you discussed and spent a lot of time on the fact that Western armies seek decisive battle, sort of a singular conflict in the open.  And you alluded to this briefly in your chapter on Vietnam, but you mentioned that one of the more effective strategies against that has been guerrilla warfare.  Can you comment on how the fact that modern American training still sort of trains people to deal in decisive battle – you know, that their comments that American Marines in Iraq sort of shoot first and ask questions later.  Given that mentality, how do you think that a Western military can deal with more of a guerrilla threat?  Or also, how do they deal with the task of peace-keeping versus warfare, when it’s the same people who have to do both?

    DR. HANSON:  It’s very hard because democratic societies or consensual societies or affluent societies are very restless.  They want to get over there and get back home.  And one of the best ways to do that is to marshal American discipline, technology, as manifested in superior supply and firepower.  They can destroy the enemy.  We all know that.  Rome did that, Greece did that, the Crusaders did that, Cortes did that.  And we understand that other paradigms are not as effective in countering that conventional strength.

    Hitler or Stalin’s system can cherry-pick elements of Western culture within the Western paradigm, but ultimately will lose. That being said, enemies of the West come up with, as I said, counter-insurgency or encouraging dissidents in the West or inter-Western rivalry, anything to call off this monstrosity they’ve aroused.

    That being said, though, there’s also this insurgent, terrorist alternative in the West, seen in two ways.  The Sicarri were pretty fearful people that fought the Romans.  Remember they would just take a Roman legionnaire and cut his throat and stealthily go to the next — and I don’t want to explain at length the Roman answer, because you all know the solution they came up with to that — how they dealt with the Siccari was destruction of the great temple and selling off the spoils to create the Coliseum.  We all know about the great Mahdi.  He was a terrific challenge to the British empire.  But whether you look at a Jugurtha or Mithridates all of these national liberationists, anti-Western people found out that the West was not weak and had these preferences for war — yes, but it was not solely confined by those protocols, because there was counter-insurgency, there were hearts and minds, there were special operation officers.  We learn to fight their battles well it turns out.

    And I think that that’s what we’re doing and we’re doing a pretty good job, given the fact that Iraq is 7,000 miles away.  It’s the site of the ancient caliphate, it’s got neighbors like Syria, it’s got Saudi Arabia close by.  I don’t think that anybody could dream a perfect storm worse than what the American military has to contend with over there.  It’s amazing they do so well.  I wake up every day and say, how did they do this today?

    And then as far as occupation, this is very interesting because historically I guess you could make the adage that the ease of occupation is directly proportional to the degree of punishment, defeat and humiliation on the enemy.  In other words, what made the occupation in Germany or Japan tolerable was the enemy knew they were defeated and humiliated.  That’s hard for a postmodern, sophisticated society who feels that the use of force is almost antithetical to their own aspirations.  So if you take the three-week war, I think Maureen Dowd wrote a column mentioning me, something I wrote that seemed too harsh and Shermaneque, because after the statue fell I was very worried, because I said – I didn’t mean it this way but it came across that way—the we had not, as General Sherman said, made the enemy feel that he is defeated and humiliated, because whether it was the forces that did not come from Turkey, or maybe it was the global spotlight of the postbellum era, I was very worried because in the Sunni triangle, the heart of the Republican Guard, perhaps there was 200,000 people who were never defeated on the battlefield.  It would almost be like trying to liberate Italy without defeating any elements or killing any of the Italian army.

    And when these who deserted went home and turned on Al Jazeera obviously and saw that the Arab world had mocked them, and they knew that no longer were the rules of engagement war in force, where if you walked out and tried to kill Americans, they were going to blow your whole house up, then it became easier to kill stealthily an American who was trying to build a school or lay electrical cable.  And out of that realization then you had an enemy who never felt defeated, never felt humiliated, that would find resonance with a lot of people who otherwise wouldn’t support them but it gave a psychological lift to see resistance.  As I said, it’s a very tough thing.

    I was just mentioning, I was on the airplane.  I had a long day, I was trying to get from Fresno here about 20 hours in the airport, just delays, and I was sitting next to a person who commented on the plane on something I’d written, and he said – he was a World War II veteran — that we did this right in World War II and got it wrong now.  And I said to him, just wait a minute before you criticize the military.  What if Hitler in 1934 or 1935 had said, I’m not going to have a conventional war.  I’m going to get 200 or 300 or 400 party members, SS operatives, send them all throughout the democracies of Western Europe, commit acts of terror, and then hand-in-glove with that I’m going to have communiqués that say that Versailles was unfair, the German people were victimized, Western democracies were weak and decadent, the ancestral Germanic volk were always on the other side of the Rhine, they’d never been contaminated by the disease of the West or of Rome.  And always have the ability to deny that the Nazi Party in Germany was responsible for this.  And then pretty soon I think you’d see that the West would probably have said, what did we do to deserve this?  The Rhineland, all these things in some way go back to Versailles.  This actually in some ways happened.

    And then we would almost have to go for intercession with Italy and Franco — Mussolini and Franco as honest brokers who were trying to bridge the gap from the democracies and Germany.  And then the United States would say to the German people, you’re not an enemy.  You have to be liberated from Nazism.  And yet at the same time they would have a certain resonance with the terrorist acts of the SS because it’s about pride and the defeat of WWI.  All those factors would be very, very difficult to deal with, and yet all of them in some ways are brought to bear in this current conflict.

    This is the most surreal war that I can think of in our history, where we don’t really know whether the enemy should be liberated or conquered.  We really don’t know whether we want to fight this war or create utopia over there.  We don’t know how it’s going to be fought from day to day.  And the effort butts up against cultural relativism, political correctness, moral equivalence, all of these doctrines of the last 30 years.  It’s very, very difficult to fight this war.

    >Central to the thesis of Hanson’s “Carnage and Culture” is the Western way of warmaking involves an adaptability.

    Read about that very process of adapting to the insurgency here…

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1675286.html

  63. Overheard in a White House bunker…

    “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”

  64. First Paul Begala, now Capital Blue Hill.

    What next, the National Enquirer?

  65. *Capital Hill Blue

  66. Well, this thread explains everything. Vega voted for Taft and apparently still has a boner for the Pharisees some 1,932 years after the destruction of the Second Temple. This is like that Star Trek episode where they turn out to have been talking through a temporal distortion to some guy who’d died a thousand years earlier, isn’t it?

    Oh, and what IS the Wolfowitz fetish all about? I mean, not that the man’s not a stone-cold fox or anything, but surely it’s not just sublimated sexual desire that makes the Pat Buchanan element so universally hot and bothered to see him in particular–even before Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc.–chained up in Guantanamo? Right?

  67. Quote: I’ve talked to three people present for the meeting that day and they all confirm that the President of the United States called the Constitution “a goddamned piece of paper.”

    Of course he said that. Don’t you know anything?  He’s our King!  Our Philosopher King!  Our Chimpy-Prince of Dominionism come to bring us all home.

    You’re so helpful Phelologician.

  68. Alex,

    I’m afraid “foxy” fetishism, S&M practices, Semite-ism (be it anti, philo, or whatever subcategory the Anti-Defamation League and their boogeyman darling David Duke might come up with), the relationship between Cartesian mathematical rationalism and Straussian neo-Platonic theology….etc. …

    I’m afraid none of the above has anything to do with the issue at hand.

    See, authentic Republican patriots such as Pat Buchanan and Colin Powell are right: Paul David Wolfowitz is a professional pinko liar and a Trotskyite traitor, and of the Major League kind if you want my opinion.

    As for Bush, well you simply can’t accuse and put on trial a highly retarded feeble mind: that would be vigilante justice “frontier” style à la Samuel Houston!

  69. Overheard in a White House bunker…

    “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”

    If you ever bothered to read other peoples posts you would find alot of us are concerned that no one in Washington takes the Constitution seriously anymore.  I would recommend going back and reading the Harriet Myers threads in particular.  That being said, what does that link have to do with anything in this thread?

    …you simply can’t accuse and put on trial a highly retarded feeble mind…

    You can’t argue with one either, have a nice day!

Leave a Reply